Estate agent to pay €3,000 to single mum for discrimination

Graham

This from an article in todays independent:

Estate agent has to pay 3,000 to single mum after discriminating against her

It's not very often that we see discrimination like this being prosecuted. It will be interesting to see if there are more like this in the pipeline or is this a one-off.

A Dublin-based estate agent has been ordered to pay €3,000 to a single mother after being found to discriminate against her status when renting an apartment.

On April 17, 2016, she saw a two-bedroom apartment for rent and emailed the letting agent to state: "I'm a single mum with one toddler. I'm looking to rent using the Housing Assistance Payment (HAP) scheme. Could you let me know if this would be agreeable. Thank you."
In reply, the estate agent stated: "HAP is acceptable but the landlord is looking for a couple here I'm afraid, apologies on this. Kind regards."

I would wonder if the EA in this case thought he was safe by avoiding 'the landlord doesn't want a HAP tenant' response.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Samuel T. Cogley

A couple of things - no pun intended.

Don't mis read it like I did this actually isn't about HAP - HAP was acceptable. This IMHO has no bearing on licencee arrangements in the LL's own home.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Wheeliebin30

Should be allowed rent your house to whoever you want end of.

pilly

EA was an idiot full stop. Deserves a fine.

Why not just say the place is gone or not reply at all?

TheChizler

Plenty of people on here have said they wouldn't openly rent to people with children, could this change their views?

pilly

TheChizler wrote:

Plenty of people on here have said they wouldn't openly rent to people with children, could this change their views?

No. Clever people just do it right.

Samuel T. Cogley

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Side conversation pre-emption.

Samuel T. Cogley

TheChizler wrote: »

Plenty of people on here have said they wouldn't openly rent to people with children, could this change their views?

Views no. How they handle it also probably no, but maybe.

.......

This post has been deleted.

Tombo2001

If I applied for a job as a district court judge; and the district court told me that I couldn't be employed as I didn't have a law degree, and stated clearly that it was a firm no as they wanted someone with a law degree; would the judge rule in my favour in a discrimination case.

Just trying to figure out where this ends......

Samuel T. Cogley

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Should be allowed rent your house to whoever you want end of.

No you shouldn't.

You should be allowed to choose who you share with, but if you enter into business you can't discriminate on the enumerated grounds. One would think we'd be past the days of no Blacks, no dogs, no Irish.

endacl

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Should be allowed rent your house to whoever you want end of.

You are. You just can't say you're doing that.

The_Conductor

TheChizler wrote: »

Plenty of people on here have said they wouldn't openly rent to people with children, could this change their views?

Rough rule of thumb recently seems to be a sliding scale of deposit requirements- with a higher number of months deposit required for tenants in different categories who are likely to incur a greater level of wear and tear over and above 'normal' for a landlord. I suspect it would be similarly be found to be discriminatory- however, it is a reflection of the lower maintenance costs a landlord is likely to encounter/incur with certain classes of tenants.

E.g. there is one nice apartment on the RTB's database in Galway city at roughly half what its open market rate is- I was talking to the owner last weekend- and she said she was happy to get 1,100 for it- its an executive class unit- on the basis its only used a couple of times a month by the American she is letting it to- and is kept in pristine condition (he has a housekeeper who visits before and after each visit). She (the landlord) is happy- and the yank is getting a really nice unit for half the going rate- and has had it for 7-8 years.........

Swings and roundabouts......

aloooof

Tombo2001 wrote: »

If I applied for a job as a district court judge; and the district court told me that I couldn't be employed as I didn't have a law degree, and stated clearly that it was a firm no as they wanted someone with a law degree; would the judge rule in my favour in a discrimination case.

Just trying to figure out where this ends......

Silly comparision, imo. You're not qualified to work as a judge if you don't have a law degree. Single mother's are perfectly capable tenants.

Samuel T. Cogley

aloooof wrote: »

Silly comparision, imo. You're not qualified to work as a judge if you don't have a law degree. Single mother's are perfectly capable tenants.

Actually :pac:

No requirement for a law degree to become a solicitor, solicitors can be apointed as Judges so no requirement for a law degree to be a judge even in the higher courts.

Fun fact for the day.

aloooof

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Actually :pac:

No requirement for a law degree to become a solicitor, solicitors can be apointed as Judges so no requirement for a law degree to be a judge even in the higher courts.

Fun fact for the day.

Well, I've learned something today!

Mr McBoatface

EA was an idiot, didn't even have to reply to the email. Or a simple I'm sorry another offer has been accepted pending reference checks.... blah blah.... blah.

weldoninhio

What does this mean for all of the ads on Daft that state Female only?? Should I get emailing and see how much money I can make??

Samuel T. Cogley

weldoninhio wrote: »

What does this mean for all of the ads on Daft that state Female only?? Should I get emailing and see how much money I can make??

Thanks for rendering my previous posts not OT - you're talking about sharing.

Bob24

pilly wrote: »

No. Clever people just do it right.

Actually this shows the stupidity of the law.

The EA here is not being punished because he doesn't want a single mother. He is being punished because he is being upfront about it.

Any EA/landlord with the same restrictions will have no problem as long as they make up another excuse. I am not necessarily blaming them, but essentially with this kind of judgement society is rewarding lies and condemning honesty.

This is also really sad about the state of our moral values when out of two landlords applying the same restriction:
- one who is honest about it is called "stupid" on this thread, receives a fine, and is described here as deserving it because of their stupidity
- one who would lie about their real motives but do exactly the same thing is called "clever" on this thread and would have no problem whatsoever

.......

This post has been deleted.

weldoninhio

weldoninhio wrote: »

What does this mean for all of the ads on Daft that state Female only?? Should I get emailing and see how much money I can make??

If they're houseshares or owner occupied then they can say they prefer whoever they want. But I imagine if you complained about a letting ad the ad would be changed but they'd still only rent the room to a female. You don't see as many ads which say rent allowance not accepted anymore, but I've no doubt those landlords are still preferentially choosing tenants who aren't on rent allowance!

Impossible to enforce in the current market as long as LLs aren't idiots and don't openly say these things.

Samuel T. Cogley

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

Thanks for rendering my previous posts not OT - you're talking about sharing.

Nah, I have seen ads for bedsits which aren't shared or owner occupied that have specified single female. Quite a few actually.

Samuel T. Cogley

Deleted User wrote: »

Nah, I have seen ads for bedsits which aren't shared or owner occupied that have specified single female. Quite a few actually.

For a bedsit to be legal it's going to technically have to be a sharing situation.

If it's on an ad for a full apartment/house yes you can cash-in if you can show you were discrimiated against personally. You won't have standing if you just screenshot a load of ads and send them off (IMHO).

If it's a sharing situation it's fine to put in what your requirements are for the 'tenant' as they're closer to guests than actual tenants.

Samuel T. Cogley

Samuel T. Cogley wrote: »

For a bedsit to be legal it's going to technically have to be a sharing situation.

If it's on an ad for a full apartment/house yes you can cash-in if you can show you were discrimiated against personally. You won't have standing if you just screenshot a load of ads and send them off (IMHO).

If it's a sharing situation it's fine to put in what your requirements are for the 'tenant' as they're closer to guests than actual tenants.

Yeah there's no real way to enforce it, unless you've been very obviously personally discriminated against. Even then, my friend was looking for a place as a single mother on HAP and a lot of the time when she showed up to viewings pregnant/with a pram she'd be turned away at the door. She probably could have taken a case against some of those EA/LLs but she had neither the resources or time to do so.

Tombo2001

I think when you bring up the 'this is getting us back to the days of no blacks no dogs no Irish'

That's a completely misguided comparison. Its inflammatory and shows more interest in confrontation than resolving what is a real issue in the rental market.

To suggest for example that a landlord doesn't want a single mum because they are misogynist - that's just daft.

So on what basis are people saying this is discrimination, and not an economic decision.

This isn't the same is selling a bar of chocolate in a shop, or a cake to a gay couple.

The difference with this commercial transaction is that 'In return for a monthly rent of 1500, I will entrust you with an asset worth 500'000'.

Insurance companies are fully allowed to segment the market. There are some people they wont insure. Full stop. Nobody is calling them racist or misogynist, its accepted as a commercial decision. Banks do the same; a lot of people they just wont lend to.

A bank lends you a loan, you pay them interest. A landlord lends you a house, you pay them rent.

Landlords clearly have a view that COMMERCIALLY they prefer some tenants to others, and that some tenants are higher risk than others.

So why cant they express that in who they conduct business with?

For example - would a landlord be allowed say - if you are a couple, I will rent to you for 1500 a month, and 1 months deposit. If you are a single parent in HAP, I will rent to you at 1500 a month and 4 months deposit.

Graham

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

The family status ground?

.......

This post has been deleted.

Michael D Not Higgins

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

It is, under family status as being a parent of a child under 18 and civil status as being a single person.