Saturday, October 31, 2009

Michigan Real Estate Con Ed Due TODAY!!!

Michigan Con Ed Due by October 31!

Halloween is scary, but risking your hard-earned real estate license by not getting your continuing education credits is even scarier! 123 ConEd LLC values you business, and if you haven’t already obtained your required 18 hours of continuing education credits, we want to help!

www.123ConEd.com

www.123ConEd.com Michigan real estate continuing education

We make Continuing Education As Easy As 1-2-3!TM

Plus:

10% DISCOUNT ON ALL COURSES

Discount Code: HALLOWEEN (at checkout)

When you're up against a deadline, 123 ConEd LLC online continuing education is the most efficient and cost effective way to meet your real estate continuing education needs. With 123 ConEd LLC, you are in control:

  • No worries about classes being full
  • No travel to/from continuing education classes
  • No standing in the back of the room to get your credits
  • Your home or office is your classroom
  • Work at your own pace (start/stop whenever you want)
  • You pick the topics that interest you
  • We report your course completion to the State
  • Our courses are a fraction of the cost of a live class
  • No special software, no downloads, no CD/DVD

123 ConEd LLC courses are all fully approved and certified by the Michigan DELEG. In fact, 123 ConEd LLC courses are prepared by two qualified licensed attorneys and real estate brokers. 123 ConEd LLC courses are interesting, informative, and reliable. Simply stated, when you log onto www.123ConEd.com, you get real eduction combined with real convenience!

Halloween

Monday, October 26, 2009

Michigan Real Estate Con Ed Due in 5 Days!!!

TICK TOCK: Michigan Real Estate Continuing Education due by October 31!

www.123ConEd.com

www.123ConEd.com Michigan real estate continuing education

DON'T FORGET: You need 18 credit hours by October 31!

Try online real estate continuing education!

You won't go back!

It's Continuing Education As Easy As 1-2-3!TM

123 ConEd LLC (www.123ConEd.com) is a leading online provider of Michigan real estate continuing education. Our courses are fully approved and certified by the Michigan Department of Energy, Labor & Economic Growth. Plus, 123 ConEd LLC courses are prepared by two extremely qualified licensed attorneys and real estate brokers. 123 ConEd LLC courses are interesting, informative, reliable and cutting-edge!

123 ConEd LLC online continuing education is the most time and cost effective way to meet your real estate continuing education needs. With 123 ConEd LLC, you are in control:

  • Classes are 100% online
  • Log on anywhere, anytime
  • No special software, no downloads, no CD/DVD
  • Work at your own pace (start/stop whenever you want)
  • Interesting and informative
  • Pick from wide variety of real estate topics
  • All courses are State approved
  • Mix and match 2, 3, 4 or 6 hour courses
  • Economical
  • 6 credits for only $35
  • We report your credits for you

Plus, get 10% discount on ALL courses

Discount Code: HALLOWEEN (at checkout)

www.123ConEd.com

www.123ConEd.com

Sunday, October 25, 2009

Michigan Real Estate Con Ed Due in Less than One Week!

Michigan Con Ed Due in Less than One Week!

Halloween is scary, but risking your hard-earned real estate license by not getting your continuing education credits is even scarier! 123 ConEd LLC values you business, and if you haven’t already obtained your required 18 hours of continuing education credits, we want to help!

www.123ConEd.com

www.123ConEd.com Michigan real estate continuing education

We make Continuing Education As Easy As 1-2-3!TM

Plus:

10% DISCOUNT ON ALL COURSES

Discount Code: HALLOWEEN (at checkout)

When you're up against a deadline, 123 ConEd LLC online continuing education is the most efficient and cost effective way to meet your real estate continuing education needs. With 123 ConEd LLC, you are in control:

  • No worries about classes being full
  • No travel to/from continuing education classes
  • No standing in the back of the room to get your credits
  • Your home or office is your classroom
  • Work at your own pace (start/stop whenever you want)
  • You pick the topics that interest you
  • We report your course completion to the State
  • Our courses are a fraction of the cost of a live class
  • No special software, no downloads, no CD/DVD

123 ConEd LLC courses are all fully approved and certified by the Michigan DELEG. In fact, 123 ConEd LLC courses are prepared by two qualified licensed attorneys and real estate brokers. 123 ConEd LLC courses are interesting, informative, and reliable. Simply stated, when you log onto www.123ConEd.com, you get real eduction combined with real convenience!

Halloween

Friday, October 23, 2009

Michigan Con Ed Due in 8 Days!

Michigan Con Ed Due in 8 Days!

Halloween is scary, but risking your hard-earned real estate license by not getting your continuing education credits is even scarier! 123 ConEd LLC values you business, and if you haven’t already obtained your required 18 hours of continuing education credits, we want to help!

www.123ConEd.com

www.123ConEd.com Michigan real estate continuing education

We make Continuing Education As Easy As 1-2-3!TM

Plus:

10% DISCOUNT ON ALL COURSES

Discount Code: HALLOWEEN (at checkout)

When you're up against a deadline, 123 ConEd LLC online continuing education is the most efficient and cost effective way to meet your real estate continuing education needs. With 123 ConEd LLC, you are in control:

  • No worries about classes being full
  • No travel to/from continuing education classes
  • No standing in the back of the room to get your credits
  • Your home or office is your classroom
  • Work at your own pace (start/stop whenever you want)
  • You pick the topics that interest you
  • We report your course completion to the State
  • Our courses are a fraction of the cost of a live class
  • No special software, no downloads, no CD/DVD

123 ConEd LLC courses are all fully approved and certified by the Michigan DELEG. In fact, 123 ConEd LLC courses are prepared by two qualified licensed attorneys and real estate brokers. 123 ConEd LLC courses are interesting, informative, and reliable. Simply stated, when you log onto www.123ConEd.com, you get real eduction combined with real convenience!

Halloween

Flagrant Violations of the Fair Housing Act in Recent Lawsuit brought by the DOJ

www.123ConEd.com

Here is another example of a recent Fair Housing Act lawsuit brought by the United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”). I try to post case summaries in order to provide timely updates to real estate professionals about the "dos and don'ts" under the Fair Housing Act, since fair housing is such an important issue.

Last Friday (October 16, 2009), the DOJ filed a lawsuit against TK Properties L.L.C., its owner, and two employees (property managers), for violating the Fair Housing Act by discriminating on the basis of race. The lawsuit alleged that the defendants violated the Fair Housing Act by harassing and making discriminatory statements to an African-American family residing at Lakeport Village Apartments (located in Sioux Falls, South Dakota). In addition, the lawsuit alleged that the defendants intimidated white tenants who came to the family's defense.

Lakeport Village Apartments is a 48-unit apartment complex that is comprised of three buildings, each with 16 units. The complex is home to many families with children. On December 1, 2008, TK Properties hired Ann Wagner (hereinafter “Manager Wagner”) and Corey Anderson (hereinafter “Manager Anderson”) as on-site property managers.

On January 5, 2009, Michelle Chevalier, a white tenant at Lakeport Village, complained to Manager Wagner about noise coming from an apartment being rented by Charlotte and Untoma Gadsden (who lived there with their three minor children and one adult child). The Gadsdens are African-American. Tenant Chevalier and Manager Wagner went upstairs to speak to the Gadsdens. Charlotte Gadsden explained to Manager Wagner that her husband Untoma had just returned from the hospital and that the noise had been the result of his dialysis machine falling to the floor. Manager Wagner nevertheless yelled, "That's it, you're done, you're out of here, I've had enough," or words to that effect.

Following that confrontation, Manager Wagner urged Tenant Chevalier to file a false police report stating that the Gadsden's 17-year old son had attacked Tenant Chevalier. Tenant Chevalier refused to do so. Manager Wagner nevertheless stated she would file such a report, and told Ms. Chevalier that she needed her help in evicting the Gadsdens, whom she referred to as "nigger" tenants. When the police arrived, Tenant Chevalier denied that she had been threatened by the Gadsdens’ son and therefore no charges were filed.

Manager Anderson told Tenant Chevalier that, with regard to the maintenance requests of African-Americans, "them fucking niggers can wait, I'll get to them when I get to them," or words to that effect. Manager Anderson made the comment in the presence of Tenant Chevalier's children.

On February 11, 2009, Manager Anderson called the Sioux Falls Police Department and falsely reported that the Gadsdens' 15-year old son was attempting to steal change from the apartment complex's laundry machine. Scott Terveen (an owner of TK Properties) insisted that charges be filed. The charges were later dismissed.

On numerous occasions, white tenant Jenny Johnson heard Manager Anderson and Manager Wagner use the word "nigger" to describe black tenants, including the Gadsdens. On February 19, 2009, Tenant Johnson told another white tenant that she believed that Manager Anderson and Manager Wagner were racist. Manager Anderson, who learned of Tenant Johnson's allegations, responded by sending Tenant Johnson a text message that said, "Who in the hell do u think u r if u want 2 bitch about me and b nosy u know where I live." Manager Anderson also told another tenant that he would "punch [Tenant Johnson] in the mouth to shut her up," or words to that effect. The tenant told Tenant Johnson about Manager Anderson's threat.

Following Manager Anderson's text message and threat of assault, Manager Wagner and Tenant Johnson saw each other on the balconies of their respective units. Manager Wagner yelled, "Do you know the difference between a black person and a nigger? . . . They're niggers. They're niggers upstairs in 306," or words to that effect, referring to the Gadsden's unit.

On February 20, 2009, Tenant Chevalier, Tenants Gadsdens and Tenant Johnson went to the Sioux Falls Housing and Redevelopment Commission ("Housing Authority") to complain about the discriminatory conduct of Manager Anderson and Manager Wagner. Manager Anderson and Manager Wagner saw them leave the property. Later that day, Tenants Gadsdens and Tenant Johnson returned to their apartments to find that they and other tenants on their floor did not have heat.

The following day (February 21, 2009), Manager Wagner sent Tenant Chevalier a text message asking, "is it true you were with Jen [Tenant Johnson] yesterday at housing [Sioux Falls Housing and Redevelopment Commission]. we have never done anything 2 u or your family -- y r u against us?”

On February 22, 2009, Tenant Johnson received a voice mail message from Manager Wagner in which she yelled vulgarities and stated that she would use "every ounce in my body" to "take you out of here." Tenant Johnson felt threatened by the message and called the police the following day.

Defendants TK Properties and Scott Terveen (an owner of TK Properties) knew about Manager Anderson’s and Manager Wagner's discriminatory conduct, but failed to take corrective action. In February 2009, Tenant Johnson met with Michael Terveen (another owner of TK Properties) to complain about Manager Anderson’s and Manager Wagner's discriminatory conduct. Michael Terveen relayed Tenant Johnson's complaints to Scott Terveen.

Despite these complaints, Defendants TK Properties and Scott Terveen failed to curtail Manager Wagner’s and Manager Anderson's authority over the management of the complex and allowed them to continue on as managers. Both managers continued to live at the property rent-free and continued to serve as managers of the property until at least May 2009.

On February 26, 2009, Charlotte Gadsden, Untoma Gadsden, Chevalier, and Johnson, on behalf of themselves and their minor children, filed three discrimination complaints with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD"). Following an investigation, HUD determined that that reasonable cause existed to believe that the defendants had engaged in illegal discriminatory housing practices in violation of the Fair Housing Act. Accordingly, HUD issued a Determination of Reasonable Cause and Charge of Discrimination against Defendants.

On September 15, 2009, Tenants Gadsden, Tenant Chevalier, and Tenant Johnson timely elected to have these charges resolved in a federal civil action. As a result, the DOJ filed this lawsuit, on October 16, 2009 ,which is pending in the United State District Court of South Dakota.

The lawsuit seeks a court order declaring that defendants' actions violate the Fair Housing Act, prohibiting future discrimination by the defendants, awarding monetary damages to all persons harmed by the defendants' discriminatory practices and assessing a civil penalty to vindicate the public interest. The complaint is an allegation of unlawful conduct. The allegations must still be proven in federal court.

Source: U.S. Department of Justice press release and legal complaint (portions of press release used with permission)

-----------------------------------------------

To learn more about fair housing issues (along with a variety of other real estate topics), please visit us at www.123ConEd.com. We are the leading online provider of Michigan real estate continuing education. All of our courses are fully approved and properly certified by the State of Michigan, and are offered online.

Copyright © 123 ConEd LLC 2009. All rights reserved.

Man Convicted of Criminal Interference with the Right to Fair Housing (Hate Crime)

www.123ConEd.comHere is another summary of a recent legal case involving a fair housing issue. This case is a little different than the typical fair housing case because it involves the criminal interference with the right to fair housing instead of the usual civil violation. Although this case doesn’t provide much guidance about the "dos and don'ts" under the Fair Housing Act for real estate professionals, I thought it was nevertheless interesting and worth posting.

On Tuesday (October 13, 2009), a Louisiana man plead guilty to firing three shots from a shotgun at the home of three Hispanic men and, after they fled, entering the home and setting a fire that burned it to the ground.

Johnny D. Mathis plead guilty to three criminal counts, including (1) criminal interference with the right to fair housing; (2) use of fire to commit a felony; and (3) use of a firearm during a crime of violence. Each count carries a maximum penalty of ten years in prison, a $250,000 fine, or both. Furthermore, the ten year penalties for use of fire to commit a felony and use of a firearm during a crime of violence are mandatory, meaning that Mr. Mathis now faces a maximum sentence of 30 years and a mandatory minimum of 20 years in prison. Sentencing is scheduled for January 13, 2010.

Testimony presented at the plea hearing established that on June 15, 2008, Mr. Mathis fired three shots from a shotgun at the home of three Hispanic men who shared the residence in a rural area of western Louisiana. Mr. Mathis’ home was across the street from the victims’ house. After hearing two shots, the victims fled their house. Once outside, the victims watched as Mr. Mathis fired a third shot into the trees and then entered the house, left briefly, and then returned. Minutes later, the house was engulfed in flames as Mr. Mathis exited the house. Subsequent investigation determined that the fire started in the kitchen where the victims had seen Mr. Mathis. Mr. Mathis admitted that his crime was motivated by the victims’ race and national origin and was intended to interfere with their right to live in their home.

Although this matter did not involve a real estate professional or a real estate transaction, it is important for all real estate professionals to remember that the federal Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination in housing on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin and disability. Real estate agents who violate the Fair Housing Act face only civil (monetary) damages and not prison time. The case against Mr. Mathis was different for (hopefully) obvious reasons.

Source: U.S. Department of Justice press release (portions of press release used with permission)

-----------------------------------------------

To learn more about fair housing issues (along with a variety of other real estate topics), please visit us at www.123ConEd.com. We are the leading online provider of Michigan real estate continuing education. All of our courses are fully approved and properly certified by the State of Michigan, and are offered online.

Copyright © 123 ConEd LLC 2009. All rights reserved.

$5,650 Settlement in First Landlord-Tenant Case under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act

www.123ConEd.com

Here is another example of a recent legal case involving a real estate issue. I try to post case summaries in order to provide timely updates to real estate professionals on important issues.

On September 24, 2009, the United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”) announced that it had reached a settlement with a Virginia landlord to resolve allegations that she violated the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (“SCRA”). The lawsuit alleged that the landlord failed to return prepaid rent and security deposits to a tenant who had terminated her lease early in order to comply with military orders to relocate to Georgia.

The SCRA provides certain protections to active duty servicemembers who must terminate residential leases to comply with military orders for a permanent change of station or for deployment. The lawsuit represented the first lawsuit involving a landlord-tenant matter brought by the DOJ under the SCRA.

The tenant in this lawsuit, Colonel Debra Bean, was a highly decorated member of the armed forces. Colonel Bean currently serves as Vice Commander for the 78th Air Base Wing at Robins Air Force Base in Georgia.

On June 11, 2007, Colonel Bean and her husband signed a two-year lease for a home in Fairfax, Virginia. Under the terms of the lease, the monthly rent was $3,000, payable on the first day of each month beginning with July 1, 2007. The Beans also gave the landlord a $3,000 security deposit and a $500 pet deposit. Under the terms of the lease, the Beans had the right to terminate the lease if Colonel Bean was transferred more than thirty-five miles from the rental home by the United States Air Force. In the event of early termination, the lease required the Beans to pay a $1,500 early termination fee.

Also under the terms of the lease, the landlord was required to, within thirty days after the termination of the tenancy, provide the Beans with a statement, if applicable, showing all charges paid against the Beans’ $3,000.00 security deposit, and return to the Beans any remaining amount of the security deposit not used for repairs and/or unpaid rent and utilities.

The Beans moved into the rental home on July 1, 2007. They made all rent payments in a timely manner from July 1, 2007, through May 2008.

On April 14, 2008, Colonel Bean received permanent change of station orders from the United States Air Force transferring her from the Pentagon to Robins Air Force Base in Robins, Georgia. Under the terms of the orders, Colonel Bean was required to report for duty at Robins Air Force Base by no later than May 30, 2008.

On May 12, 2008, Mr. Bean sent a certified letter to the landlord informing her that his family intended to move out of the rental home on June 19, 2008. Included with Mr. Bean’s letter was a check for $1,900 for rent for the time period from June 1, 2008, to June 19, 2008, a second check for $1,500.00 for the early lease termination, and a copy of Colonel Bean’s permanent change of station orders.

The Beans moved out of the house on June 19, 2008. On June 27, 2008, the landlord sent the Beans a message in which she stated that she had visited the rental home and noted that everything looked fine at the property. Nevertheless, the landlord refused to return the Beans’ $3,000 security deposit and $500 pet deposit.

After the landlord refused to return the security deposits, the Beans were forced to pursue their rights under the SCRA. This case was handled on their behalf by the DOJ.

Under the terms of the settlement, the landlord was required to pay $5,650 in damages to the Beans and was enjoined from engaging in future violations of the SCRA. The landlord must also undergo SCRA training and submit compliance reports to the government.

Source: U.S. Department of Justice press release (portions of press release used with permission)

------------------------------------------------

To learn more about a variety of real estate topics, please visit us at www.123ConEd.com. We are the leading online provider of Michigan online real estate continuing education. All of our courses are fully approved and properly certified by the State of Michigan, and are offered online. DELEG Sponsor No. 373.

Copyright © 123 ConEd LLC 2009. All rights reserved.

FRIDAY FUNNY -- Terry Tate: Office Linebacker

I just rediscovered the very funny Terry Tate: Office Linebacker videos, which were a series of short television commercials from a few years ago. If you’ve ever worked in an office environment, and I know that many of you have, then you’ll really appreciate how Terry Tate enforces office policies and rules. I wish that Terry had worked in my office to help with all of the people who just can't seem to follow common office courtesy. Every office needs a Terry Tate!

Enjoy!


------------------------------------------------

To learn about a variety of real estate topics, please visit us at www.123ConEd.com. We are the leading online provider of Michigan online real estate con edu. All of our courses are fully approved and properly certified by the State of Michigan, and are offered online. DELEG Sponsor No. 373.

Copyright © 123 ConEd LLC 2009. All rights reserved.

Types of Discrimination Against Persons with Disabilities Prohibited by the Fair Housing Act

www.123ConEd.com

The goal of the Fair Housing Act is to ensure “no person shall be subjected to discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin in the sale, rental or advertising of dwellings, in the provision of brokerage services, or in the availability of residential real-estate related transactions.” With respect to people with disabilities, the Act serves to:

  • Give people with disabilities opportunities to choose where they want to live;
  • Assure that reasonable accommodations and reasonable modifications are made so that a person with a disability can secure and use housing as fully as a person without a disability.
  • Assure that persons with disabilities are able to live free from intimidation and harassment; and
  • Require that multi-family housing built for first occupancy after March 13, 1991, has certain accessible features (e.g., a usable kitchen for a person who uses a wheelchair).

The Fair Housing Act prohibits housing providers from discriminating against applicants or residents because of their disability or the disability of anyone associated with them and from treating persons with disabilities less favorably than others because of their disability. The Act also prohibits housing providers from refusing residency to persons with disabilities, or, with some narrow exceptions, placing conditions on their residency, because those persons may require reasonable modifications or reasonable accommodations.

With respect to reasonable accommodations and reasonable modifications:

  • The Act makes it unlawful for any person to refuse “to make reasonable accommodations in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such accommodations may be necessary to afford . . . person(s) [with disabilities] equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling.”
  • The Act makes it unlawful for any person to refuse “to permit, at the expense of the [disabled] person, reasonable modifications of existing premises occupied or to be occupied by such person if such modifications may be necessary to afford such person full enjoyment of the premises, except that, in the case of a rental, the landlord may where it is reasonable to do so condition permission for a modification on the renter agreeing to restore the interior of the premises to the condition that existed before the modification, reasonable wear and tear excepted.”

It is important for all real estate professionals to remember that the federal Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination in housing on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin and disability.

*********************************************

To learn more about Fair Housing issues (and many other real estate topics), please visit us at www.123ConEd.com. 123 ConEd LLC (www.123ConEd.com) is a leading online provider of continuing education courses to real estate professionals in Michigan. Our online Michigan real estate con ed courses are fully approved and properly certified by the Michigan Department of Energy, Labor & Economic Growth.

Copyright © 123 ConEd LLC 2009. All rights reserved.

Real Estate Professionals Arrested in Mortgage Fraud Scheme

scalesHere is another example of a recent legal case involving mortgage fraud. I try to post case summaries in order to provide timely updates to real estate professionals on important issues.

On June 3, 2009, five people were arrested for their roles in a mortgage fraud scheme in the Washington State that bilked banks and property sellers out of more than $18 million. The arrests came as a result of an extensive investigation by United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”).

Humerto A. Reyes-Rodriguez, Alexis Ikilikyan, Micki S. Thompson, Mario Marroquin, and William S. Poff were indicted by a federal grand jury last month on charges of money laundering and conspiracy to commit bank and wire fraud (they were arrested on June 3, 2009). The indictment alleges that over a three-year period starting in 2004, they were responsible for 80 fraudulent loan transactions in communities throughout King County and Pierce County, Washington.

Mr. Reyes-Rodriguez and Ms. Ikilikyan were licensed real estate agents and mortgage loan originators. Mr. Poff is Ms. Ikilikyan's ex-husband and was a licensed notary and loan originator. Mr. Thompson was employed by Great American Escrow and acted as the closing officer for many of the fraudulent sales. Mr. Marroquin acted as a straw buyer and oversaw fictitious home repair companies.

According to court documents, the five defendants worked together to obtain financing from banks to purchase homes. At the same time, they convinced innocent home sellers to extend private loans to the buyer of the home to cover a portion of the purchase price.

The sellers did not know that the conspirators had already obtained financing from commercial lenders to cover the full cost of the home. When payments were not made, the properties fell into foreclosure. The homes were then sold for less than the total of all loans secured for the property. The sellers who had extended private loans to the buyers were left with nothing.

The conspirators also used straw buyers to purchase and resell properties and then submitted false information to the banks such as employment, income, citizenship status, assets and liabilities. They submitted bogus appraisals and hired fictitious home repair companies to do repair work on the properties. Proceeds from the home sales would go to the fake companies that had, in fact, done no work.

This case uncovered a group of real estate professionals who manipulated home sales for pure profit while some of the properties went into foreclosure and innocent private citizens were defrauded.

The conspiracy and money laundering charges are punishable by up to 20 years in prison and a $1 million fine. An indictment is merely a formal charge by the grand jury. Each defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in court.

I will try to keep following this case and post an update when the case is ultimately resolved, hopefully with all of the defendants getting long prison sentences.

Source: U.S. Department of Justice press release (portions of press release used with permission)

------------------------------------------------

To learn more about a variety of real estate topics, please visit us at www.123ConEd.com. We are the leading online provider of Michigan real estate continuing education. All of our courses are fully approved and properly certified by the State of Michigan, and are offered online.

Copyright © 123 ConEd LLC 2009. All rights reserved.

Nationwide Sex Offender Website

www.123ConEd.com

The United States Department of Justice provides a link on its website to a national sex offender website, which is known as the Dru Sjodin National Sex Offender Public Website ("NSOPW"). The NSOPW is coordinated by the Department of Justice and is a cooperation between all 50 states and the federal government. In addition to including sex offender registration information from all 50 states, it also includes registration information from Puerto Rico, Guam, the District of Columbia, and participating Native American tribes. The NSOPW allows users to submit a single national query to obtain information about sex offenders through a number of search options, including by location/zip code or by offender name.

The NSOPW was created in response to the November 2003 murder of Dru Kathrina Sjodin, who was a student of the University of North Dakota. She was kidnapped and killed by a registered sex offender (who was later caught, convicted and sentenced to death).

In addition to providing a comprehensive national database, the website also provides links to the separate sex offender registries of all 50 states (Public Registry Sites). This is a helpful place to quickly locate the sex offender registry of your specific state.

One more great resource for identifying the locations of registered sex offenders is a website called Family Watchdog. It is an excellent site and very comprehensive and user-friendly. This site displays search results on a map of the search location. The map uses color-coded markers to identify the exact location of registered sex offenders in your area. The color-coded map markers allow users to quickly determine whether the offender was convicted of an offense against children, rape, sexual battery, or a different sexual offense. And, if you click on one of the map markers, a separate window opens that shows a picture of the offender and provides a description of the crime.

As a father of two young children, I was terrified to see how many registered sex offenders live in my general area, which is considered a nice, clean, and safe neighborhood. Scary!

********************************

To learn more about a variety of real estate topics, please visit us at www.123ConEd.com. We are a leading online provider of Michigan real estate continuing education. All of our courses are fully approved and properly certified by the State of Michigan, and are offered online.

Copyright © 123 ConEd LLC 2009. All rights reserved.

When and How a Tenant Must Request a Reasonable Accommodation or Permission to Make a Reasonable Modification

www.123ConEd.comUnder the Fair Housing Act, a resident or an applicant for housing makes a reasonable accommodation request whenever she makes clear to the housing provider that she is requesting an exception, change, or adjustment to a rule, policy, practice, or service because of her disability. She should explain what type of accommodation she is requesting and, if the need for the accommodation is not readily apparent or not known to the provider, explain the relationship between the requested accommodation and her disability.

Similarly, a resident or an applicant for housing makes a reasonable modification request whenever she makes clear to the housing provider that she is requesting permission to make a structural change to the premises because of her disability. She should explain that she has a disability, if not readily apparent or not known to the housing provider, the type of modification she is requesting, and the relationship between the requested modification and her disability.

An applicant or resident is not entitled to receive a reasonable accommodation or modification unless she requests one. However, the Fair Housing Act does not require that a request be made in a particular manner or at a particular time. A person with a disability need not personally make the reasonable accommodation request; the request can be made by a family member or someone else who is acting on her behalf. An individual making a reasonable accommodation or modification request does not need to mention the Act or use the words “reasonable accommodation” or “reasonable modification.” However, the requester must make the request in a manner that a reasonable person would understand to be a request for an exception, change, or adjustment to a rule, policy, practice, or service because of a disability or that a reasonable person would understand to be a request for permission to make a structural change because of a disability.

Although a reasonable accommodation or modification request can be made orally or in writing, it is usually helpful for both the resident and the housing provider if the request is made in writing. This will help prevent misunderstandings regarding what is being requested, or whether the request was made. To facilitate the processing and consideration of the request, residents or prospective residents may wish to check with a housing provider in advance to determine if the provider has a preference regarding the manner in which the request is made. However, housing providers must give appropriate consideration to reasonable accommodation and modification requests even if the requester makes the request orally or does not use the provider’s preferred forms or procedures for making such requests.

Example: A tenant in a large apartment building makes an oral request that she be assigned a mailbox in a location that she can easily access because of a physical disability that limits her ability to reach and bend. The provider would prefer that the tenant make the accommodation request on a pre-printed form, but the tenant fails to complete the form. The provider must consider the reasonable accommodation request even though the tenant would not use the provider’s designated form.

It is important for all real estate professionals to remember that the federal Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination in housing on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin and disability.

******************************************

To learn more about Fair Housing issues (and many other treal estate topics), please visit us at www.123ConEd.com. 123 ConEd LLC (www.123ConEd.com) is a leading online provider of continuing education courses to real estate professionals in Michigan. Our online Michigan real estate con ed courses are fully approved and properly certified by the Michigan Department of Energy, Labor & Economic Growth.

Copyright © 123 ConEd LLC 2009. All rights reserved.