...if you are being naughty when it comes to fair housing and familial status issues.  Actually, you would likely prefer a spanking than what you might get for your misbehavior with rules for children at your community.  Because rather than a spanking, you could get a HUD complaint or lawsuit, and the opportunity to pay out lots of money.

“How many times do I have to tell you?”  I have blogged and written articles and lectured on the fair housing implications of overly restrictive rules for children for years and, yet lately there have been a number of new cases which make it pretty darn clear that the message still needs to be repeated.  Here is information on two of those recent cases:

• HUD recently reached a discrimination settlement agreement with both an owner and manager for putting overly restrictive rules into place to control the free movement of children at a community.   The allegations include management prohibiting children from using the swimming pool during certain hours, placing restrictions on children playing outside, and even requiring children to clean the manager’s office toilet when they were found outside unaccompanied by an adult (I don’t even know what to say about this!).  The families were even threatened with eviction.  Under the terms of the agreement, the owners and manager will pay the fair housing organization $3,750; waive four months of rent for five of the families (a total monetary value of $19,000); pay two former tenants a total of $7,000; eliminate the rule that limits pool usage by children during the day; and obtain fair housing training for employees.

• Another case has yet to be heard, but here are the allegations:  owners and property managers instituted a policy that prohibited children under the age of 16 from freely using the common areas of the property and required children to be supervised by an adult at all times.  Additionally, HUD alleges that children were prohibited from playing anywhere on the property except the playground, and from playing any team sports, or riding bicycles, skateboards, or scooters on the property. A mother of a 14-year-old son complained that he was essentially on “lockdown” at the community; the alleged response was that management retaliated by refusing to renew the family’s lease.  Time will tell as to the financial impact of this storyline.

“I am going to give you the count of 3.”  Here are the three rules you probably can have to limit the children of the leaseholders at your community:

1. In or at the swimming pool, children 14 and under must be accompanied and supervised by an adult.

2. In the exercise or fitness center, children under the age of 16 must be accompanied and supervised by an adult.

3. In the exercise or fitness center, restricting any resident of any age from using amenities or equipment should be based on (a) guidelines of the manufacturer of such, or (b) the standards of the industry in which such amenities or equipment are an integral part.

Any and all other rules restricting occupants who happen to be children are risky; the biggest risk of all is having a rule that requires that children of any age be supervised by an adult if they are outside of the residence.  There has been a case included this issue and that had a price tag of $834,000.  “Money doesn’t grow on trees.”

“I’m not talking just to hear my own voice.”  And you may not be reading this just to hear my opinion on this fair housing topic.  So let me close with the words of Gustavo Velasquez, HUD assistant secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity…

“Placing special rules on families with children

unfairly singles them out and creates a hostile living environment

 that is authoritarian and unequal.

The Fair Housing Act protects the rights of families with children

to enjoy their homes the same way as other households.”