Posted by TenantNet on September 09, 2001 at 05:50:03:
In Reply to: Re: Housing Discrimination: Cranky Tenant, DJ are correct posted by Provost on September 09, 2001 at 03:14:26:
Not necessarily. We're not up on the fine points of Fair Housing, but the ability to not rent or sell is limited. It is correct that rejections can occur based on ability to pay and other factors that may not be based on protected class status. I believe even type of job is not protected (actors, lawyers, etc.) But things like race, gender, etc. (the protected classes) are not suitable reasons and might open to seller up to charges of discrimination. (look at Federal Fair Housing issues). Of course, the difficulty is proving that the decision was solely based on race, gender, etc. That's why the Human Rights Div. has testers that go out. Even then, it can be difficult to prove. There might be fine points in coop because it's an issue of shares, but we've seen some cases where the courts have held that shares are synonymous with housing -- if the person represents they will live there, not just invest. So to all, it merits further study.
: A coop board has carte blance to decide whom they allow in or not. Even former Presidents of the United States have been rejected by coop boards. Boards do not need to justify their decisions, so suing for discrimination will go nowhere.
: Actually, their rejecting you may have been the best thing that could happen. If their criteria for selection is so arbitrary and illogical, then imagine the trouble you would have as an owner trying to SELL the coop. I bet the current coop owner is rather PO'd at the board now, since they've just killed his sale. Good luck in finding a condo.
Note: Posting is disabled in all archives
Post a Followup