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.
That article does nothing to support your case. it isn't about accepting NEW section 8 tenants--it's about existing tenants. IOW they were good enough before--unless you think the very act of qualifying for Section 8 turns a good tenant into a degenerate.
That article does nothing to support your case. it isn't about accepting NEW section 8 tenants--it's about existing tenants. IOW they were good enough before--unless you think the very act of qualifying for Section 8 turns a good tenant into a degenerate.
SECTION 8 PROGRAM RULED MANDATORY IN NEW JERSEY. | North America > United States from AllBusiness.com (http://www.allbusiness.com/real-estate-rental-leasing/real-activities-related-to-real/370017-1.html - broken link)
"As a result, even though federal regulations make participation in the Section 8 program voluntary, New Jersey apartment owners and managers cannot refuse to accept Section 8 vouchers. NAA/NMHC/American Seniors Housing Association (ASHA) and the New Jersey Apartment Association (NJAA) had coordinated an industry coalition and submitted an amid curiae brief in support of the property owner."
I might be interpreting this incorrectly, but it would appear to me that the intent was to prevent owners and managers of apartment buildings from refusing to accept Section 8.
I just did a bit of Googling. The original law only pertained to existing tenants. The court then appears to have extended it to all tenants and a blanket protection of income source (including alimony, child support, and welfare) was instituted. (I bet the landlords are now regretting that lawsuit, eh?)
Further, in certain circumstances, rejecting on grounds of credit history may be discrimination in New Jersey.
(IANAL, nor do I play one on television, nor have I got a JD from Google U. My interest in housing discrimination stems solely from the number of flagrantly illegal ads I saw when apartment hunting.)
I just did a bit of Googling. The original law only pertained to existing tenants. The court then appears to have extended it to all tenants and a blanket protection of income source (including alimony, child support, and welfare) was instituted. (I bet the landlords are now regretting that lawsuit, eh?)
Further, in certain circumstances, rejecting on grounds of credit history may be discrimination in New Jersey.
(IANAL, nor do I play one on television, nor have I got a JD from Google U. My interest in housing discrimination stems solely from the number of flagrantly illegal ads I saw when apartment hunting.)
My mom used to work for a housing authority in Mass. She said the way that Landlords there who didn't want to deal with Section 8 dealt with it was by advertising the rent higher than the voucher allows. So if a 2 br voucher allows up to 1500, they advertise for 1600...
My mom used to work for a housing authority in Mass. She said the way that Landlords there who didn't want to deal with Section 8 dealt with it was by advertising the rent higher than the voucher allows. So if a 2 br voucher allows up to 1500, they advertise for 1600...
Was that considered, permissable and/or legal, within the Section 8 guidelines ? And was there a permissable "threshold" of profit ?
By the way, thanks for sharing the personal, insight into this !
It's a free market system, you can charge whatever you want for rent, no matter how outrageous. Section 8 vouchers only pay up to a certain amount. There's nothing saying that you can't advertise your apartment for 2000 month and AFAIK HUD can't force you to lower your rent just because the person is on a voucher program. This is all assuming you aren't subject to rent control laws.
That's really unfair to the landlords.... I know if I owned a property, I wouldn't want Section 8 tenants simply because these are people who don't work, don't know the value of a hard work or a buck, and would think nothing of destroying your property.
If I was forced into taking a Section 8 tenant, I would want 3 months security deposit, plus first/last month's rent.
For your own information you are ENTIRELY wrong! My mother in law is a retired nurse but they won't give her permanent disability(heart problem) so they include her in a different type of Section 8 based on disability(not unwillingness to work)(she's 59).She worked for the hospitals in long island for over 30 years but was told she'd have to wait till she hit the right age for social security but still classified as a Section 8 tenant. Don't prejudge unless you know!There are some that won't work but others have legitimate reasons.
Is it not a waste of government money to provide section8 for the elderly that can simply live with their families?
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.
