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 don't know your exact situation but I'd generally go with the LL in these types of cases. Maybe she doesn't want to be a "hands on" LL - someone who gets called by the tenants every now and then to make the house/property more child friendly. Or there are areas in the property that could potentially pose danger to young children. Unfortunately, NY state laws are more tenant-friendly than LL-friendly which explains why she doesn't want to take the risk with you.
Unfortunately, NY state laws are more tenant-friendly than LL-friendly which explains why she doesn't want to take the risk with you.
Uh, they are that way for a reason, because otherwise there would be plenty of people who would basically become "unrentable" who do not have the means to own a home. What's your solution for that, force the gov't to provide them housing? Also, if a LL could legally not rent to people with children, what's to stop a LL from legally not renting to black people, disabled people, old people, etc. While I understand the LL's worries a bit, if he/she is truly worried about renting to so-called "problem groups" he/she shouldn't be a landlord. Should police only protect people in "good" neighborhoods and not take risks? That's the analogy that comes to my mind.
Most laws are made to protect those who cannot protect themselves from being taken advantage of........
I don't know your exact situation but I'd generally go with the LL in these types of cases. Maybe she doesn't want to be a "hands on" LL - someone who gets called by the tenants every now and then to make the house/property more child friendly. Or there are areas in the property that could potentially pose danger to young children. Unfortunately, NY state laws are more tenant-friendly than LL-friendly which explains why she doesn't want to take the risk with you.
Well said. Rent laws in NY overwhelmingly favor tenants. Though legally what the LL is doing is illegal, she still could of been more discreet about her not wanting kids living in her property due to the added risk and wear and tear so that not to tip off the renter. She could of found other legit reasons not to rent to her and still got her way even though her true reason was the renter having kids.
"Since this is a single family home, I don't think it is subject to the same laws and this is not illegal."
Of course it is. I can't just rent out my home to white people!
Some laws don't apply, but discriminating on family status is right up there with race. Still, as with anything, proving it is another story and not worth it.
Just skip this one. If she doesn't want a family, you don't want her. We just saw about a dozen rentals, having just moved to the area, and not one of them was worried about us moving in with 2 young kids.
Sorry to hear of your experience. We have a 2 year old and have not encountered this attitude from anyone. And we've been looking for a rental in the NYC metro area for a loooooong time.
While I feel 99% of all agents are useless parasites, this is one case when having one with you to tour the whom would have been priceless. I doubt the landlord would have dared speak like that in front of an agent, and if they did, the agent could have quickly reminded her of the laws.
You can report this landlord. Not sure what good it will do, but might give you some peace of mind.
Be thankful they've shown their true colors and move on. There are plenty of landlords that know the rules and play by them.
Uh, they are that way for a reason, because otherwise there would be plenty of people who would basically become "unrentable" who do not have the means to own a home. What's your solution for that, force the gov't to provide them housing? Also, if a LL could legally not rent to people with children, what's to stop a LL from legally not renting to black people, disabled people, old people, etc. While I understand the LL's worries a bit, if he/she is truly worried about renting to so-called "problem groups" he/she shouldn't be a landlord. Should police only protect people in "good" neighborhoods and not take risks? That's the analogy that comes to my mind.
Most laws are made to protect those who cannot protect themselves from being taken advantage of........
I'm talking about tenant protection rules that apply once the tenants have settled in, not when they are looking for a place to live. Under NY laws, once tenants have settled in, they become extremely difficult to evict even if they are largely at fault (moreso if it is a family with children). Now these laws have made LLs more risk averse and less willing to take chances with stereotypes - leading to the problems you have mentioned. The solution would be to create more balanced laws and policies that take LL interests into account. They are after all the ones who put their honestly-earned money into buying and developing the property.
"Since this is a single family home, I don't think it is subject to the same laws and this is not illegal."
Of course it is. I can't just rent out my home to white people!
Some laws don't apply, but discriminating on family status is right up there with race. Still, as with anything, proving it is another story and not worth it.
As far as I know the only legal "discrimination" allowed in housing are two things:
1) Landlords can refuse to accept Section 8 vouchers for payment
2) A designated "retirement community" can limit residents to being 55 years of age or older (that's it, can't be 65, 80, etc. just 55). Many such places will allow a spouse under 55 but no kids.
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.