Skip to content
×
PRO
Pro Members Get Full Access!
Get off the sidelines and take action in real estate investing with BiggerPockets Pro. Our comprehensive suite of tools and resources minimize mistakes, support informed decisions, and propel you to success.
Advanced networking features
Market and Deal Finder tools
Property analysis calculators
Landlord Command Center
$0
TODAY
$69.00/month when billed monthly.
$32.50/month when billed annually.
7 day free trial. Cancel anytime
Already a Pro Member? Sign in here

Join Over 3 Million Real Estate Investors

Create a free BiggerPockets account to comment, participate, and connect with over 3 million real estate investors.
Use your real name
By signing up, you indicate that you agree to the BiggerPockets Terms & Conditions.
The community here is like my own little personal real estate army that I can depend upon to help me through ANY problems I come across.
General Landlording & Rental Properties
All Forum Categories
Followed Discussions
Followed Categories
Followed People
Followed Locations
Market News & Data
General Info
Real Estate Strategies
Landlording & Rental Properties
Real Estate Professionals
Financial, Tax, & Legal
Real Estate Classifieds
Reviews & Feedback

Updated almost 3 years ago, 01/02/2022

User Stats

6
Posts
5
Votes
Robert Jackson
5
Votes |
6
Posts

Is this statement used to turn down Section 8 really legal?

Robert Jackson
Posted

HI everyone, 

So I have noticed a trend among some of my fellow property owners here in Los Angeles, California. 

As you may know, it is illegal to deny someone the opportunity to apply for a unit simply because they have section 8 as income. However, I noticed allot of property owners here using this phrase if someone asks if section 8 is accepted: 

"The building is not certified for section 8." 

Is this really a legally tested and legitimate way to deny section 8 voucher holders an opportunity to apply for a unit without breaking the law? To be clear, this tactic, while not saying flat out section 8 is not accepted, has the same outcome: to deny the opportunity to apply. 

By the way, I would never engage in discrimination, but I find it interesting that so many property owners are using this sort of line in an attempt to skirt the law.

Loading replies...