Why, as a landlord, I will never rent to Section 8 tenants

[Orlong]

The insurance company will, as they're meant to.

If someone was so stupid that they let a place out without insuring it it's not exactly Obama's fault.

Insurance doesnt usually cover intentional damage. Even if it did, it doesnt cover lost income from the rent the landlord would be receiving over the 6 months if we was able to rent the home because its being repaired, and cant be rented

- - - Updated - - -

So then you would say "get a job, put the kids in daycare"? Do you realize how much daycare is? So basically, you're OK with someone having no money left at the end of the month because 2 kids need to be put in daycare and their job basically pays for the daycare of both childs but you're not ok with them saving the money (granted, not working either) and having section 8 pay you instead?

My point, it's a wash in terms of money.

[.

Its not a wash. If he is working he is spending HIS money to have the kids in daycare. If he stays home its TAXPAYERS money paying for his housing. Im pretty sure you can find a cheap daycare place or ask grandparents to watch the kids while you work to pay your own rent.

- - - Updated - - -

With your language I would have never guessed you were on section 8...

Yeah, and in addition he claims to be so poor he needs section 8 but he obviously has internet access, likely plays WoW since this is a WoW oriented website, and I bet he has a cellphone and cable TV. All that money spent on that stuff could be going towards rent

[Deleted]

A negative statement can't be proven because only positive statements bear the burden of proof.

And you can't prove that 2 + 2 does NOT equal 5. You would probably try proving that by saying "it equals 4" but that still doesn't rule out the possibility that 2+2 could = 5 (perhaps 2+2 could be 4 and 5? You can't prove it doesn't).

Actually, we very much can.
(2 + 2 = 4) and (4 != 5) => (2 + 2 != 5)
Do I need to elaborate or is this obvious enough ?

[Paq]

I hope someone finds out that you are intentionally denying tenants based on the fact they are receiving government aid. Then I hope you get sued or penalized for your actions. Then well see how much money you lose. Your prejudiced against the poor is disgusting.

I seriously hope this doesn't happen. If I rent out a house or a flat to someone, I am quite within my right to deny them tenancy based on whatever reason I want. It is my properly, which I am leasing privately, I can do what the hell I want with it. Only in a place as messed up as the USA (Sorry, infract me w.e) could you ever thing it is OK to sue someone because they don't want someone on government aid living in their house.
It is common as muck here (In the UK) to have advert's on renting housing which clearly state no DSS (Department of Social Security), and no one bats an eye lid because its up to the landlord who live in a house that THEY own!

[Lilly32]

I hope someone finds out that you are intentionally denying tenants based on the fact they are receiving government aid. Then I hope you get sued or penalized for your actions. Then well see how much money you lose. Your prejudiced against the poor is disgusting.

is being poor a protected class? pretty sure its not.

[Spectral]

If I rent out a house or a flat to someone, I am quite within my right to deny them tenancy based on whatever reason I want.

This is legally incorrect. Federal fair housing statutes prevent landlords from discriminating on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status or handicap. More info here.

- - - Updated - - -

is being poor a protected class? pretty sure its not. people discriminate against the poor all the time.

As Section 8 is a disproportionately non-white program, discrimination against Section 8 tenants would likely be treated as a proxy form of racial discrimination by courts. I'm not arguing that this is a good or correct thing, just informing.

[Lilly32]

This is legally incorrect. Federal fair housing statutes prevent landlords from discriminating on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status or handicap..

yes but you can always discriminate based on wealth

[Beazy]

This is legally incorrect. Federal fair housing statutes prevent landlords from discriminating on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status or handicap. More info here.

- - - Updated - - -



As Section 8 is a disproportionately non-white program, discrimination against Section 8 tenants would likely be treated as a proxy form of racial discrimination by courts. I'm not arguing that this is a good or correct thing, just informing.

Then dont tell the person they are denied because they are Section 8. . . . . simple solution.

[Spectral]

yes but you can always discriminate based on wealth

This is true, provided that you apply the same standards across the board. Most landlords are not in a position to set spectacularly high wealth limits, and all forms of income generally have to be treated the same.

- - - Updated - - -

Then dont tell the person they are denied because they are Section 8. . . . . simple solution.

This simple solution will turn into a nightmare if a landlord is forced to defend their disproportionate denial of minority candidates. Policies for acceptance and denial of tenants have to be fair and consistent and records need to be kept on this. If something looks anything like racial discrimination, it will be treated as such.

[djprada]

is being poor a protected class? pretty sure its not.

Section 8 is protected class by housing laws and housing authorities. If government finds out that landlord is denying to rent based on being Section 8 tenant only this landlord will lose his renting privileges and will get sued for triple amount of damages,

- Realtor IRL

[Masark]

Actually, we very much can.
(2 + 2 = 4) and (4 != 5) => (2 + 2 != 5)
Do I need to elaborate or is this obvious enough ?

Yeah, you've proved the negative indirectly by proving a contradictory positive

- - - Updated - - -

Insurance doesnt usually cover intentional damage.

What? If someone came over and burned your house down, you're saying the insurance wouldn't cover that?

[The Riddler]

What we have here is just a person who was a total ingrate. They were living in a beautiful home, and it was being paid for by someone else (gummint). In a sane world, this person should have been on her knees in gratitude and respect to both the owner and the taxpayers who were giving them a free ride in this fine house. Instead, this person was grasping, ungracious, selfish, and slovenly. She had no respect for the property. She had no respect for the owner. She obviously didn't respect herself much either because no person with an iota of self-respect would live in such squalor.

I've been dirt poor. I've lived in rental apartment housing. With just a tiny bit of elbow grease, even a lousy apartment can always be kept neat and clean. It may not be glamorous, but it'll be acceptable. No place - NO place (at least in the USA) ever has to fall into the kind of condition as the house in the video unless the person living there has no respect for the property or for themselves. People with self respect do not allow such pigsties to form around them.

But merely because someone is Section 8 does not mean that they are the kind of specimen that this woman was. Clearly the woman who lived in that house was a slob, a pig, and a selfish jackass. I've seen plenty of renters who weren't Section 8 that were just as bad (or worse). How some people can live in the level of squalor and filth that I've seen I will never know.

But that's why I'll never be a "landlord". I don't trust other people when it comes to issues of money. I would never put myself in a position where someone else could take that kind of advantage. I'd just sell the property and walk away first.

[Tinykong]

Section 8 is protected class by housing laws and housing authorities. If government finds out that landlord is denying to rent based on being Section 8 tenant only this landlord will lose his renting privileges and will get sued for triple amount of damages,

- Realtor IRL

You don't deny someone based on Section 8, you just deny them. You don't need to give them a reason, and you aren't obligated to rent to anyone.

[Beazy]

This is true, provided that you apply the same standards across the board. Most landlords are not in a position to set spectacularly high wealth limits, and all forms of income generally have to be treated the same.

- - - Updated - - -



This simple solution will turn into a nightmare if a landlord is forced to defend their disproportionate denial of minority candidates. Policies for acceptance and denial of tenants have to be fair and consistent and records need to be kept on this. If something looks anything like racial discrimination, it will be treated as such.

Well, you can rent to minority families. Just not section 8, regardless of race. Denying someone because of section 8 has nothing to do with race.

[Sunseeker]

You don't deny someone based on Section 8, you just deny them. You don't need to give them a reason, and you aren't obligated to rent to anyone.

The downside to doing so, is that if you even find yourself in court over it, you will have to give a reason for each of your denials, to show that there is not a specific pattern of denying a certain group of people.

[Tinykong]

The downside to doing so, is that if you even find yourself in court over it, you will have to give a reason for each of your denials, to show that there is not a specific pattern of denying a certain group of people.

"I didn't want to rent to them."

There isn't any law that says you have to rent to anyone, at least not in my state. You can't discriminate, but denial doesn't equal discrimination.

[smelltheglove]

"I didn't want to rent to them."

There isn't any law that says you have to rent to anyone, at least not in my state. You can't discriminate, but denial doesn't equal discrimination.

it's pretty hard to prove discrimination if one is renting a limited number of properties as well. the guy that owns a second house that he rents out will most likely never see a case even if he is the biggest bigot in the world. it's a bit harder for those with a ton of rentals, trends start showing up with enough numbers, and that can cause issues for someone that is discriminatory or appears discriminatory

[Tinykong]

it's pretty hard to prove discrimination if one is renting a limited number of properties as well. the guy that owns a second house that he rents out will most likely never see a case even if he is the biggest bigot in the world. it's a bit harder for those with a ton of rentals, trends start showing up with enough numbers, and that can cause issues for someone that is discriminatory or appears discriminatory

Good luck proving that, though. There is no law that says you have to rent property to anyone, you can simply just say "No thanks" and deny their application. You don't even need to give a reason, in fact, it's probably better if you don't.

[smelltheglove]

Good luck proving that, though. There is no law that says you have to rent property to anyone, you can simply just say "No thanks" and deny their application. You don't even need to give a reason, in fact, it's probably better if you don't.

im actually agreeing with you. im just saying that if a guy has 1000 apartments he rents out he is more susceptible to the appearance of discrimination, whatever form that might take. and in civil suits and the like perception trumps reality almost every time

[oblivionx]

im actually agreeing with you. im just saying that if a guy has 1000 apartments he rents out he is more susceptible to the appearance of discrimination, whatever form that might take. and in civil suits and the like perception trumps reality almost every time

Perhaps... but what sort of twisted nation has America become to tell people how to rent their property.

I guess it's the "you didn't build that" deformation at work.

[Tinykong]

im actually agreeing with you. im just saying that if a guy has 1000 apartments he rents out he is more susceptible to the appearance of discrimination, whatever form that might take. and in civil suits and the like perception trumps reality almost every time

You could have a million properties and not rent to a specific group of people. Unless they can actually prove that's why you didn't rent to them, which they can't, what grounds are there for discrimination?

"I didn't rent to them because I didn't want to." Maybe you don't like them. Maybe you don't think they have enough income. Maybe they have bad credit. Maybe they have too many vehicles. Whatever, it doesn't matter, you can simply deny anyone without a reason.

I'd deny any and all section 8 applications on the principle that if they need section 8, they are probably living on a thin margin anyway, and I wouldn't want to be at risk of dealing with an eviction. Are all section 8 tenants scum? Nope, but, I don't have to rent to them if I don't want to.