Continuing a trend I have been reporting on this month, the Department of Justice (DOJ) has filed yet another complaint against the owner and manager of a 28 unit apartment community alleging familial status discrimination under the federal Fair Housing Act (FHA).  This complaint, filed in Colorado, asserts that the defendants had a policy in place to generally prohibit families with children from living in the front building at the property and further that management restricted families with children to a rear building instead.

The lawsuit started with a fair housing complaint filed with HUD by a local fair housing tester group.  The testers sent individuals posing as applicants to the leasing office to determine if management was complying with the FHA.  It is alleged that the tests revealed that the community manager told applicants that families with children were placed in the rear building and further that families with children were not offered units in the front building.  HUD issued a formal charge of discrimination and an election was made to take the case to federal court.

While I absolutely want to hear the other side before forming any opinion as to the merits, under the FHA, apartment management cannot arbitrarily limit where children live in the apartment complexes.  Provided the applicant family meets a non-discriminatory resident selection criteria (which can include a credit and criminal background screen), the general rule is that the applicant should decide which specific available unit fits their needs.  Management cannot direct families to a different building or even a separate floor.  I have seen other instances in which management for what appears to be a benign reason – typically to have a quiet floor or building – runs into trouble (such as a discrimination complaint) because their policy unlawfully discriminates against families with children.  If you have policies or are writing policies concerning occupancy (locations, limits, or standards) you might want to run them by a lawyer like me in an effort to reduce the potential that you might end up as a defendant or respondent in a fair housing case.

Just A Thought.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

AUTHOR(S)
Scott M. Badami
Fox Rothschild LLP
POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Real Estate and Construction from United States
New Jersey Expands Real Property Owners' Flood Notification Obligations
Holland & Knight
New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy signed into law the Flood Risk Notification Law (P.L. 2023, c.93) on July 3, 2023, amending the Truth-in-Renting Act (P.L. 2001, c.313) and supplementing the Consumer Fraud Act...
Chapter 1: The Bid
The Cromeens Law Firm
"I did not agree to do the electrical work. I never agree to do the electrical work." That's what Josh from Super Door Subcontractor told me after the general contractor on his community college project...
'Office Is Not Dead', And Other Takeaways On The Real Estate Outlook
Goodwin Procter LLP
A sense of optimism pervaded the air at Goodwin and Columbia University's annual Real Estate Capital Markets (RECM) conference on March 27.
Construction Defects Coverage Update
Plunkett & Cooney
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit determined that an insurer had a duty to defend its insured on the basis that, at the time the insured requested a defense...
Broad Form Indemnities In Construction Contracts
Gray Reed & McGraw LLP
Broad form indemnities are common in Texas construction contracts, even though indemnifying someone for their own negligence is a tough pill to swallow.
Recent Legal Developments Affecting Syndicated Real Estate Funds
Partridge Snow & Hahn
Two recent developments may affect private funds, including syndicated real estate offerings. First, at the end of last summer the SEC adopted the Private Fund Adviser rules...