For what may be good for one may be bad to someone else.  32 states voted to make marriage ONLY for a man and a woman, and yet it was over turned by the Supreme Court.  

Not only kick the tires, but take a dive into the inner workings, once under contract order a home inspection a completely neutral opinion, my opinion is you want to know everything there is to know in advance, have the turnkey provider complete a Removal of Contingency Addendum during the purchase process for any deficiencies defined in the home inspection.3) Absolutely challenge the PM f you go Turnkey your provider is a one stop shop, they offer the asset from the starting line and manage , you get the supreme level of accountability.

Using an arrest record without a conviction is being viewed as discriminating against a consumer who has not been found guilty of having done anything illegal.Per the new guidance:Exclusions Because of Prior Arrest.....A housing provider with a policy or practice of excluding individuals because of one or more prior arrests (without any conviction) cannot satisfy its burden of showing that such policy or practice is necessary to achieve a substantial, legitimate, nondiscriminatory interest.  .....As the Supreme Court has recognized, “[t]he mere fact that a man has been arrested has very little, if any, probative value in showing that he has engaged in any misconduct.

Because minorities are a protected class under the Fair Housing Act, HUD’s guidance says that creating arbitrary or blanket criminal-based policies and restrictions *could* potentially violate the Fair Housing Act.HUD speculated out loud.. and now people are advising others to apply background check on a case by case bases, which is dicrimation plain and simple.Until the FHA is changed, or HUDs opinion is tested in the Supreme Court.

I even thought about it for a long while in front of the United States Supreme Court in Manhattan on Center Street, standing in meditative silence there for long enough to attract the negative attention of the U.S.

Also there is quite a difference between reading what the law is, and understanding the additional regulations that HUD imposes(which carry the same weight as law) which are often hard to find...and understanding the additional case law interpreting such laws and regulations.To further complicate things, the status of unrelated adults in terms of being protected or not by the fair housing act has gone all the way to the Supreme Court (sometime in the 90's), and you know what the court decided?

Branscum Texas Supreme Court established the veil piercing doctrine stating that entities usually protect shareholders, officers, and directors from company liabilities, however if those individuals abuse this privilege, that individual is held liable.

Social Justice reins supreme in Seattle.

There is actually a lawsuit in the PA supreme Court about it you can look up.

As of 03/27/20 the TX Supreme court said no evictions until 04/19/20 and Dallas county specifically said no evictions until 05/18/20