37. Two prospective tenants feels that because of their national origin, they were denied rental of an apartment in a 12-unit apartment building. The building was owned by a private individual who lived in one of the units and who used no discriminatory advertising and no real estate broker. Do the prospective tenants have any recourse
Answer: C
No, because the owner occupied one of the units
The prospective tenants do not have recourse because the owner of the building occupies one of the units, which exempts the owner from certain fair housing laws regarding discrimination in rental properties. This situation falls under the Fair Housing Act's exemption for owner-occupied dwellings with four or fewer units.
A) Yes, because discrimination was in the rental of a unit in a 12-unit building
While discrimination in rental practices is generally prohibited, the specific context of this case matters significantly. The Fair Housing Act provides exemptions for small, owner-occupied buildings, and in this scenario, the owner's occupancy in one of the units means that the law does not apply as it normally would in larger buildings.
B) Yes, because the owner of the building did not use a broker
The absence of a real estate broker does not change the applicability of fair housing laws in this context. The key factor is that the owner lives in the building; thus, the exception applies regardless of whether a broker was involved in the rental process.
C) No, because the owner occupied one of the units
This option is correct as the owner occupies one of the units, which provides an exemption under the Fair Housing Act for discrimination claims in this specific scenario. Therefore, the tenants do not have legal recourse in this case.
D) No, because the owner avoided discriminatory advertising
Avoiding discriminatory advertising is indeed a positive practice, but it does not negate the fact that the owner occupies one of the units, which is the crucial factor in determining the applicability of fair housing laws. The tenants' claims are not valid simply because the owner adhered to proper advertising practices.
Conclusion
The correct answer is C, as the owner’s occupancy of one of the units provides a legal exemption from fair housing discrimination claims. Options A and B incorrectly assume that the size of the building or the absence of a broker overrides this exemption. Options C and D acknowledge the owner’s occupancy, but only C correctly identifies the legal implications, affirming that the tenants have no recourse in this situation.