Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have been looking at local ads lately and I am seeing something I've never seen before: owners of houses and apartments stating that they do not rent to retired tenants on SS or pensions because they cannot garnish wages should they fail to pay rent.
They also mention not renting to self-employed or people working multiple part-time jobs. Only full time workers. One even wants employer references detailing job security. I think that is particularly ridiculous.
But regarding retirees, I would rather rent to someone who has guaranteed monthly income like SS or a pension rather than someone who could be fired or laid off. No guarantees there of payment as one can lose their job at any time.
Anyway, I feel this is age discrimination and I was shocked to see a prejudice against renting to someone who is retired on SS and/or a pension.
Have you seen this? What do you think?
Moderator Note: City-Data is not a venue for Legal Advice
Last edited by Ultrarunner; 10-14-2017 at 12:27 PM..
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,563 posts, read 81,147,605 times
Reputation: 57767
Discrimination in renting is subject to the Fair Housing Act, a federal law, and neither employment status nor older age are protected classes. Many states and cities have additional rental laws, you would have to look it up to see if this is covered locally. In this case, I suspect that the owner has been burned by retirees and/or people that were laid off before. In a hot market like here, landlords can afford to be very picky and still get many applicants, so they do what they can to limit them.
I mentioned those categories among others mentioned.
I am not citing this to get legal questions answered. I know the laws. Why has this forum become so literal-minded and quick to shut down every discussion?
It's a ''discussion forum'', not a wikipedia for legal and financial affairs.
I was sharing an observation that I had never seen before in my area of rural Ohio. That's all.
And yes, though it all may be ''legal'', it certainly will impact negatively on retirees if it becomes a regular renting practice across the area. They won't be able to rent a house or apartment.
I've not seen a 'trend' or even multiple instances of avoiding retired renters. On the contrary, my own observation is that renting to retirees is more desirable --- than renting to younger people with more drama/baggage, job insecurity and less stability. (I think the OP's observation is more of an anomaly than a trend).
The rental market in most areas is heavily skewed toward landlords these days.
In many areas of the country, you've had a lot of folks who were foreclosed on the financial crisis who are still not able to qualify for a mortgage. Home prices are rising rapidly, out of the reach of many potential buyers, with very limited inventory in most markets. Many jobs these days don't offer the stability needed to purchase a home. I live in an area where owning is notably cheaper than renting, but if you have a decent job here and that job goes for whatever reason, it's going to be difficult to even pay the low mortgage.
A lot of factors force people into renting. Until that overall dynamic changes, you're going to see landlords able to discriminate on virtually anything that is not legally protected, and even then they may find ways around the legal protections.
I have been looking at local ads lately and I am seeing something I've never seen before: owners of houses and apartments stating that they do not rent to retired tenants on SS or pensions because they cannot garnish wages should they fail to pay rent.
They also mention not renting to self-employed or people working multiple part-time jobs. Only full time workers. One even wants employer references detailing job security. I think that is particularly ridiculous.
But regarding retirees, I would rather rent to someone who has guaranteed monthly income like SS or a pension rather than someone who could be fired or laid off. No guarantees there of payment as one can lose their job at any time.
Anyway, I feel this is age discrimination and I was shocked to see a prejudice against renting to someone who is retired on SS and/or a pension.
Have you seen this? What do you think?
So it's a balancing act. I asked my sibling who owns some rental property. for him it's not so much as being on SS it's more of "that's their only income". It's not necessarily the age but the income
Seniors trying to rent when Social security is their only income do present a higher risk (not my words). same thing with someone working 4 part time jobs.
Remember your goal as a landlord is to get a reliable, financially secure tenant. What happens to "Joe or Jane 4 jobs" if they lose one of their jobs? rent is usually the first thing they skip on. the problem is, as a landlord, your bills don't stop because your income does.
His applications do have to list their income sources. sure there are no "guarantees" but you are trying to hedge your bets.
That's why it's hard to get a mortgage without a job. You can have a million bucks in liquid assets and without a job it's tough. I've even made the argument that a day after you get a mortgage you can up and quit.
In our city, many landlords are very happy to get senior citizens to rent their small homes or duplexes. A friend told me they take much better care of the properties. However, we have a huge stock of housing and relatively low rentals except for the downtown properities or the hot areas where the rental market is crazy.
Guaranteed SS income is better than any job's income because the job can go at any time. I know, I've lived it.
I am better prepared to manage the rent now than I ever was during lay-offs in the Great Recession.
Most people will make the rent the first bill to be paid, period. No one wants to be evicted. I've witnessed it. It is not pretty.
If a person who works gets laid off, what is there to garnish? Duh.
So there is no logic to banning SS income applicants as tenants. It goes against any logic and common sense, IMVHO.
So rent in other areas that practice unfair rental discrimination. You know the ones, where only people over 55 are able to rent in?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
