October 2024 Coach's Quiz

COACH’S ANSWERS & EXPLANATIONS

QUESTION #1

Correct answer: d

Reason: This question brings three different problematic crime-free practices into play:

2. Blanket Exclusion of Individuals with Criminal Records

3. Excluding on the Basis of Arrest Rather than Conviction

4. Automatic Exclusion for Any Criminal Conviction

Measures designed to exclude individuals or households due solely to a record of criminal activity is potentially problematic under fair housing laws to the extent that it might have a disparate impact on Blacks, Latinos, and other groups the laws protect. Criminal history is also a protected group under the fair housing laws of some states. Nevertheless, landlords have a legitimate interest in keeping persons who pose a substantial threat to safety and property out of their communities. Criminal background checking may be deemed a legitimate method of achieving that objective—and may also be legally required for certain kinds of federally assisted housing—provided that the landlord’s screening methods are transparent, fair, and consistent and not selectively applied only to racial or other groups fair housing laws protect. So, d is the right answer.

Wrong answers explained:

a. is wrong because while criminal record exclusion is a complex and fact-specific issue, the one thing that is clear is that it’s illegal to exclude a person simply because they’ve been arrested for a crime, even though this may be mandated by a crime-free ordinance.

b. is wrong because while a conviction is, in fact, necessary, it’s not necessarily enough. To justify exclusion, the applicant being rejected (or tenant being evicted) must have been convicted of a serious crime—that is, a felony and not a misdemeanor.

c. is wrong because even a felony conviction isn’t enough. Landlords must still consider the nature of the particular felony and whether it’s associated with a risk to safety and property. Thus, for example, while homicide, sexual assault, or arson might justify exclusion, forgery or embezzlement would not. Even then, the landlord must consider whether there are any mitigating circumstances including how long ago the felony occurred (unless the felony is a sexual assault, in which case, no shelf life applies) and evidence of successful rehabilitation.

QUESTION #2

Correct answer: b

Reason: This question brings into play the other three problematic crime-free practices discussed in the lesson:

1. Holding Entire Households Accountable for One Person’s Actions

5. Punishing Tenants for 911 Calls

6. Punishing Tenants for Reporting/Experiencing Domestic Violence

Engaging in acts of domestic violence on community premises constitutes legitimate grounds for evicting the husband. But evicting the couple would be tantamount to punishing the wife. Accordingly, the landlord’s best option is to seek eviction on a bifurcated basis. This is especially true when the wife tells you she fears for her life. Bifurcated eviction may actually be mandated under state law, provided that the wife asks you to pursue it for her own protection. So, b. is the right answer.

Wrong answers explained:

The reason a. is wrong is that evicting tenants because they suffer domestic violence is a form of illegal sex and perhaps racial and national origin discrimination. The cardinal rule is that you can’t treat domestic violence victims and victimizers the same.  

b. is wrong because punishing tenants for calling for emergency assistance is illegal under the FHA and, if the tenant is a woman, VAWA. It may also constitute a violation of the ADA if the tenant who places the call does so to request help for a disability. Note that these are federal violations even if the landlord’s punitive action against the tenant for making calls is permitted or required by local nuisance property ordinances.

d. is wrong because it leaves the wife at the husband’s mercy. Although intervention isn’t called for in all situations, it is required when the situation is life-threatening. In addition to being morally wrong, failing to take steps to protect the wife could expose you to liability under VAWA (if your community is federally assisted), and state domestic violence protection and negligence laws.