Quote:
Originally Posted by redrockglass
Austin Steve: I found this piece from an article in Time magazine"
In California: an estimated 60% of Los Angeles apartments do not rent to children..."
|
Unless a community is designated "Senior" or "Over 55", for which there are guidelines required, it is absolutely 100% against the law for a landlords to discriminate against or refuse to rent to families with children. Families with children are a Federally protected class. "Senior" communities are an exception provided for by law, but they must meet specific requirements. Perhaps there are more and more apartment communities electing to go to "Senior" status, but that means every tenant
must be 55 or older.
Furthermore, a complex cannot make special rules just for children, such as "no riding bikes" or "no playing with toys outside". Any non-Senior apartment community violating the Fair Housing laws would be subject to fines and penalties if caught doing so, based solely on age. That doesn't mean that there are not landlords who regularly violate these laws, but if caught they will pay the price.
As far as restricting 18 to 21 year olds, the landlord must have written guidlines establishing the criteria to be met when renting an apartment. Normally, this includes credit history, income and rental history requirements. A person over 18 is considered an adult, and is no less an adult than a 22 year old in the eyes of the law. A landlord trying to keep out 18-21 year olds is asking for trouble, and I am not aware of a legal way to do.
For example, if a 22 year old white woman applies for an apartment and is accepted, but a 21 year old minority appliacant, with the same qualifications, is declined or told he cannot apply for an apartment in the same community, I guaranty you with 100% certaintly that that landlord will get his butt fried in a discrimination lawsuit. It will be open and shut, a slam dunk. A landlord would have to be an idiot to exposes themselves to that sort of liability.
That landlord will be unable to defend or argue that there was any difference between the two applicants other than race. A judge or jury will roll their eyes at the notion that 1 year in age matters. It would be deemed an absurd argument and the landlord will lose the suit.
Now, that said, many 18 to 21 year olds don't have sufficient income or rental history to qualify for a rental. It is perfectly legal to require two years rental history, income 3 times the rent, good credit score, etc. so long as those requirement
apply equally to each and every applicant.
There is also no law that prohibits a landlord from refusing to rent to roommates. A landlord can say, for example, there is a limit of "one family or maximum two roommates", and thus not accept applications from three 20 year old roommates, so long as they would also apply the same rule to three 35 year old roommates. A single, unmarried person is considered a "family" under the housing laws, and a landlord has no obligation to rent to multiple "families".
I've been managing rentals in Austin since 1990 and have leased literally to thousands of tenants in Austin as a professional property manager. Perhaps I'm over-conditioned by all the Fair Housing and Ethcis education I've received as a Realtor and a property manager, and I've also been sued (unsuccessfully) a number of times by tenants trying to claim they were dscriminated against, so I've been put through the meat grinder and had to defend my own actions.
I strongly believe that it's plain foolish to try to dance araound the edges of Fair Housing and descrimination laws. It's asking for big time trouble. There has to be consistent treatment of all prospective tenants, with written and specific guidelines to remain inside legal and ethical boundaries.
I once had to prove to HUD, after I was sued, that I also evict white people who don't pay rent on time. I was sued by a minority couple whom I evicted for non-payment of rent, and they claimed that I did so only because of their race. They filed a Fair Housing complaint against me with HUD. During the interview with the HUD investigator (who clearly was hoping to nail me, not just learn the truth), I was peppered with questions such as "so, you
never make an exception, ever? You
always file an eveiction on every tenant who hasn't paid rent by the 10th?"
To which I was able to truthfully respond "Yes, that is correct. We treat every tenant exactly the same, no exceptions, ever - period". This is the only response that makes me bulletproof against bogus accusations.
Any landlord who can't anwer those questions in that manner is going to get fried, not matter their intentions. If I had said, "well, there was sweet Mrs. Johnson who was on Social Security and I didn't have the heart to evict her right away... and there was that nice young couple, the Turners, with the new baby who had unexpected medical costs"... etc., the door would have been opened for the investigator to interpret those actions as favorable to one type of tenant and hostile to another. Instead, those lines of questions hit dead ends and the case was rightfully dismissed.
Good luck finding an adult-oriented place to rent. But no landlord can legally promise you there won't be a crying baby next door next month.