In the last few days of June, I decided to take a look at the "Lodge at Stone Oak Ranch" (5400 W Parmer Ln) since I had recently starting working in the area and had last year toured the property and was quite impressed with the "looks" of the property. I am a professional IT employee with a Master's degree as well as a bachelor's degree from the Texas universities. The staff appeared friendly, and they kindly showed an apartment to me. The apartment asst manager agreed to offer a deal that was hard to pass up to rent during that month -- however, it was stated that the rates would possibly change in July. Understandable, but I was not ready to agree to a lease immediately. Since both the leasing agent, asst manager, and the manager (called by the leasing agent) agreed that the lease rate would be effective until the end of June, I figured I would have to make a quick decision.

I returned before closing on June 30th. There were still 2 apartments unleased at that time, but since it was near closing, the kind leasing agent (who attempted to call her apartment management on her cell to get the okay to lease one of the apartments), said to come back the next day. She said to come back the next day and since I had come in before the end of the month, that the lease would probably be honored at the June rate, as long as the paperwork was signed and a deposit put down. The leasing agent said that a Jessica would be in the office the following day and that if any questions regarding the signed lease were to occur, that the agent should call her.

The following day (Sunday), I went to church in the morning and had an errand to do prior to going to the apartment. I arrived at 4 p.m., an hour before closing. I expressed my interest in signing a lease for one of the 2 available apartments. Jessica said that one of the two had been leased and that all deals no longer existed for the current month. I asked her to call the other leasing agent and/or the manager regarding the issue, and she refused. There was one woman in the office when I arrived, but she left by about 4:05 - 4:10 p.m. I asked to be shown the apartment prior again prior to leasing the apartment, and Jessica said that "she was busy with office and paperwork before closing", and that her phone office clock said it was 4:20 p.m. and that she would not show an apartment after 4:00 p.m., even though the community closed at 5:00 p.m. I persisted and asked that she call the original leasing manager or apartment manager, and that I was interested in leasing the apartment at the agreed upon rate. She refused, and reiterated that no specials existed for the current month (or the previous month, in fact).

She said (paraphrased since I did not have a recorder to record the conversation at the time): "We are like a car dealership in which you are buying a BMW. We make an offer at the time, and unless you accept the offer then and there, the offer may no longer exist. We can change our prices anytime, whenever we want. That is just the way it is done." I questioned her, stating that I held a real estate certification, and whether this could be construed as discrimination, that this could easily infer that they could offer different prices to different people walking in the door in any given day at any given time' She flatly stated that this was not discrimination. I stated what she obviously knew I was not a college student, but somewhat an older professional, and that I felt that this matter was a form of discrimination. She claimed again that they had a right to lease to whoever they chose to lease at whatever price was in effect at the time. I agreed to return the following day to speak to my original leasing agent to discuss the matter with the apartment manager.

The next day, Monday, July 2, I returned during my lunch hour. I stated what had happened the previous day to both the original leasing agent and her manager, and had asked that they honor the original agreement, since the leasing agent on Sunday had refused to accept the paperwork and have a lease signed. The apartment manager said she still had an apartment available. I was shown the model. The apartment manger (Vanessa Reimers) agreed to hold it for a day for me due to the situation regarding the matter on Sunday to give me time to decide to take the apartment. I agreed to return the following day with my decision to take the apartment. Tuesday, July 3rd, I returned at about 1:00 p.m. I was told that the apartment had been leased on July 2nd to another person, and that no other apartments were available (which I believe is not true since notices are usually given at the end of the month).

Vanessa agreed to offer me an apartment in another community the management company owns (not as nice of an area), but with no other recourse.

So was this discrimination' Do these actions violate Federal laws on discrimination'

It was the Fair Housing section of the 1968 act and the Fair Housing Amendment of 1988 that made the idea of Fair Housing a National concept that prevented and outlawed discrimination of any kind in the rental, purchase, or sale of Real Estate. The scope of the Fair Housing Laws included any type of discrimination. This included age, sex, religion, race, National origin, family status, or disability. The Equal Credit Opportunity Act extended the anti-discrimination laws to the area of loans and credit applications.

The discrimination laws for Real Estate apply to investors exactly as they apply to anyone else or any other situation. Investors are involved in both the buying and the selling of Real Estate. This means that the laws not only prevent them from discriminating against others, but they also protect them from being discriminated against. Unlike the early days of Civil Rights, the laws can be and are easily and often enforced.

It is important to leave behind any prejudice when you enter into the Real Estate Market. It does not matter if you are doing so as a buyer, seller, or investor. Perhaps, it is the investor that must be even more careful to avoid discrimination of any kind in his Real Estate dealings. This is more than an ethical or legal matter. It simply is not good business to risk the problems that result from discriminatory practices. The only discrimination that makes any sense to an investor is between those who can help them make money and those that can not.

Voluntary Disclosure: Race: White, Sex: Male, Age: Not a College Student, Income: 70K

User Responses
From: Anonymous	Date: 07/03/2007
This does not surprise me. Google the management company (MBS) and you will find this is common practice for them. TRUST ME, YOU DO NOT WANT TO LIVE HERE. COUNT YOURSELF LUCKY.
From: trididos	Date: 07/03/2007
Let me make this brief. I used to work for the Hanover Company, the entity that developed and built The Lodge at Stone Oak Ranch, and was the management company before it was purchased. You are not receiving the type of professional service you should receive. Your business belongs at a property that values you, and this is no longer the place that can offer you such a service. This saddens me greatly, and puts me in a very defensive posture toward my industry. What you have said does not implicitly prove you were discriminated against because of any factors you have described. It does indicate that there is an issue with the office, one that will only create issues for you in the future. As far as discrimination, keep in mind that some forms of discrimination are legal! Determining the criteria used to discriminate, that's a more difficult situation. Federal Fair Housing laws are extremely difficult, and certain company policies, when in writing, do afford companies certain privileges. It's best to find a place that you are comfortable with.

Your thoughts? Post a response to this review. Display my response: with my username anonymously Responses appear below reviews and one response per user is permitted.

   Free estimates on moving trucks      Find apartment share/roommates