RENT WATCH : Don’t Presume to Limit Options for Disabled Tenants
Question: Recently, a new tenant moved into a first-floor one-bedroom unit in an old apartment building I own.
Shortly after moving, the tenant came to me and asked why I did not show her the second-floor one-bedroom unit that was also available when she first applied.
I told her that I did not show her the second-floor unit because she is in a wheelchair. The tenant explained that she can walk and she only uses a wheelchair when her legs become fatigued.
She said she prefers to live in upstairs units so that she can walk up the stairs to strengthen her legs. Can you advise me on what I should do in the future so I won’t offend prospective tenants with my own false assumptions?
Answer: Under federal and state fair housing laws, which prohibit discrimination based on disability, a landlord should not make assumptions about where a disabled person should live.
If a prospective client asks for information about first-level units only, you may limit your response to information about such units.
However, if a prospective tenant in a wheelchair makes a general request about availability (i.e. does not request information about first-level units only), you should provide him or her with the same rental options you would provide prospective tenants who are not in wheelchairs.
Not all disabilities are visible. For example, a prospective tenant could be disabled by asthma, which is not as evident as someone using a wheelchair. A prospective tenant with a disability may not need to use their wheelchair all the time. Like your current tenant, he or she may prefer a unit above the ground floor.
Keep in mind that people with physical disabilities have limited housing options. Thus, an owner’s attempt to further limit these options may be viewed as a fair-housing violation.
At this point, you might consider offering your tenant either the second-floor unit, or if it is no longer available, the next one that becomes available. This might make her happy and head off a complaint to a fair housing agency.
Also, keep in mind that many such agencies will gladly offer training to owners and managers of rental housing.
State Law Sets Limits on Security Deposits
Q: I’m applying for a new apartment that is renting for $1,300 a month. The landlord wants $3,000 as a security deposit. I think this is over the legal limit. Am I correct?
A: You are correct if your new apartment is unfurnished.
According to State of California Civil Code 1940.5(g), a security deposit for an unfurnished unit cannot exceed an amount equal to twice the monthly rent, while the deposit for a furnished unit can be up to three times the monthly rent.
If the tenant is bringing in a water bed, an additional one-half the monthly rent (i.e. 2 1/2 times for unfurnished and 3 1/2 for furnished) can be collected.
Based on the monthly rent of $1,300, your total deposit should be no more than $2,600. The inclusion of only a dishwasher, washer or dryer does not count as a “furnished” unit. Your landlord’s request for $3,000 may just be an oversight. You should point this out and ask for a reduction.
Tenant Uncertain About Discrimination
Q: I am 20 years old and just moved into my new apartment a month ago. Last week a retired elderly couple of modest means moved into the apartment next to me.
I learned that the landlord encouraged them with a “move-in special” that required they pay a security deposit only half of what I had paid. I like my new neighbors, but I am upset that I had to pay a higher deposit than they did. Did my landlord discriminate against me?
A: It depends. The intent of fair housing laws is to keep the housing market free of discriminatory decisions based on protected categories, such as age, while not interfering with legitimate business decisions.
If this “move-in special” was a general promotion available to anyone moving in at that time, regardless of age, then it was clearly not discriminatory.
However, if the building management has a policy of asking for lower security deposits only from new elderly tenants, then that is discrimination, because it is an offer of different terms and conditions to a specific group of tenants at the exclusion of others.
The fair housing laws are not meant to limit a landlord’s ability to make goodwill exceptions for needy tenants on a case-by-case basis. If the management company requires consistent security deposits from all of its other tenants, but the manager decided to give only this one elderly couple a break because of their limited income, then he was being charitable, not discriminatory.
In short, what matters is not what the manager charged this one couple, but whether he offered you and everyone else in the building rates that were consistent with each other and that he followed a nondiscriminatory policy. If you need more information, you should call your local fair housing agency.
Deduct Cost of Keys From Security Deposit
Q: A tenant in an apartment building I manage recently gave a 30-day Notice of Termination of Tenancy. She left on the 30th day, which was yesterday, but she did not return her keys.
I called her at work, and was told she was on a business trip. My question is, who is responsible for the cost of changing locks and the new keys? Also, does she owe any rent until the locks are changed and I have access to the apartment?
A: In addition to giving a 30-day notice, the return of the keys is a kind of symbolic termination of a tenancy. However, if the tenant hangs on to the keys, what is the liability?
As a manager, based on her 30-day notice, you can change the locks, get new keys, and either bill the tenant or deduct any added cost from the security deposit.
As for charging rent--it is not a good idea. The tenant gave notice that she was leaving and she left on schedule, so it was clear the tenancy would not continue.
Laws Prohibit Bias Based on Gender
Q: I am recently divorced and have three small children. I have a good job and adequate income to rent a single-family house. I recently found a house that I really liked. It was in great condition and close to my children’s school.
When I asked for an application to rent, the landlord said that since he had put so much effort into remodeling, he wanted “a man around the house” to maintain the property. Can he refuse to rent to me because I am a single woman?
A: No. Under federal and state fair housing laws, a landlord may not consider a tenant’s gender in deciding whether or not to rent to that tenant.
Other characteristics a landlord may not consider are race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, familial status (i.e. presence of children), age, disability, marital status and sexual orientation.
The factors a landlord should evaluate are a prospective tenant’s credit history, references from prior landlords, income and job stability.
For assistance in this matter, contact your local fair housing agency, which may investigate the situation and assist in negotiating with the landlord so you may live at the site.
This column is prepared by Project Sentinel, a rental housing mediation service in Sunnyvale, Calif. Questions may be sent to 1055 Sunnyvale-Saratoga Road, Suite 3, Sunnyvale, Calif. 94087, but cannot be answered individually.
For housing discrimination questions, complaints or help, call the state Department of Fair Housing and Employment at (800) 233-3212 or the Fair Housing Council, Fair Housing Institute or Fair Housing Foundation office in your area:
Bellflower: (888) 777-4087
Carson: (888) 777-4087
El Monte: (626) 579-6868
Hawthorne: (888) 777-4087
Lancaster: (888) 777-4087
Long Beach: (562) 901-0808
Pasadena: (626) 791-0211
Redondo Beach: (888) 777-4087
San Fernando Valley: (818) 373-1185
South-Central Los Angeles: (213) 295-3302
Westside Los Angeles: (310) 474-1667
Orange County: (714) 569-0828
San Bernardino County: (909) 884-8056
San Diego County: (619) 699-5888
