California Fair Housing Law Federal Fair Housing Law California Fair Housing Law Federal Fair Housing Law California Fair Housing LawThis section on the Unruh Civil Rights Act (CC § 54 & 55), and the one following, California Fair Employment and Housing Act, discuss two primary statutes which prohibit discrimination in the sale and leasing of real property in the State of California.
The Unruh Civil Rights Act provides that "all persons within the jurisdiction of this state are free and equal, and no matter what their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, or blindness or other physical disability are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments of every kind whatsoever." The act also prohibits discrimination against a disabled person by denying or interfering with admittance to, or enjoyment of, any public facility.
Unfortunately, the Unruh Act makes no attempt to define "business establishment." However, the courts have interpreted the language of the statute to apply to "all business establishments of every kind whatsoever." "Business establishment" is not limited to a commercial establishment. It includes profit-making as well as nonprofit enterprises, and it includes public as well as private organizations. In reference to real estate activities, an owner of property is in the "business" of renting residential units and is subject to the Unruh Act, and he/she cannot discriminate when he or she offers the unit for rent. The owner also cannot evict a tenant based on the tenant's race or color. The rental of a triplex, for example, even though it is the only property owned by the owner, is enough to establish the owner in the "business" and subject to the act.
The Unruh Act also applies to the activities of an owner in the sale of his or her property, but in much more limited situations than those involving rentals. For example, a construction company and its employee(s) who are engaged in the business of selling houses in a tract operate a "business establishment" within the meaning of the Unruh Act (Burks vs. Poppy Constr. Co. (1962) 57 C2nd 463, 468, 469, 20 CR 609, 370 P2nd 313). Also, considering the liberal nature of the Act, the sale of only a few houses may well fall within the provisions of the Unruh Act even if the properties are not part of a single tract, particularly where the owner is actively engaged in buying and selling property for profit.
A real estate broker also operates a business establishment within the terms of the Unruh Act. The act applies to any real estate broker in the business of acting as an agent for the rental of residential units, for the sale of homes in a tract development, and for the sale of an individual single-family residence.
The Unruh Act does not intend to require a property owner to build, alter or modify any new or existing structure to accommodate any disability by a person who may rent or use the premises, nor does the owner have to treat any blind or disabled person any differently than a person who does not have a disability.
SPECIAL NOTE:
When a landlord refuses to accept tenants with dogs, he/she does not have to accept a person who has a dog except that he or she must accept a blind or visually handicapped person, deaf person, or physically handicapped person who has a trained guide or service dog. (CC § 54.1 (b)(5)) The owner does have the right in this case to establish certain terms in the rental or lease agreement that regulate the presence of guide dogs. In addition, the landlord cannot impose an additional charge to a disabled tenant because he or she has a trained guide or service dog; the tenant, however, is liable for any damages caused by the dog.
Also, under the Unruh Act, a disabled person cannot be denied the opportunity to rent merely because he or she relies on the income of his or her spouse. The landlord, however, can apply normal credit standards to the combined income of the tenants.
Civil action may be brought by any aggrieved party against the persons alleged to have engaged in discriminatory conduct in violation of the Unruh Act.
The only remedy expressly provided by the Unruh Act is the recovery of actual damages suffered by the plaintiff, plus such additional amount as may be determined by a jury or a court sitting without a jury, up to a maximum of three times the amount of actual damages, but in no case less than $1,000, plus attorney's fees.
However, if the act or acts which caused the complaint include violence, or intimidation by threat of violence, committed against the aggrieved parties or their property because of race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, political affiliation, sex, sexual orientation, age, disability, each person who aids or incites such conduct, is liable for the aggrieved party's actual damages plus an amount equal to three times such damages, plus a civil penalty of $25,000, together with attorney's fees, for each offense.
The Unruh Act also permits the Attorney General, and any district attorney, county council, or city attorney to bring an action for injunctive relief against persons engaged in discriminatory practice.
Since 1982, it has been unlawful to discriminate against children by refusing to provide housing either through rental or sale, except when such housing is designed to meet the needs of senior citizens. Generally, federal law preempts state law. The federal law, however, is not significantly different from California law and in some instances is more specific. The topic of age discrimination will be discussed more thoroughly later in this section under Federal Fair Housing Law.
Click Here To ContinueCopyright © 1998-2006 proU.net, Inc. - All Rights Reserved - Revised: May 23, 2006