I wanted to share an article with all of you but could not do it as an article due to either my misunderstanding of how to post an article or maybe the restrictions of the extranet usage here at work. So I will share it here in the open forum where it will probably be seen by even more people.
Government wants to force all landlords to accept section 8 vouchers and or certificates. What I have found is a very, verry, verrry recent case that you might want to watch as it unfolds.
In this case the landlord told the section 8 client that she/he did not want to deal with the Section 8 program and the governments response was
"We are facing critical housing needs in the Commonwealth and the strain on those needing rental or transitional housing assistance is particularly great,'' said Coakley. "Realtors, brokers, and landlords in Massachusetts should understand that discrimination against those who hold housing assistance subsidies is illegal and we will seek to hold accountable those who break the law.''
Does this case from October 15, 2009 shed some light on the wishes of some governmental officials in what they want to be law?
Well, unless you're in MA or another state which has added to the federal protected classes in housing descrimination I don't think you have to worry.
The catch phrase in this article is "Under Massachusetts law, it is illegal to discriminate against housing applicants because they receive public assistance."
It doesn't mention how long this law has been in effect, but the states and municipalities do have the authority to add protected classes to their equal housing laws (I remember one where sexual orientation was added), and this just serves to illustrate how important it is to know and abide by your state and local laws, and mind your P's and Q's when dealing with prospective tenants.
You are 100% correct. As I've been saying, the socialists want to control every aspect of our lives (both personal and business). This could very easily become a federal law.
I'd be happy to take Section 8 if I ever get a Section 8 applicant who meets my written criteria. But they never even come close. Oh well.
When they call, I tell them I'd be very happy to consider them, but I only do month to month, and if they will check with their case worker and see if that is OK, and call me back........
As Mike so aptly noted, this could easily become Federal law as most of these socialist policies are started in the NE or CA area and spread nationwide.
And if they do not spread nationwide by states virtually adopting each others laws then people are taken to court and the decision (if it goes against these people) are cited as case law and imposed upon the other states.
I have to admit, this is no one's fault but our own! As long as we keep electing the same politicians year in and year out, we will never really get anything accomplished!
Send those section 8 tenants my way. I will be more than happy to take them and not worrying whether or not the next rent check will be in. I'm sure that if MA would agree to reconcile their high taxes with the rent level, It wouldn't be a problem.... :wink:
I would very much agree also Eddie, but to force someone to take them that would like to choose to do otherwise is a problem.
As is this topic in all reality because it will be difficult to keep it on subject of Section 8 rentals without getting into the political side of the issue itself.
In reality, section 8 should not be singled out based on that classification alone. If their voucher is qualified for the rental then, they go through the regular screening. If, you as a landlord prefer not to take a section 8 renter, how can anyone prove that the section 8 factor was the prevailing reason not to rent to that person?
The Fair Housing folks come around posing as various groups that are suspected of being on the wrong end of discrimination. That is how they can tell if the landlord representative did something that violated Fair Housing regulations.
That's all fine, but I still don't see how they can prove anything. If lets say, you have five applications where all the applicants have similar background and financial ability, if you chose the non-section 8 applicant, how can they prove any wrong doing?
It is difficult to prove. But when you are dealing with these professionals who make it their business to prove this sort of stuff ...
Many people don't even realize when they say or do something that negatively affects a protected class, so they say or do that thing. The Fair Housing employees are skilled at identifying such behaviors. Then you get presented with a lawsuit, and then you realize from where it arose. Then you are paying for the attorney to defend your position, and then the Fair Housing evidence is revealed, and your attorney says "just settle"... And nothing really had to be "proven" to end up there.
Either you settle, or your are forced to accept the Section 8 tennant even when your principles say to you that you are not going to accept any governmental monies because of the strings attached.
It has nothing to due with Section 8 itself, it has to do with governmental intervention in my business and taking away my free market choices.
If the government wanted everything on level terms they could issue checks to the Section 8 qualified tenant for the amount of help they are qualified for and it is the tenants responsibility to pay their bills to the landlord the same as any other tenant would. If they do not pay they are evicted the same way any other tenant would be.
But to be forced to accept government monies (strings are always attached) and tenants of the governments choosing is just not acceptable.
I still don't see what to settle for? I also don't see why FH would pursue a suit that is completely arbitrary and have very little proof of wrong doing. Although, I agree that the government should not force landlords to accept section 8, I do see the role of the government when it comes to fair housing and equal opportunities.
That is a very dangerous slippery slope which can create an opening for discrimination based on race, religion, sex, etc...
Wow. The conspiracy theorists are working overtime in this thread.
The Fair Housing folks come around posing as various groups that are suspected of being on the wrong end of discrimination. That is how they can tell if the landlord representative did something that violated Fair Housing regulations.
Whazis? It doesn't even make sense. See:
http://www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/FHLaws/yourrights.cfm HUD (FHEO) only responds to complaints, they're not out there trolling, trying to entrap LLs/Pms. Their methods of responding to a complaint are clearly spelled out and entrapment isn't one of them.
Government wants to force all landlords to accept section 8 vouchers and or certificates.
I don't think so. I read the article, too. If a state adds a new class in addition to the federal classes, it does not force anyone to do anything. It only prohibits you from descriminating for that particular reason. And if any state adds a class to it's particular law, it doesn't automatically bleed over to all states.
Some number of years ago, the feds were reading real estate advertisements and taking action when the ads suggested preference for various things, like "great for the young family just starting out" was deemed to discriminate against age. So you change your ad to read "great for the first time homebuyer!"
See my first post in this thread. Know the law, abide by it, and watch your P's and Q's when talking to prosepective tenants. :roll:
We both read the article from two different aspects.
The Feds, who run the policy, state you do have to accept the vouchers if you do not want to. The the State arrests you because you do not want to accept the vouchers.
Those are the only facts so far. The State is insinuating that it is discrimination not to accept the voucher. Which effectively takes away your choice not to accept the voucher (if they get their way). If you can not choose not to take a voucher, then you are FORCED to take the voucher.
Whazis? It doesn't even make sense. See:
http://www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/FHLaws/yourrights.cfm HUD (FHEO) only responds to complaints, they're not out there trolling, trying to entrap LLs/Pms. Their methods of responding to a complaint are clearly spelled out and entrapment isn't one of them.
...
Ralph,
That's not the Fair Housing folks that I was referring to. I tracked down a few links to peruse. Here are some quotes directly from the links I supply below.
In the 1960s, having helped to achieve passage of state and federal fair housing legislation, the FHCSP began monitoring real estate agencies' performance under the new laws. "Testing" for compliance became the organization's major program.
Since the mid 1990s, FHCSP has implemented methodical investigations of rental, sales, accessibility, lending and insurance practices. Today, a dedicated Board of Directors, and professional staff work together to carry out an ambitious program of monitoring and community education, with an ongoing commitment to eliminate housing discrimination and achieve freedom of residence for all.
Now, I have to admit that I personally have not experienced the "testing" methodology that I posted previously; that information was anecdotal, from the local REIA. But then again, one can "learn the hard way" (by experiencing for oneself), or one can "learn the easy way" (observing others experiences); this one falls into the category where I would definitely prefer to learn the easy way.
So here is one tale told to me by another REIA member. A landlord had a rather dumpy unit that was vacant and being advertised and was showing it actively, when another nicer unit became available also. Rather than run a second ad, he decided to just show the nicer unit to the tenant prospects that he observed to be more favorable, and not show it to those he deemed less favorable. Somehow, the fair housing folks had caught this guy (I was told by "testing", "posing as the less desirable AND as the more favored groups); they had their "testing" results where it demonstrated his favoritism.
I can't confirm this as anything other than second-hand (or worse) info. Hopefully, this context will help to explain my previous post a bit better. BTW, they did have a couple of their reps attend the local REIA meeting one night to explain what it is they do - part of the educational aspect of their mission.
Oct 18 '09, 04:02 PM
