Illegal immigrants as tenants
Anchorage, AK · Member since 2016 · 15 posts · 12 votes
Illegal immigrants as tenants
Most Popular Reply
Residential Real Estate Broker · College Station, TX · Member since 2013 · 1k+ posts · 969 votes
8y@Philip Bennett. At least from a Texas standpoint - you could do whatever you desire.
First, being an "illegal immigrant" is not a "protected class". So, you are not discriminating against any of the "protected classes" - race, creed, familial status, etc.
Second, you have someone who cannot provide you with an acceptable completed application.
Third, the Texas Association of REALTORS Standard Application has a block for SSAN - you need that to accurately identify the person you are credit screening.
If you own the property, you can "NOT ACCEPT" the applicant without fear of retribution.
273 Replies
- Investor · Princeton, TX · Member since 2014 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes8y
@Tom Gimer Actually several types of visas do not allow the person to work. Therefore they do not qualify for a Social Security number. Most foreign students are not authorized to work in the US. Certain types of investor visas do not qualify people for social security numbers either.
I have also helped thousands of people rent hundreds of apartments before they receive their social security number. Refugees have to have an I-94 form stamped upon entry into the country before they file for a social security number. Of course... the apartments are rented before they get on the plane to come to the US.
If we are talking about requiring the applicant have a social security number, then unless a case was intentionally setup to be a test case it would be fairly unlikely for it to be published. I think as soon as the case was filed and certainly as soon as the petitioner gave a list of less discriminatory policies then the landlord's lawyer would say change the policy. Since we are talking about a disparate impact and not disparate treatment that would pretty much be the end of it.
- Investor · Princeton, TX · Member since 2014 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes8y
@Gabe N. It is ABSOLUTELY NOT discriminatory to check credit. It is the requiring a social security number that is at issue. Experian says a social security number is not required to check credit.
- Investor · Anchorage, AK · Member since 2015 · 29 posts · 24 votes8y
@Account Closed pretty blatantly say that a credit check can be considered discriminatory and that landlords should not be using them.
Personally I do not ask for a SSN because I don't think it's useful for my application process but I do not see why it would be discrimination to ask for it. Many government applications require a SSN to qualify for even basic rights like purchasing a gun. That specific application even asks explicitly if the applicant is an illegal immigrant. So, if the government is explicitly accepting or denying people on a background check on the basis of their citizenship status then I fail to see how it is discrimination for a landlord to simply ask for an SSN or proof of citizenship.
- Investor · Princeton, TX · Member since 2014 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes8y
@Gabe N. As I mentioned earlier in the thread it is ok to ask every applicant if they are in the country legally.
Having a social security number does not mean someone is a citizen or is in the country legally.
- Investor · Laurel, MD · Member since 2016 · 395 posts · 191 votes8y
Originally posted by @Tom Gimer:
Originally posted by @Ihe O.:
Originally posted by @Thomas S.:
For those landlords believing that they are safe by not knowing the relevant facts about a applicant...under the law ignorance is not a valid defence.
You're wrong again - a tenants immigration status is not a relevant fact.
" In general, the landlord doesn’t have the duty to inquire about status, explains Professor Seng. That means that since most criminal standards require that the offender know that they are committing the offense, renting to an illegal immigrant is typically not prosecuted as a criminal offense even in the states that consider it to be one."
https://www.ezlandlordforms.com/articles/education...
and nobody has yet been prosecuted for it in Oklahoma where it's been on the statute book for 10 years.
Leading with "You're wrong again" is the guy who cites British law as summarized in magazines.
If my would-be tenant can't produce evidence of good credit, income and the ability to continue earning, that's relevant.
Based on your latest posts, that's also racist. smh
I believe in doing at least a bit of research before opening my mouth.
We evidently don't have that in common so we are done.
- Investor · Laurel, MD · Member since 2016 · 395 posts · 191 votes8y
Originally posted by @Gabe N.:
@Account Closed pretty blatantly say that a credit check can be considered discriminatory and that landlords should not be using them.
Personally I do not ask for a SSN because I don't think it's useful for my application process but I do not see why it would be discrimination to ask for it. Many government applications require a SSN to qualify for even basic rights like purchasing a gun. That specific application even asks explicitly if the applicant is an illegal immigrant. So, if the government is explicitly accepting or denying people on a background check on the basis of their citizenship status then I fail to see how it is discrimination for a landlord to simply ask for an SSN or proof of citizenship.
No I didn't say that at all. Please don't ever make the mistake of misquoting me like that again.
Requiring proof of citizenship to rent is discrimination based on national origin. You are allowed to do it in employment because citizenship is a legal requirement for many/most jobs. It is not a requirement to rent - if it were diplomats would not be able to find a place to live.
http://www.washdiplomat.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=6415:-where-we-live-&catid=993:september-2008&Itemid=264
- 8yTom GimerBusiness MemberDMV · Member since 2017 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes
Originally posted by @Ihe O.:
Originally posted by @Tom Gimer:
Originally posted by @Ihe O.:
Originally posted by @Thomas S.:
For those landlords believing that they are safe by not knowing the relevant facts about a applicant...under the law ignorance is not a valid defence.
You're wrong again - a tenants immigration status is not a relevant fact.
" In general, the landlord doesn’t have the duty to inquire about status, explains Professor Seng. That means that since most criminal standards require that the offender know that they are committing the offense, renting to an illegal immigrant is typically not prosecuted as a criminal offense even in the states that consider it to be one."
https://www.ezlandlordforms.com/articles/education...
and nobody has yet been prosecuted for it in Oklahoma where it's been on the statute book for 10 years.
Leading with "You're wrong again" is the guy who cites British law as summarized in magazines.
If my would-be tenant can't produce evidence of good credit, income and the ability to continue earning, that's relevant.
Based on your latest posts, that's also racist. smh
I believe in doing at least a bit of research before opening my mouth.
We evidently don't have that in common so we are done.
We are "done" because you read stories in sources like The Washington Diplomat and refer to it as research.
Gimer Law516 Reviews - Investor · Laurel, MD · Member since 2016 · 395 posts · 191 votes8y
Originally posted by @Tom Gimer:
Originally posted by @Ihe O.:
Originally posted by @Tom Gimer:
Originally posted by @Ihe O.:
Originally posted by @Thomas S.:
For those landlords believing that they are safe by not knowing the relevant facts about a applicant...under the law ignorance is not a valid defence.
You're wrong again - a tenants immigration status is not a relevant fact.
" In general, the landlord doesn’t have the duty to inquire about status, explains Professor Seng. That means that since most criminal standards require that the offender know that they are committing the offense, renting to an illegal immigrant is typically not prosecuted as a criminal offense even in the states that consider it to be one."
https://www.ezlandlordforms.com/articles/education...
and nobody has yet been prosecuted for it in Oklahoma where it's been on the statute book for 10 years.
Leading with "You're wrong again" is the guy who cites British law as summarized in magazines.
If my would-be tenant can't produce evidence of good credit, income and the ability to continue earning, that's relevant.
Based on your latest posts, that's also racist. smh
I believe in doing at least a bit of research before opening my mouth.
We evidently don't have that in common so we are done.
We are "done" because you read stories in sources like The Washington Diplomat and refer to it as research.
That wasn't research and it wasn't addressed to Mr Gimer.
It should be obvious to anyone who gives it a moments thought that diplomats are
a) foreign nationals
b) not supposed to have SSN's (actually due to reciprocal tax treaties they don't pay US taxes).
c) need to rent homes.
The article gives a useful insight for Landlords in my cachment area (DC Metro) about renting to niche.
- Investor · Laurel, MD · Member since 2016 · 395 posts · 191 votes8y
Originally posted by @Gabe N.:
@Account Closed pretty blatantly say that a credit check can be considered discriminatory and that landlords should not be using them.
Personally I do not ask for a SSN because I don't think it's useful for my application process but I do not see why it would be discrimination to ask for it. Many government applications require a SSN to qualify for even basic rights like purchasing a gun. That specific application even asks explicitly if the applicant is an illegal immigrant. So, if the government is explicitly accepting or denying people on a background check on the basis of their citizenship status then I fail to see how it is discrimination for a landlord to simply ask for an SSN or proof of citizenship.
Children of diplomats that are born in the US are not entitled to SSN's (or citizenship) but are getting them because the SSA hasn't figured out how to stop them being issued when their parents present their birth certificates.
- Investor · Atlanta, GA · Member since 2013 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes8y
Originally posted by :
Children of diplomats that are born in the US are not entitled to SSN's (or citizenship) but are getting them because the SSA hasn't figured out how to stop them being issued when their parents present their birth certificates.
Why would they not be entitled to SSN? Everybody, born in the U.S. is considered American citizen, regardless of their parents being American or foreign or not, and thus has the right to a SSN
- Investor · Princeton, TX · Member since 2014 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes8y
Why this came up, I am not sure. It is fairly complex. Here are the rules...
https://www.uscis.gov/greencard/born-in-us-to-fore...
In short, the 14th Amendment was intentionally written to prevent them from becoming citizens.
To be exact "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" in the amendment keeps people born with diplomatic immunity from being US citizens at birth. They are also considered non-immigrants so can later give up their immunity and apply for citizenship.
- Investor · Atlanta, GA · Member since 2013 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes8y
Originally posted by @Account Closed:
Why this came up, I am not sure. It is fairly complex. Here are the rules...
https://www.uscis.gov/greencard/born-in-us-to-fore...
In short, the 14th Amendment was intentionally written to prevent them from becoming citizens.
To be exact "and subject to the jurisdiction thereof" in the amendment keeps people born with diplomatic immunity from being US citizens at birth. They are also considered non-immigrants so can later give up their immunity and apply for citizenship.
Oh, I didn't realize that. I actually know someone who came as a 2 year old with his mother, who was a diplomat. She passed away when he was 16 and this is the only country he knows. He's been surviving as an undocumented immigrant. But he wasn't born here anyway.
- 8yTom GimerBusiness MemberDMV · Member since 2017 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes
Originally posted by @Ihe O.:
Originally posted by @Tom Gimer:
Originally posted by @Ihe O.:
Originally posted by @Tom Gimer:
Originally posted by @Ihe O.:
Originally posted by @Thomas S.:
For those landlords believing that they are safe by not knowing the relevant facts about a applicant...under the law ignorance is not a valid defence.
You're wrong again - a tenants immigration status is not a relevant fact.
" In general, the landlord doesn’t have the duty to inquire about status, explains Professor Seng. That means that since most criminal standards require that the offender know that they are committing the offense, renting to an illegal immigrant is typically not prosecuted as a criminal offense even in the states that consider it to be one."
https://www.ezlandlordforms.com/articles/education...
and nobody has yet been prosecuted for it in Oklahoma where it's been on the statute book for 10 years.
Leading with "You're wrong again" is the guy who cites British law as summarized in magazines.
If my would-be tenant can't produce evidence of good credit, income and the ability to continue earning, that's relevant.
Based on your latest posts, that's also racist. smh
I believe in doing at least a bit of research before opening my mouth.
We evidently don't have that in common so we are done.
We are "done" because you read stories in sources like The Washington Diplomat and refer to it as research.
That wasn't research and it wasn't addressed to Mr Gimer.
It should be obvious to anyone who gives it a moments thought that diplomats are
a) foreign nationals
b) not supposed to have SSN's (actually due to reciprocal tax treaties they don't pay US taxes).
c) need to rent homes.
The article gives a useful insight for Landlords in my cachment area (DC Metro) about renting to niche.
The whole point of a policy is to determine whether the tenant will likely pay the rent.
In this instance, the applicant would say something like -- "I don't have SSN but I do have this Visa as well as this voucher from X country that guarantees I will pay the rent until Y date."
If the LL thinks the applicant is sufficiently creditworthy, problem solved. Applicants like this don't have trouble finding a rental. You are creating a solution for a problem that doesn't exist.
Gimer Law516 Reviews - Investor · Princeton, TX · Member since 2014 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes8y
@Michaela G. Adoption at the time of his mother's death would have probably been the best option to change his status.
- Broker/Flipper · Austin, TX · Member since 2013 · 4k+ posts · 4k+ votes8y
Originally posted by @Ihe O.:
Originally posted by @Tom Gimer:
Originally posted by @Ihe O.:
Originally posted by @Tom Gimer:
Originally posted by @Ihe O.:
Originally posted by @Thomas S.:
For those landlords believing that they are safe by not knowing the relevant facts about a applicant...under the law ignorance is not a valid defence.
You're wrong again - a tenants immigration status is not a relevant fact.
" In general, the landlord doesn’t have the duty to inquire about status, explains Professor Seng. That means that since most criminal standards require that the offender know that they are committing the offense, renting to an illegal immigrant is typically not prosecuted as a criminal offense even in the states that consider it to be one."
https://www.ezlandlordforms.com/articles/education...
and nobody has yet been prosecuted for it in Oklahoma where it's been on the statute book for 10 years.
Leading with "You're wrong again" is the guy who cites British law as summarized in magazines.
If my would-be tenant can't produce evidence of good credit, income and the ability to continue earning, that's relevant.
Based on your latest posts, that's also racist. smh
I believe in doing at least a bit of research before opening my mouth.
We evidently don't have that in common so we are done.
We are "done" because you read stories in sources like The Washington Diplomat and refer to it as research.
That wasn't research and it wasn't addressed to Mr Gimer.
It should be obvious to anyone who gives it a moments thought that diplomats are
a) foreign nationals
b) not supposed to have SSN's (actually due to reciprocal tax treaties they don't pay US taxes).
c) need to rent homes.
The article gives a useful insight for Landlords in my cachment area (DC Metro) about renting to niche.
So in another thread , you tell me that in effect Common Law supercedes Texas law
Then earlier in this thread you reference an article regarding English law and not Federal law to support your argument
Now, you reference an article about diplomats that want to live close to work due to concerns about fuel prices.......from 2008 ! Somehow that is relevant as well. SMH
- Investor · Atlanta, GA · Member since 2013 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes8y
Originally posted by @Account Closed:
@Michaela G. Adoption at the time of his mother's death would have probably been the best option to change his status.
He was 16 at the time. By the time anyone might have accepted someone that age, he would have been aged out
- Investor · Laurel, MD · Member since 2016 · 395 posts · 191 votes8y
Originally posted by @Greg H.:
Originally posted by @Ihe O.:
Originally posted by @Tom Gimer:
Originally posted by @Ihe O.:
Originally posted by @Tom Gimer:
Originally posted by @Ihe O.:
Originally posted by @Thomas S.:
For those landlords believing that they are safe by not knowing the relevant facts about a applicant...under the law ignorance is not a valid defence.
You're wrong again - a tenants immigration status is not a relevant fact.
" In general, the landlord doesn’t have the duty to inquire about status, explains Professor Seng. That means that since most criminal standards require that the offender know that they are committing the offense, renting to an illegal immigrant is typically not prosecuted as a criminal offense even in the states that consider it to be one."
https://www.ezlandlordforms.com/articles/education...
and nobody has yet been prosecuted for it in Oklahoma where it's been on the statute book for 10 years.
Leading with "You're wrong again" is the guy who cites British law as summarized in magazines.
If my would-be tenant can't produce evidence of good credit, income and the ability to continue earning, that's relevant.
Based on your latest posts, that's also racist. smh
I believe in doing at least a bit of research before opening my mouth.
We evidently don't have that in common so we are done.
We are "done" because you read stories in sources like The Washington Diplomat and refer to it as research.
That wasn't research and it wasn't addressed to Mr Gimer.
It should be obvious to anyone who gives it a moments thought that diplomats are
a) foreign nationals
b) not supposed to have SSN's (actually due to reciprocal tax treaties they don't pay US taxes).
c) need to rent homes.
The article gives a useful insight for Landlords in my cachment area (DC Metro) about renting to niche.
So in another thread , you tell me that in effect Common Law supercedes Texas law
Then earlier in this thread you reference an article regarding English law and not Federal law to support your argument
Now, you reference an article about diplomats that want to live close to work due to concerns about fuel prices.......from 2008 ! Somehow that is relevant as well. SMH
In the other thread someone was citing a Texas law on abandoned property. Property left behind is not abandoned if the owner has indicated they are going to return for it - thats a bailment which are also dealt with in Texas law. If you look at the obligations Texas law imposes on a landlord in those situations and you look at the obligations of an involuntary bailee in Common Law you will find they are very similar. Why do you think that is?
OK the other stuff.
Indirect discrimination based on immigrant status or national origin is unlawful.
Diplomats (to whom laws and taxes do not apply) shouldn't be having SSN's.
You know what you are right. These principles are so obvious they don't need a supporting article to figure them out.
- Specialist · fremont, NE · Member since 2014 · 161 posts · 42 votes8y
Since OP has knowledge that the person is illegal, that means that the person in question has committed a crime. That falls under "aiding and abetting a known criminal."
By "not caring and taking a stand," it is condoning the crime. If the person committed just about any other crime, this wouldn't even be a question.
If an American citizen had killed that woman, odds are stronger that "well, you didn't intend to kill her, but it's still man-slaughter," or some other crime.
Since the person's an adult, if I've read it right, then unless the person is something like someone who is autistic, then I believe that only they can fill out the app, not someone who won't live there.
If they can't provide a proper and complete app, simply state that until the app is properly filled out, then just like any other app, you can't accept an incomplete app.
This shouldn't even be a discussion, imo. Enabling or not caring them increases this to increase. How many times do we allow people who are deported multiple times, for rape, murder, and other crimes, before it's enough?
- Investor · Laurel, MD · Member since 2016 · 395 posts · 191 votes8y
Originally posted by @Eddie Starr:
Since OP has knowledge that the person is illegal, that means that the person in question has committed a crime. That falls under "aiding and abetting a known criminal."
By "not caring and taking a stand," it is condoning the crime. If the person committed just about any other crime, this wouldn't even be a question.
If an American citizen had killed that woman, odds are stronger that "well, you didn't intend to kill her, but it's still man-slaughter," or some other crime.
Since the person's an adult, if I've read it right, then unless the person is something like someone who is autistic, then I believe that only they can fill out the app, not someone who won't live there.
If they can't provide a proper and complete app, simply state that until the app is properly filled out, then just like any other app, you can't accept an incomplete app.
This shouldn't even be a discussion, imo. Enabling or not caring them increases this to increase. How many times do we allow people who are deported multiple times, for rape, murder, and other crimes, before it's enough?
It is a civil violation. Not a crime.
- Investor · Atlanta, GA · Member since 2013 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes8y
Originally posted by @Eddie Starr:
Since OP has knowledge that the person is illegal, that means that the person in question has committed a crime. That falls under "aiding and abetting a known criminal."
Being in this country without proper status is a civil infraction, not a crime, like jay walking. Thus, an undocumented immigrant is not a criminal - as much as you'd like it to be, you can't make it so, without changing the law. A civil infraction is a NON-criminal breaking of some rule or statute.
- Investor · Princeton, TX · Member since 2014 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes8y
I think it is important to keep things in perspective.
- Investor · Atlanta, GA · Member since 2013 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes8y
As @Ihe O. wrote , it's a civil infraction, which is a NON-criminal breaking of a rule or statute, similar to jaywalking or driving without a license.
I've never heard the term 'illegal pedestrian' for a jaywalker or 'illegal driver' for someone that forgot his license.
- Investor · Kirkland, WA · Member since 2017 · 310 posts · 271 votes8y
To be here illegally for any length of time and in any kind of comfort means breaking many other laws. You’d have to commit identity theft to get a utility account, bank account, drivers license, insurance, tax evasions of various types including running any cash business without remitting state sales tax, employing workers without remitting L&I amounts properly, filling out I-9 federal form with false info and signing it is also a crime... when the banking system is accessed in furtherance of other crimes like tax evasion then its money laundering... using the mail in furtherance of other crimes is mail fraud, well mailing applications for credit cards or utility accounts with false info could be argued as such... as pp said, I can’t even understand how this is a topic.
- Investor · Atlanta, GA · Member since 2013 · 3k+ posts · 3k+ votes8y
Originally posted by @Tyler Mullen:
To be here illegally for any length of time and in any kind of comfort means breaking many other laws. You’d have to commit identity theft to get a utility account, bank account, drivers license, insurance, tax evasions of various types including running any cash business without remitting state sales tax, employing workers without remitting L&I amounts properly, filling out I-9 federal form with false info and signing it is also a crime... when the banking system is accessed in furtherance of other crimes like tax evasion then its money laundering... using the mail in furtherance of other crimes is mail fraud, well mailing applications for credit cards or utility accounts with false info could be argued as such... as pp said, I can’t even understand how this is a topic.
You're full of false assumptions. Anyone can start an LLC and can pay taxes that way and get hired as a sub-contractor. People can get ITIN and pay taxes that way. They can employ people and submit taxes. You can get a bank account with your LLC. You can pay sales tax with your LLC. , There are many states where you can now get a driver's license. You can get utility accounts.
Just because you don't know all of the legal options out there, doesn't mean that every undocumented immigrant commits identity fraud. Just because many people like to see it that way and others are just gladly running with those unresearched fake facts, does not make it real.
And considering that you're in Washington, you should know more, because that's one of the states where undocumented immigrants can legally get licenses.
- Realtor and Investor · Scottsdale, AZ · Member since 2017 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes8y
Originally posted by @Michaela G.:
As @Ihe O. wrote , it's a civil infraction, which is a NON-criminal breaking of a rule or statute, similar to jaywalking or driving without a license.
I've never heard the term 'illegal pedestrian' for a jaywalker or 'illegal driver' for someone that forgot his license.
You both have really taken this to more of a political conversation, which is a pretty far departure from what the orginal question was about. This is one of the struggles in our country. No one wants to truly debate an issue. We (notice I say "We" as to not start anything with anyone, but rather just share an observation) just learn ways of deflecting and distracting from the issues instead of answering the original questions with legitimate answers, and we just take turns talking instead of really listening to the opposition and building on a conversation that leads to resolution.
It's time for us (again, collective "Us") to just say "we don't know" when we don't know the answer to a question, even if we don't like the question.
But I have heard you reference this civil infraction idea previously in this thread. Tell me something. If someone breaks into your house, and sets up in a bedroom to live there. Would you consider them just an undocumented house guest? My guess is that you would be the first one to call the authorities and prosecute this person for their ILLEGAL activity. So, how is it different (legit question, not trying to start a fight, but rather have a conversation) when people who do not have the right to live here in the US, but get here through illegal means, and stay illegally, and take advantage of entitlements and priveledges that belong to US citizens like health care and education?