Came across this shocking piece in Ohio’s Star Beacon.
In October, an elderly Ohio landlord was ordered to pay $22,000 in damages for alleged housing discrimination practices at a rental property that she owns. The whole things started with a $100 security deposit that the landlord, Helen Grybosky, requested from a potential renter with a “therapy dog.”
Here’s the kicker. There was no bona fide renter or therapy dog. The inquiry was made by a tester hired with a federal grant provided to the Fair Housing Resource Center by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
Read the piece here: http://starbeacon.com/local/x503826604/Landlords-targeted-by-discrimination-testers
With that said, there was another incident at the tail end last year that was ruled on by the Ohio Civil Rights Commission.
Denying or rejecting an applicant on the basis of the colour of their skin, their religion, or their sexual orientation is wrong – and can cost landlords. Clearly the federal government is cracking down on these kinds of cases and is clearly attempting to educate landlords on the rules. What do you think?