All the continuing education essentials for those who have already completed the required 3 hour Core
If you've already taken the required Core class, then this is the ideal package for you. It includes the new 6 hour Fair Housing course (required to be completed by June 2023 for all brokers and managing brokers) as well as all of your elective hours in one spot. All courses are Washington State certified to meet your continuing education requirement.
This is the one stop shop to choose the topics you want to study, from Contracts to Listings, or Negotiation and Agency. It's a great way to review or learn a variety of topics in a single renewal.
If you still need your Core hours as well, we recommend you take a look at our Complete Renewal with Core package which includes Core as well.
Washington Real Estate Fair Housing (6 Hr) (6 hrs) and your choice of:
The Fair Housing Act of 1968 was the culmination of a movement to fight housing discrimination. It was passed at President Johnson's urging, a week after Martin Luther King, Jr. was killed. Its core ban made it illegal to refuse to sell, rent, or negotiate with any individual because the individual falls within the protected classes. Civil rights activists had been pushing to quickly enact fair housing legislation before the funeral of Dr. Martin Luther King. After a short House hearing, it was passed and sent to President Lyndon B. Johnson for his signature on April 11, 1968.
The Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination in housing because of
The Fair Housing Act covers most housing. In very limited circumstances, the Act exempts owner-occupied buildings with no more than four units, single-family houses sold or rented by the owner without the use of an agent, and housing operated by religious organizations and private clubs that limit occupancy to members.
It is illegal discrimination to take any of the following actions because of race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity and sexual orientation), disability, familial status, or national origin:
It is illegal discrimination to take any of the following actions based on race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity and sexual orientation), disability, familial status, or national origin:
The Fair Housing Act makes it illegal to harass persons because of race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity and sexual orientation), disability, familial status, or national origin. Among other things, this forbids sexual harassment.
In addition, it is illegal discrimination to:
Publishers and advertisers are responsible under the Act for making, printing, or publishing an advertisement that violates the Act on its face. They should not publish or cause to be published an advertisement that, on its face, expresses a preference, limitation, or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin. To the extent that either the Advertising Guidelines or the case law do not state that particular terms or phrases (or closely comparable terms) may violate the Act, a publisher is not liable under the Act for advertisements which, in the context of the usage in a particular advertisement, might indicate a preference, limitation or discrimination, but where such a preference is not readily apparent to an ordinary reader. Complaints are not accepted against publishers concerning advertisements where the language might or might not be viewed as being used in a discriminatory context.
For example, HUD staff should not take a complaint against a newspaper for running an advertisement that includes the phrase female roommate wanted because the advertisement does not indicate whether the requirements for the shared living exception have been met. Publishers can rely on the representations of the individual placing the ad that shared living arrangements apply to the property. Anyone placing such advertisements, however, is responsible for satisfying the conditions for the exemption. Thus, an ad for a female roommate could result in liability for the person placing the ad if the advertised housing is a separate dwelling unit without shared living spaces.
Real estate advertisements should state no discriminatory preference or limitation regarding race, color, or national origin. Using words describing the housing, the current or potential residents, or the neighbors or neighborhood in racial or ethnic terms (i.e., white family home, no Irish) will create liability.
Advertisements should not contain an explicit preference, limitation, or discrimination on account of religion (i.e., no Jews, Christian home). Advertisements that use the legal name of an entity with a religious reference (for example, Roselawn Catholic Home) or those with a religious symbol (such as a cross) standing alone may indicate a religious preference. However, suppose such an advertisement includes a disclaimer (such as the statement "This Home does not discriminate based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, handicap or familial status"). In that case, it will not violate the Act.
Housing providers must make reasonable accommodations and allow reasonable modifications necessary to allow persons with disabilities to enjoy their housing. Certain multifamily housing must be accessible to persons with disabilities.
Housing discrimination can take many forms. Some examples of housing discrimination.
John, a Black man, speaks to 0-a prospective landlord on the phone about leasing an apartment. On the phone, the landlord seems eager to rent to John, but when John meets with the landlord in person to fill out an application, the landlord’s attitude is entirely different. A few days later, John received a letter saying that his application was denied because of a negative reference from his current landlord. John is surprised because he has never had problems with his landlord, and his landlord swears she has never been contacted for a reference. John suspects that the real reason he was denied the apartment was because he is Black, so John filed a complaint with HUD. HUD investigates, and it turns out John is right – the landlord’s files show a pattern of discrimination because of race and color.
Jane is a Muslim woman who wears a hijab. Jane walks into the leasing office for a large apartment building because she sees a sign advertising several available units in the building’s window. Jane introduces herself to the leasing officer, who immediately says no units are available. Jane asks to be put on the waiting list but never receives a call. Jane files a complaint with HUD. After all, she suspects that the leasing officer does not want to rent to her because she is Muslim. HUD investigates, and it turns out that Jane is right – other building employees give HUD information that substantiates Jane’s religious discrimination claim.
John, an Asian man, meets with a real estate broker to discuss purchasing a house for his family. When John names the neighborhood that he is interested in, the broker asks John if he is sure that his family will feel comfortable there. The broker tells John she has a wonderful listing in another neighborhood where more “people like them.” When the broker takes John to see the house, John notices that the residents of the neighborhood appear to be mostly Asian. John files a complaint with HUD because steering someone to a certain neighborhood because of his race is a form of racial discrimination.
Jane has a Housing Choice Voucher (Section 8), but one month, she fell behind on her portion of the rent. When Jane asks her landlord if he will give her a few more days, she says yes, but only if she goes out with him. Feeling she has no choice, Jane says yes. Over the next few days, Jane’s landlord sends her sexually explicit text messages even though Jane tells him to stop. Jane’s landlord tells her that if she does not go out with him again, he will evict her, and she will lose her voucher. Jane filed a complaint with HUD because sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination.
John, a person with a disability who uses a wheelchair, views a condominium he is hoping to purchase in a new multistory building. When John arrives, he finds no accessible parking spaces in the building’s parking lot. When John tries to enter the unit, his wheelchair can barely fit through the door, and he bangs his arms on the way in. Inside the unit, the thermostat and light switches are too high for him to reach. The building has a fitness room, but he cannot look at it because the only way to get to the fitness room is to go up the steps. John filed a complaint with HUD because failing to comply with accessibility requirements is a form of disability discrimination.
Jane has a developmental disability that affects her capacity to manage her finances. Jane tells her building manager that her mother will pay her rent for this reason and asks if all notices relating to her rent can be sent to her mother. The building manager tells Jane that the management company only sends notices to residents, with no exceptions. Several months later, Jane received an eviction notice because her mother did not know that Jane’s rent had been increased. Jane filed a complaint with HUD because denying a reasonable accommodation is a form of disability discrimination.
John has three teenage children. John’s building has a patio with picnic tables, and one day, John’s children decide to have lunch there with some of their friends. The next day, John receives a notice from the homeowners association informing him that the building rules say that the patio is for adult use only and that he must ensure his children do not violate the building rules. John filed a complaint with HUD because building rules that discriminate against children are a form of familial status discrimination.
Jane and John are filling out an application for a mortgage at their local bank. Their loan officer notices that Jane is visibly pregnant and asks whether she will take maternity leave. When Jane says yes, the loan officer informs the couple that they must either apply without Jane’s income or wait until she returns from leave. “I’m sorry,” the loan officer says, “but I’ve seen too many women change their mind about returning to work.” Jane and John filed a complaint with HUD because the bank’s policy discriminates based on sex (including gender identity and sexual orientation) and familial status.
John recently moved to the United States from Mexico. One day, John sees a new tenant in the apartment next to his, so he welcomes her to the building. John’s neighbor comments on how nice everyone in the building seems, especially the building manager, who offered to waive her security deposit because she seems like a good person. John is surprised because the building manager is short-tempered with him and says that John’s accent makes him hard to understand. John later asks around and finds out that the building manager has waived fees and deposits for other tenants he likes but not for him or others from Mexico. John filed a complaint with HUD because providing different terms and conditions to tenants because of national origin is illegal discrimination
Washington’s primary discrimination law is RCW 49.60.222, titled: Unfair practices with respect to real estate transactions, facilities, or services. The protected classes are sex, marital status, sexual orientation, race, creed, color, national origin, citizenship or immigration status, families with children status honorably discharged veteran or military status, the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a person with a disability, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, race, creed, color, national origin, citizenship or immigration status, families with children status, honorably discharged veteran or military status, the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability, or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a person with a disability.
Several activities are forbidden specifically including:
Answering any information regarding demographics can raise potential fair housing issues later on. To be on the safe side, give your clients resources so they can access demographic information on their own. A lot of information is available by phone or on the Internet. If your client doesn’t have access to the Internet, let them know they can access it at their local library.
Answer your client’s question and tell the buyer how prices trend in that area. You have access to information that shows what comparable homes are going for, and that information doesn’t involve any fair housing issues.
During a 3-day neighborhood review (when a buyer can back out of an offer if there is something they do not like about the neighborhood), your client wants to ensure this considerable investment is suitable. If you want to provide a professional service that stands out, prepare a resource packet that lists online resources or telephone numbers for law enforcement agencies, schools, transportation services, census data, etc., for your local area. Your clients can do their homework; you don’t have to worry about any potential fair housing implications.
Responding to someone who asks where Chinatown is located (also known as the International District in Seattle) does not violate fair housing laws.
Consider a slightly different situation – say you receive an out-of-town call from a Chinese prospect, and you only show them available units in Chinatown or areas you believe have more Chinese residents. That would be “steering” based on your client’s protected class and would be a violation of fair housing laws.
Tell the seller that you cannot give her that information under the fair housing laws and that the question is illegal. In a fair housing lawsuit with these facts, the court found that the real estate agent had “facilitated and participated” in discrimination simply by answering a seller’s question about race, even though she immediately informed the seller that her question was discriminatory. In that case, the court imposed a civil penalty on the real estate agent to send a message that questions about race and color should remain unanswered.
If the seller refuses to deal with your clients because of their race, let them know they can file a complaint of illegal discrimination under fair housing laws. You can provide substantial evidence in their case. You also may be able to file a complaint in this situation because you have been harmed in a real estate transaction – you lost the opportunity to receive a commission.
Asking for photo IDs is okay if you’re consistent and flexible. Real estate agents have established a policy of requesting identification from prospects for safety reasons or to verify identity. Fair housing laws do not prohibit such a practice as long as the request is not based on a prospect’s protected class. For example, requiring ID only from people who appear to be immigrants would be discriminatory. Requiring a specific form of photo ID – such as a driver's license – may be prejudiced because it can have a disproportionate impact on members of certain protected classes, such as some people with disabilities or immigrants from other countries who may not have driver's licenses.
What follows are definitions and practical advice from the Washington Human Rights Commission:
Under the Washington Law Against Discrimination RCW 49.60, it is illegal to discriminate based on "honorably discharged veteran or military status." The law applies to:
Any individual who served in any branch of the Armed Forces, including the National Guard and Reserves, fulfilled his or her service obligations and received an honorable discharge or a discharge for medical reasons with a good record.
Any individual who is currently an active or reserve member in any branch of the Armed Forces.
Use ads that prohibit military persons
Deny an applicant based on military or veteran status
Apply different terms or conditions
Make disparaging comments about the appearance or practice of a military or veteran group
Enforce a neutral rule that has a disproportionately negative impact on military persons or veterans.
Prioritizing applicants on a waiting list based on veteran status
Setting different rents or fees for tenants based on veteran or military status
Delaying repair requests based on a tenant’s perceived veteran status
Considering a tenant’s military status before pursuing eviction
Any housing provider who discharges, expels or otherwise discriminates against a person for filing a complaint with the Human Rights Commission is engaging in an unfair practice. If a Veteran or person with military status feels that a housing provider has acted in retaliation for his or her filing a complaint, that should also be reported.
The Fair Housing Act provides specific protections regardless of religious background. Although the Fair Housing Act does not define religion, a housing provider cannot discriminate based on a “faith/belief system.” Creed is also protected under Washington state law and refers to the perception of a faith/belief system by others based on how someone may dress, symbols in their home or business, jewelry, and/or other items that may lead to discrimination based on another person’s negative perception[1].
Use ads that target particular religious groups or appear to have a preference for one religious group over another
Ask about an applicant’s or tenant’s religion
Apply different terms or conditions
Deny applications based on Creed
Steer individuals to specific neighborhoods or areas of a complex because of their perceived religion
Make disparaging comments about the appearance or practice of a religious group
Prohibit only specific decorations during religious holidays
In some instances, housing providers may give preference to its members in the sale, rental or occupancy of non-commercial housing if the following factors are met:
Owned by a religious organization
Provides a purpose other than commercial use (i.e. case management, rehabilitation, monastery, etc.)
It is limited to members of the same religion
It is not further restricted based on race, color or national origin.
Prioritizing applicants on a waiting list based on religion,
Setting different rents or fees for tenants based on religion,
Prioritizing repair requests based on a tenant’s perceived religion,
Allowing some religious décor but not all
Making exceptions to rules or offering amenities only to tenants of certain religions
Considering a tenant’s religion before pursuing eviction
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has suggested that landlords use “secularized terms or symbols” aimed at spreading holiday cheer rather than observing specific religions. For example, a tree decorated with lights is fine, while a prominently displayed nativity scene may be seen as violating the Fair Housing Act.
Section 818 of the Fair Housing Act makes it unlawful to retaliate against anyone because a person has filed a discrimination complaint or has assisted someone with filing a discrimination complaint.
Timing is an important factor in establishing retaliation. As such, housing providers are encouraged to be thoughtful in their responses and actions once they know a tenant has filed a fair housing complaint. To avoid the perception of retaliation when other actions are necessary to address the tenant’s behavior or situation (i.e., breaking community rules, damage to the unit, etc.), housing providers should:
Even if a housing provider believes the original complaint lacks merit, a housing provider cannot engage in activities that may be seen as threatening, intimidating or hurting the individual who has exercised their fair housing rights.
The Fair Housing Act provides specific protections regardless of sexual orientation or gender. The executive order here (link is external) asked the Federal Government to take the Supreme Court decision in Bostock v. Clayton County, which ruled that LGBTQ people are protected from sex discrimination in employment decisions under Title XII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and apply it wherever sex is a protected class in federal law. That means that LGBTQ people can no longer be discriminated against in housing, education, and health care, as well as employment[1].
A person must be approved for shelters or programs based on their gender identity, even if their official identity documents state a different or conflicting gender or sex.
No intrusive questions are allowed about a person’s sex, gender identity, or sexual orientation.
No steering or limiting access to facilities or amenities based on a person’s gender identity
Housing provider must address the behavior of the aggressive party, not the victim
You have the right to be placed in a shelter of the gender with which you identify.
Transgender people should be welcome to:
Use the bathrooms and showers that correspond to their self-identified gender
Use the facilities that feel safest for them.
In some instances, housing providers may separate individuals based on self-identified gender if there is a legitimate business reason due to privacy or security.
Some potential signs of sexual orientation and gender discrimination could be[2]:
Housing providers are encouraged to create environments where everyone feels welcome and safe. This includes having at least one single-stall, gender-neutral bathroom and a single-stall shower where applicable.
If anyone is in immediate danger due to an act of hate, call 9-1-1. If the threatening act has already occurred and/or there is no longer an immediate danger, contact your local police department.
Despite the socio-political progress the state of Washington has achieved over the years, our local police departments still report hundreds of hate crime incidents every year. In 2018, there have been 450+ reports of bias/hate crime incidents just within King County, according to Seattle Police Department’s Bias/Hate Crime Data Dashboard(link is external).
According to the FBI Hate Crime Statistics of 2017 (link is external), 27.5% of all hate crime incidents across the nation occur in or near residences and family homes.
Within the state of Washington, a hate crime is defined as an illegal act that is motivated by bias, bigotry, or prejudice against a person or people based on their perceived race, ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability.
Under the state laws and statutes related to RCW 9A.36, “a person is guilty of malicious harassment if he or she maliciously and intentionally commits one of the following acts because of his or her perception of the victim’s race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, gender, sexual orientation or mental, physical, or sensory handicap:
To learn more about RCW 9A.36 statutes, click here. (link is external)
It is essential to understand the difference between “hate crimes” (criminal acts) and “hate-based incidents” (non-criminal conduct or words).