DOJ Takes Action to Combat Familial Status Discrimination

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced recent action against landlords in two unrelated cases involving discrimination based on familial status under the Fair Housing Act:

• June 14, 2016: The court entered a consent order in United States v. Brinson (D. Nev.), requiring Nevada landlords to pay $24,000 in damages to victims and a $12,000 civil penalty to the United States. The complaint (filed July 10, 2015) alleged that the landlords ran advertisements showing a preference against renting to families with children, and that they turned away a family with children who responded to one of the ads. (You can read the consent order here.)

• June 23, 2016: In United States v. Dominic Properties, LLC (D. Minn.), a referral from HUD, the DOJ filed a complaint against Minneapolis, Minnesota, owners and managers for allegedly creating and enforcing rules that restrict children from being in the yard, hallways and other indoor and outdoor common areas of their apartment complex. (You can read the complaint here.)

For more information about familial status discrimination under the Fair Housing Act, see "It's Fair Housing Month... Do You Know Who's Protected Against Familial Status Discrimination?"

Avoid Fair Housing Traps When Renting Apartments to Single People

The Fair Housing Act (FHA) doesn't protect tenants based on the fact they're not married, but landlords can still get into legal trouble if they treat tenants more—or less—favorably simply because they’re single.

If you're a landlord thinking about turning away prospective tenants for being single, or you're considering creating an apartment community designed for singles only, take a moment to learn about the inherent fair housing risks behind both types of practices.

Check out my recent article for Nolo.com, entitled "Avoid Fair Housing Trouble When Dealing With Single Tenants," for more information.

It's Fair Housing Month... When Can an Apartment Rule Legally Single Out Children?

The Fair Housing Act (FHA) protects tenants based on "familial status," which refers to the presence of at least one child under 18. Despite the FHA's protection, it's okay for landlords to single out children in apartment rules if their health or safety is specifically at stake.

As I explain in an article for About.com, you can determine if a rule at your apartment building is in compliance with the FHA by asking yourself two questions.

It's Fair Housing Month... Can Landlords Ban Pets from Apartments?

One common source of confusion landlords and tenants have is when it comes to the legality of pets at an apartment building. Many landlords wish to bar tenants from keeping any animal in their apartments, while other landlords allow pets but with restrictions.

Is taking such action legal? Are such landlords risking fair housing violations?

Find out what a landlord's responsibility is when it comes to tenants and pets by checking out the fourth video from the "Fair Housing Tips in Less Than a Minute" YouTube series.

It's Fair Housing Month... Do You Know Who's Protected Against Familial Status Discrimination?

A relative latecomer to federal housing discrimination law, "familial status" is a protected class that refers to the presence of at least one child under 18 years old. The goal of including "familial status" in the Fair Housing Act is to give tenants the right not to be turned away from housing or be treated differently just because they have kids.

Familial status sounds straightforward, but there's a bit more to it than meets the eye.

For example...

• Are families with adopted children protected just as much as those with biological children?
• Do parents in a household have to be married?
• Can the owner of a senior housing community legally turn away families with children?
• Are all rules that single out children automatically in violation of federal law?

Find out the answers to these questions and more in my recent Nolo.com article, entitled "Who's Protected Against Familial Status Discrimination?"

Denver Fair Housing Audit Reveals 'Pervasive' Discrimination

The Denver Metro Fair Housing Center (DMFHC) yesterday released the findings of its audit into fair housing practices, in a report entitled “Access Denied: A Report on Rental Housing Discrimination in the Denver Metro Area.”

The DMFHC's report is based on testing conducted in late 2013, in which white prospects were paired with black or Latino testers, and testers without children were paired with testers with children.

According to the report, apartment hunters are likely to encounter discrimination 91% of the time if they are Latino and 67% of the time if they are black. Also, a bias against families with children was present 73% of the time. DMFHC Executive Director Arturo Alvarado said the audit's “dramatic results" reveal that fair housing compliance "is a pervasive problem in our community and that our public officials must take action now to enforce fair housing laws and publicly condemn housing discrimination.”

Although this audit focused on race, national origin, and familial status, three of the seven protected classes under the Fair Housing Act, the report also cautions against noncompliance with other protected classes under federal as well as state housing discrimination laws.

For example, in its recommendations, the report advises housing providers to implement non-discriminatory policies, noting that:

One example of a policy that is unlawful under state law is an application fee discount offered to married couples only. Because marital status and sexual orientation are protected classes in Colorado, providing a discount to married people that is not available to singles or unmarried couples is an example of discrimination in terms, conditions, or privileges of rental.

You can download the full report here.

Testers Show Ohio Landlord Didn't Make the Grade

The Ohio Civil Rights Commission yesterday ordered the landlord of an apartment building in Conneaut, Ohio, to pay over $11,000 in damages, attorney's fees, and travel costs for a complaint alleging violations of the FHA and state fair housing law's ban on discrimination based on familial status and disability.

According to a report from The Columbus Dispatch, the landlord:

• told testers who claimed to need service animals for a disability either that all animals aren't allowed under any circumstances, or that keeping an animal for a disability would require a specific deposit; and


• told a tester who posed as a single mother with a child that she can only rent a downstairs apartment at a higher cost (a practice commonly known as "steering").

Interestingly, the only allegations at issue were discriminatory acts committed against testers. Unlike actual victims, testers only pretend to be looking for an apartment while checking for fair housing compliance.

(Learn more about steering by reading "Fair Housing Help: Identify and Avoid Illegal Steering" and get more information about the role of testers by reading "Landlording in a World of Fair Housing Testing.")

Was this a fair outcome? Should the fact that the complaint stemmed from allegations based solely on testing play a role in determining liability or the amount of damages?

What do you think?

_______________________________

Looking for fair housing compliance training

that's informative, engaging, convenient, and affordable?

Check out the new

Fair Housing Helper

for Apartment Professionals

Visit www.fairhousinghelper.com for more information.

Find out how you can become a

FairHousingHelper.com Gold Professional

at no additional charge.

_______________________________

Fair Housing Help: How to Tell if an Apartment Rule Illegally Discriminates Against Families With Children

Given the Fair Housing Act's (FHA) ban on familial status discrimination, you might wonder why so many landlords appear to get away with adopting and enforcing rules that single out children.

As I explain in a recent article, tenants and landlords alike can tell if a rule at your apartment building is compliant with the FHA by asking yourself two questions.

Fair Housing Help: Children in Senior Housing

If you're looking for an apartment in a senior community, you might prefer not to have children as your neighbors. On the other hand, you may want a senior community that allows children, particularly if you're the legal guardians of children.

Fair housing law lets children live in senior housing, but only under certain circumstances. Find out what they are by reviewing this summary I put together of what you should expect when you start a senior housing search.

Fair Housing Help: Who Qualifies for Senior Housing?

Many seniors prefer to rent an apartment in a community with other seniors. If you're one of them, you might wonder exactly what "senior housing" means and what age you must be to qualify for such a community.

To help you, I put together a summary of the Fair Housing Act's (FHA) senior housing's requirements so you can know what to expect before you begin an apartment search. Landlords who wish to limit occupancy of certain apartments to seniors should also be familiar with these requirements to avoid fair housing violations. 

Fair Housing Help: Single People and Housing Discrimination

If you're unmarried and looking for an apartment, you might wonder if there are apartment communities out there that limit residency to single folks. You might also be curious as to whether the fact that you're single gives you protection against housing discrimination.

You may find the answers in my recent article on single people and fair housing.

Fair Housing Help: Whom Does Familial Status Aim to Protect?

Many landlords refuse to rent to families with children, not knowing that the Fair Housing Act (FHA) bans discrimination based on "familial status." Also, many prospects who get turned away because they have children don't realize this is a violation of federal law.

But landlords, leasing agents, and other housing professionals who attempt to limit housing choices because prospects or tenants have children risk a discrimination claim against them.

If you have children or you plan to have children living with you in your apartment some day, you should be aware of how the law protects families with children against illegal discrimination. To avoid liability risks, landlords should also take a moment to read my article to learn who, exactly, qualifies for familial status protection.

Single Mom Told Only a Man Can Shovel Snow

A La Crosse County, Wisconsin landlord is facing discrimination charges after telling a single female prospect she was ineligible to rent a two-bedroom modular single-family house in a cattle farm with her child because her household is missing a man.

The landlord, a woman, expressed her opinions on single women several times to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), saying she never rents to them, "especially not in the country." She insisted that a single woman can't handle the seclusion of the rural community and the snow removal during "brutal" winters, and also didn't want a tenant calling her repeatedly to plow her out or make repairs. Not renting the house to a single woman with a child at the property was "just common sense," she concluded.

In light of these statements and the landlord's subsequent rental of the property to two men, HUD issued a Charge of Discrimination based on sex and familial status. An administrative law judge is expected to hear the case.

If you've been following this blog, you may recall reading a few years ago about a similar case in Idaho, in which a property manager settled with the government after denying housing to a single mother on the insistence that a man was needed to mow the lawn. (See "Requiring Men to Mow the Lawn Doesn't Cut It," September 16, 2008.)

The lesson from these cases to housing providers is, as HUD Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity John Trasviña put it:

Fairness dictates, and the Fair Housing Act requires, that housing decisions not be based on outmoded stereotypes of people’s "place" in our society. HUD will enforce the law whenever a housing provider seeks to limit a woman’s housing choices because of her gender or family composition.

HUD Issues Annual Report Detailing Enforcement Activity

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) released its Annual Fair Housing Report, which provides details and insight into the types of complaints filed under the Fair Housing Act (FHA) for FY 2010 (October 1, 2009 through September 30, 2010).

For the fifth consecutive year, the number of fair housing complaints topped 10,000. (See "Government Fair Housing Report Shows Disability Continues to Top Complaint List" and "2008 Fair Housing Complaints Break Record.")

According to the report, 10,155 fair housing discrimination complaints were filed with HUD and its Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP) partner agencies over this period. As in recent years, disability topped the list as the basis of the complaints, at 48%, while 34% involved claims based on race and 15% on familial status.

The report also reveals that HUD and its FHAP partner agencies processed 4,494 new complaints within 100 days -- 328 more than in 2009 and 583 more than in 2008. In addition, HUD pursued its own Secretary-initiated investigations over the fiscal year, resulting in four charges and eight conciliation agreements, and filed 10 new complaints.

Landlord's 'Winter Special' Draws Unexpected Response

A Pennsylvania landlord's advertisement for a low rent on an apartment was an attention-grabber, but not for the reason he hoped.

The Craigslist ad, entitled "Winter Special Price for Two Adults," got the owner of four multifamily buildings containing 91 apartments into hot water because it appears to indicate a preference for renters who do not have children, in violation of the Fair Housing Act's (FHA) ban on discrimination based on familial status.

The Fair Housing Council of Suburban Philadelphia (FHCSP) filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which has issed a Charge of Discrimination following an investigation that uncovered evidence that the landlord charges same-size households more rent if one of the occupants is a child.

For example, the landlord told an FHCSP tester she would have to pay $35-per-month above the advertised price for a two-bedroom apartment because of her preschool-age son. When another tester asked if having a child would pose a problem, the landlord explained, "It's just going to be higher," according to the Charge.

A HUD administrative law judge is expected to hear the case.

Interesting to note:

• In addition to a claim of direct discrimination, HUD is claiming that the landlord's offering of more favorable rental terms to households that have only one or two people is discriminatory because it has a "disparate impact" on families with children, arguing that they usually make up larger households.

Do you agree with the "disparate impact" argument? In other words, do you think this landlord should be held liable for familial-status-based discrimination even if he didn't limit the special to "two adults"?

What do you think?

Landlord Wouldn't Let Teenager Have Friends Over Without Mother Present

Viable familial status discrimination claims don't have to involve a landlord who refuses to rent to families with children. Often enough, landlords who say they'll rent to families with children but impose certain restrictions on those families also find themselves in fair housing trouble.

A recent example is a Wisconsin landlord who admitted to placing guest restrictions only on tenants with children, according to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Charge of Discrimination announced today (issued July 12).

After approving a single mother and her 17-year-old son for tenancy and accepting a deposit, he allegedly told the mother she would need to agree to a lease restriction requiring her to be present whenever her son had visitors. The landlord indicated he has had problems in the past with teenagers and also cited a tip from another tenant claiming that the son was a "bad kid" who had been in "trouble."

The mother insisted the tenant's claim is unfounded and suggested the landlord call the police for proof. But the landlord stood firm, leading the mother to file a complaint with HUD alleging Fair Housing Act (FHA) violations. An administrative law judge will now hear the case.

Do you agree with the Charge? Should a landlord ever be allowed to impose restrictions on families with children aimed at controlling teenagers' behavior while in their apartments?

What do you think?

Familial Status Gains Familiar Status in May

Familial status discrimination under the Fair Housing Act (FHA) has dominated fair housing news in May, a month that is known for Mother's Day.

A relative latecomer to the FHA, "familial status" is one of the FHA's seven protected classes and refers to the presence of one or more children under 18 in a household. People who are expecting a child, whether through pregnancy or via the process of adoption, are also protected against familial status discrimination.

Here are important familial status developments that made the news in May:

• The Massachusetts Attorney General's office announced on May 12 that the owner and operator of 26 rental properties has agreed to settle a lawsuit claiming the company illegally discriminated when it attempted to evict a tenant and her small children from their apartment. According to the complaint, a neighbor repeatedly made "unreasonable and unsubstantiated complaints" about noise made by the tenant's children. After an investigation, the Attorney General determined that the tenant had taken steps to address the neighbor's concerns, including enrolling her children in additional daycare and keeping her children out of the apartment for long periods of time on the weekends. But the neighbor allegedly complained about noise even when the children were not in the apartment, and the company simply responded with a notice of eviction. The company has agreed to pay $6,500 to the tenant and the Commonwealth, as well as implement improved training and adjust its best practices to ensure future compliance with the FHA and Massachusetts' fair housing law.
  
  
• The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) announced on May 20 that it has charged a Las Vegas, Nevada, homeowners association and its management company with discriminating against families with children by limited housing to persons who are 55 and older — without taking the steps the law requires to meet the "55 and older" senior housing exemption.
  
  
• HUD announced on May 26 that it has charged the owner of a five-unit apartment building in Lebanon, New Hampshire, with FHA violations for allegedly refusing to rent one of the building's three apartments to a mother with two children. The owner, who used one of the building's commercial units for his chiropractic office, reportedly dared the mother to "turn him in" after she accused him of familial status discrimination. HUD also claims the owner's receptionist violated the FHA by carrying out the owner's instructions to turn away prospective tenants with children.


• HUD announced today that Ocala, Florida-based USA4SALE Network, Inc., has agreed to pay $15,000 to settle claims that it violated the FHA when it posted ads on its Web sites that discriminated against families with children by stating "No children, No kids." The company has also reportedly agreed to change the way its Web sites filter potentially discriminatory language, plus donate $7,500 to a HUD-funded state fair housing organization and $7,500 to a HUD-approved local fair housing group to cover the cost of the group's future fair housing advertisements.
  

Update: Washington Complex Owners and Managers Settle Multiple Claims With DOJ

Last April, as part of a special series to commemorate Fair Housing Month, I blogged about the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) first announced charge of Fair Housing Month. The case concerned a Renton, Washington landlord, property management company, and on-site manger who had to defend themselves against alleged violations of four of the Fair Housing Act's (FHA) seven protected classes: race, color, national origin, and familial status.

Since then, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) got involved, and the defendants have now agreed to settle the claims against them, while not admitting any liability or wrongdoing.

On March 8, 2011, a federal court entered a consent order that requires the defendants to pay $85,000 to tenants and prospective tenants who were harmed by the alleged discriminatory practices, pay $25,000 to the government as a civil penalty, create a common recreational area for tenants, including children, provide fair housing training to the defendants' employees, and develop and maintain non-discrimination policies throughout the complex.

Rural Fair Housing: What Tops the Complaint List?

A new report from the Housing Assistance Council (HAC), a nonprofit corporation headquartered in Washington, D.C., shows that more complaints under the Fair Housing Act (FHA) in rural areas of the United States were filed for disability than for any other protected class.

HAC looked at the 91,030 complaints in the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) database from 1998 to 2008, identifying roughly 13% of these complaints as concerning rural communities.

According to the study, 37% of the rural complaints were based on disability, followed by race (29%), familial status (12%), sex (7%), national origin (6%), color and religion (each 2%).

Access the complete results of HAC's report here.

Will the HOME Act Become Law in 2011? Should It?

A bill by the House introduced earlier this month promises to "modernize" the Fair Housing Act (FHA) if passed, supporters say.

H.R. 6500, known as the Housing Opportunities Made Equal (HOME) Act, would greatly expand federal protections against housing discrimination across the United States.

In its current form, the HOME Act would:

• add sexual orientation, gender identity, source of income, and marital status as protected classes;
  
  
• reinforce existing protections for people who are discriminated against after they have already rented or purchased a home;
  
  
• allow the public to hold municipalities accountable for failing to advance fair housing laws;
  
  
• expand the definition of "familial status" to include "anyone standing in loco parentis" of a child under 18 years of age;
  
  
• improve the Department of Justice's (DOJ) ability to investigate potential fair housing and fair lending violations; and
  
  
• clarify and strengthen protections for people with disabilities.

For more information about the HOME Act, take a look at this excellent section-by-section commentary by the National Fair Housing Alliance.

Do you think the HOME Act will become law in 2011? Should it? Do you agree with the law's supporters that it's time to modernize the FHA?

What do you think?