The Rev. Douglas Taylor’s letter (Sept. 12) was well-intentioned but missed the mark.

It is true that some tenants take advantage any way they can; however, landlords do not have to accept “deadbeats” as tenants. Landlords have tools available to them to screen most of the potentially problematic tenants through proper underwriting.

Checking past credit and employment is simply part of good management practice for landlords.

For a landlord who is a good manager and knows what he is doing, building ownership can be quite lucrative. Trouble usually occurs when a landlord gets too greedy or simply is not a good manager.

The legal relationship between landlord and tenant, without protective regulations, is otherwise asymmetrical. That is, if landlords were not restrained by the law, tenants would be at the mercy of landlords.

The regulations that protect tenants from abuse did not come about from nothing; indeed, the history of these regulations is the history of landlord abuse.

But let me hasten to add that problem landlords are as few and far between as problem tenants.

Landlords can also do more to upgrade their neighborhoods and attract more well-heeled tenants. They could form neighborhood associations to hire some otherwise unemployed people to clean up the streets. Landlords are, after all, ultimately responsible for the appearance of the properties they own.

The Rev. Douglas Taylor ought to be applauding the work of housing advocates such as the”Visible Community,” who are truly doing God’s work (Matt 25:31-46).

Fred Nehring, Boothbay