Massachusetts Tenant Screening Laws: The Landlord and Applicant Guide

Massachusetts tenant screening sits at the crossroads of federal and state law: the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act, which governs how a consumer report may be pulled and used everywhere in the country, and a distinctive Massachusetts overlay that is stricter than most states. Massachusetts is one of only two states, with Vermont, that effectively bans landlord application and screening fees. It protects Section 8 voucher holders and other public-assistance recipients as a matter of statewide law, regulates criminal-record access through the CORI system, and, as of May 2025, lets tenants seal old eviction records so they cannot be used against them. The landlords who screen properly almost never face a lawsuit; the ones who charge an illegal fee or skip the adverse-action notice pay for that shortcut.

This guide walks the whole framework in plain English: the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act requirements every landlord must meet, the Massachusetts General Laws chapter 186, section 15B rule that no application or screening fee may be charged, credit-check consent and cost rules, source-of-income protection under chapter 151B, the CORI and criminal-record standard, the new chapter 239, section 16 eviction-record sealing law, fair housing, applicant rights, a day-by-day workflow, a compliance playbook, real scenarios, and a Massachusetts-specific set of frequently asked questions.

Because Massachusetts layers strong state protections on top of the federal baseline, the safest posture for a landlord is written consent, consistent written criteria, no prohibited fees, and proper adverse-action notices every single time, and the strongest position for an applicant is to know exactly which rights the law confers. Treat every figure and date here as a starting point and verify the current statute before you screen, decline an applicant, or dispute a decision.

The Fair Credit Reporting Act, codified at fifteen U.S.C. section 1681, is the federal statute that governs tenant screening nationwide, and a Massachusetts landlord must comply with it regardless of any state-law differences, then add the Massachusetts consumer credit reporting statute at chapter 93, sections 50 through 68, which mirrors the federal rules and adds its own adverse-action disclosure. Getting both layers right prevents almost all screening-related liability. Five federal requirements sit at the core, and each one is load-bearing.

Permissible Purpose

A landlord has a permissible purpose under Fair Credit Reporting Act section 604(a) to pull a consumer report on a rental applicant. That is the threshold right to obtain the report at all, but it does not eliminate any of the other requirements — it only opens the door to a report the landlord must then handle correctly.

Written Consent

The applicant must provide written consent before the landlord obtains a consumer report. The consent must be clear and conspicuous, and the best practice is a standalone consent form rather than a clause buried in the rental application. In Massachusetts, obtaining a Criminal Offender Record Information report requires a separate signed CORI Acknowledgment Form on top of the general consumer-report consent.

Consistent Criteria

Written screening criteria must be applied consistently to every applicant. Inconsistency creates both Fair Credit Reporting Act disparate-treatment exposure and Fair Housing Act and chapter 151B liability, because bending the rule for one applicant and not another is powerful evidence of discrimination even where none was intended.

Pre-Adverse Action Notice

Before finalizing a rejection based even in part on a report, the landlord must send a pre-adverse-action notice that includes a copy of the report and the Fair Credit Reporting Act summary of rights, and then wait a reasonable period — commonly at least five business days — so the applicant can dispute an error before the decision becomes final.

Adverse Action Notice

When the rejection becomes final, the landlord must send an adverse-action notice identifying the consumer reporting agency, explaining the applicant’s dispute rights, and including the summary of rights. This step is not optional, and it applies to any adverse action — not only an outright denial, but also a higher deposit or an added condition driven by the report. The Massachusetts statute at chapter 93 reinforces this duty at the state level.

How much can a Massachusetts landlord charge for an application or screening fee?

Nothing. Massachusetts is one of the only states in the country — along with Vermont — that effectively bans landlord application and screening fees outright. Under Massachusetts General Laws chapter 186, section 15B, before a tenancy begins a landlord may lawfully collect only four things: the first month’s rent, the last month’s rent, a security deposit no greater than one month’s rent, and the actual cost of purchasing and installing a new lock and key. An application fee, a credit-check fee, a background-check fee, an amenity or move-in fee, or a holding fee is not one of the four permitted categories, so charging it is unlawful. The statute is published at Massachusetts General Laws chapter 186, section 15B.

The practical consequence for screening is direct: the landlord, not the applicant, pays for the screening report. A landlord may absolutely run a credit report, a criminal background check, and an eviction and rental-history check — the landlord simply absorbs the cost as a business expense and cannot bill it to the applicant. The one narrow exception is a licensed real estate broker, who may charge a broker fee for the rental transaction under the Attorney General’s broker-fee guidance; but a broker fee is not a screening fee, and a landlord acting as their own agent cannot use it to recover the report cost.

Can a Massachusetts landlord run a credit check?

Yes — a Massachusetts landlord may run a credit check and other consumer reports, provided the landlord has the applicant’s written consent and does not charge the applicant for it. The report must come from a Fair Credit Reporting Act compliant consumer reporting agency, which verifies the landlord’s permissible purpose. Massachusetts adds its own layer through the state consumer credit reporting statute at chapter 93, sections 50 through 68, which parallels the federal law and requires a disclosure to the applicant when credit or housing is denied based on a report.

Two Massachusetts-specific points matter. First, because chapter 186, section 15B forbids passing the cost to the applicant, the landlord budgets the report cost rather than collecting it. Second, the applicant’s file may include a sealed eviction record that may not be reported under the 2025 sealing law described below, so a landlord should treat a screening report as a starting point, not the last word, and give the applicant a chance to explain an item before acting on it. Applicants can learn to spot problems early using our guide to red flags in a rental application, which cuts both ways.

Can a Massachusetts landlord refuse a Section 8 voucher?

No. One of the most consequential Massachusetts rules for screening is source-of-income protection under Massachusetts General Laws chapter 151B, section 4. It is unlawful for a landlord to refuse to rent, to advertise a no-Section-8 policy, or to apply different or harsher screening because an applicant intends to pay part of the rent with a Housing Choice Voucher, other federal, state, or local rental assistance, a rental supplement, or public-assistance income. A landlord also may not refuse to comply with a reasonable requirement of the voucher program, such as a routine housing-quality inspection. Enforcement runs through the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination, the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, and, in Boston, the city’s fair housing office.

This does not strip the landlord of the right to screen. The landlord may still apply neutral, consistent criteria — credit, rental history, and income measured against the tenant’s own share of the rent — to a voucher holder exactly as to any other applicant. What the law forbids is treating the voucher itself as a disqualifier or steering voucher holders away. A common and costly mistake is calculating an income multiplier against the full contract rent rather than the tenant’s out-of-pocket share, which screens out voucher holders as a group and exposes the landlord to a source-of-income claim. Narrow owner-occupied small-building exemptions may apply, so confirm coverage for the specific property.

Can a landlord reject an applicant based on a criminal record in Massachusetts?

A Massachusetts landlord may consider criminal history, but only through an individualized assessment — never a blanket rule that automatically rejects anyone with any record. Landlords obtain criminal records through the state iCORI system, operated by the Department of Criminal Justice Information Services under Massachusetts General Laws chapter 6, sections 167 through 178B, and only after the applicant signs a CORI Acknowledgment Form. The Attorney General’s guidance advises requesting a CORI report only as the final step of the process, on the applicant the landlord would otherwise approve, rather than pulling records on everyone at intake.

On top of the CORI access rules, federal HUD guidance issued in 2016 holds that a blanket criminal-record ban can violate the Fair Housing Act as disparate-impact discrimination, because criminal records disproportionately affect Black and Hispanic applicants. Massachusetts does not have a statewide ban-the-box statute for private housing — the ban-the-box law at chapter 151B, section 4 applies to employment applications — but state-aided and public housing operate under stricter lookback limits set by Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities regulations. When criminal history is considered, weigh these factors and document the analysis.

The Assessment Factors

• Nature and severity of the offense. A decades-old shoplifting conviction differs materially from a recent violent crime.
• Time since the conviction. More recent offenses carry more predictive weight; very old convictions may have little probative value.
• Evidence of rehabilitation. Consistent employment, completed parole or probation, continuing education, or recovery documentation can rebut the presumption of risk.
• Relevance to tenancy. The offense should bear on the specific risk — violent or property crimes bear more directly than a traffic or minor drug-possession offense might.
• Consistent application. Apply the same analysis to every applicant with any criminal history; selectivity creates disparate-treatment exposure.

Can a landlord see a sealed eviction record in Massachusetts?

No. The Affordable Homes Act, signed into law in August 2024, created a Massachusetts eviction-record sealing process codified at chapter 239, section 16, effective May 5, 2025. Once an eviction case is sealed, it is removed from public court access and from tenant-screening and credit reports, and tenant-screening companies must stop disclosing it — generally within thirty days. An applicant with a sealed record may lawfully answer “no record” when asked about prior evictions, and housing and credit applications must now carry a notice telling applicants that a person with a sealed record may answer “no record” to a question about that record. The sealing law is enforceable by the Attorney General, with damages, costs, and attorney fees available to a tenant when a screening company or landlord misuses a sealed record.

When can a Massachusetts tenant seal an eviction record?

The waiting period depends on the case type. A case that was dismissed or ended in judgment for the tenant may be sealed administratively, immediately, with no hearing. A no-fault eviction may be sealed after the applicable notice period. A nonpayment-of-rent case may be sealed once the judgment is satisfied, or after four years with a hardship showing. A fault eviction may be sealed after at least seven years, and certain cases under chapter 139, section 19 after seven years with a hearing. For a landlord, the operational rule is simple: do not screen on, ask about, or act on a sealed eviction record, and update your application forms to include the required “no record” notice.

The Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination in housing based on seven federally protected classes, and Massachusetts General Laws chapter 151B adds a substantially longer list. Screening criteria must be facially neutral, predictive of tenancy success, and consistently applied, and they must not produce a disparate impact on any protected class — a criterion that looks neutral but disproportionately excludes a protected group can still be unlawful.

Federal Protected Classes

The Fair Housing Act protects race and color, national origin, religion, sex including gender identity and sexual orientation under current HUD guidance, familial status meaning the presence of children, and disability whether mental or physical. In Massachusetts, source of income is protected statewide on top of these.

Massachusetts’s Expanded Protections

Chapter 151B layers on additional protected characteristics, including source of income and receipt of public assistance or rental subsidy, marital status, age, ancestry, genetic information, military or veteran status, and gender identity and sexual orientation as independent state classes. Massachusetts’s list is among the broadest in the country, which is why criteria that pass muster elsewhere can still create liability here.

Common Massachusetts Fair-Housing Traps

• Blanket criminal-history bans that auto-reject any record, which violate the disparate-impact doctrine and the CORI rules.
• Rigid credit-score cutoffs applied with no individualized review of the applicant’s full picture.
• Income multipliers measured against full contract rent, which exclude voucher holders and single parents.
• No-Section-8 policies, which are unlawful under chapter 151B source-of-income protection.
• Charging an application or screening fee, which violates chapter 186, section 15B.
• Screening on a sealed eviction record, which violates chapter 239, section 16.

Massachusetts applicants have strong federal rights under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, supplemented by state-level protection under chapter 93 and the eviction-sealing law. Understanding these rights matters for applicants who want to contest an inaccurate report and for landlords who want to avoid liability.

The Core Rights

• Right to consent disclosure. The landlord must disclose that a consumer report will be obtained and get written consent before pulling it; the applicant may decline and withdraw.
• Right to a fee-free process. Under chapter 186, section 15B the applicant cannot be charged an application or screening fee at all.
• Right to an adverse-action notice. If the report causes any adverse action — rejection, a higher deposit, or added requirements — the applicant is owed a notice identifying the consumer reporting agency and explaining dispute rights.
• Right to a free copy of the report. When an adverse action is taken, the applicant may obtain a free copy of the report from the agency, generally within sixty days.
• Right to dispute inaccuracies. The applicant may dispute inaccurate information with the agency, which must investigate, generally within thirty days, and correct or remove anything it cannot substantiate.
• Right to a sealed record. A tenant with a sealed eviction record may answer “no record,” and that record may not be reported or used.

A disciplined, day-by-day workflow is what turns the legal requirements into a repeatable process that consistently produces defensible decisions. The exact timing can flex, but the sequence — disclose, consent, report, decide, notice — should not. A fuller walkthrough of each stage lives in our how to screen a tenant step-by-step guide, and the underlying paperwork is covered in our rental application guide for landlords.

The rules become concrete when applied to real situations. Each of the following turns on the same handful of principles — no illegal fee, written consent, the adverse-action notice, consistent criteria, source-of-income protection, individualized criminal review, and sealed-record protection. A deeper treatment of the criminal-history piece is in our guide to criminal history in tenant screening.

Massachusetts landlords who follow this playbook virtually never face a Fair Credit Reporting Act, fair-housing, or fee-ban claim. The list is short, but every item is load-bearing. Build it into your standard operating procedure and the liability largely disappears.

Published by Tenant Screening Background Check

Established 2004 · 20+ Years · All U.S. States & Territories · Statute-Based · Attorney-Reviewed

A Private Eye Reports™ service trusted by landlords, property managers, and attorneys.