As the Manufactured Housing Institute (MHI) informs MHProNews, “If a statistical discrepancy occurs because of an action taken by a community owner, a protected class disproportionately impacted by the action may bring a legal claim for discrimination. For the landowner, the legal burden shifts for them to prove the action is necessary to achieve legitimate, non-discriminatory interests.”
Although SCOTUS acknowledges there are business decisions and profit motives involved in a free enterprise system, MHI says there will be lawsuits testing the “disparate impact” theory of discrimination. MHI states when a series of communities were being closed in Boise, Idaho for redevelopment, a majority of the residents who were forced to leave were single females. A 2011 Iowa law review suggests the redevelopment could have resulted in a class-action discrimination lawsuit brought by the women as having “disparate impact” on a protected class.
Opponents to the ruling lined up. The U. S. Chamber of Commerce said the decision “makes it harder rather than easier to develop and finance affordable housing.” House Financial Services Chairman, Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) said, “…disparate impact will have predictable, negative consequences for all Americans who will experience a less competitive and more expensive market for housing and credit – all without providing any meaningful support for the fight against actual discrimination.”
Although it is too early to tell what impact this will have on the manufactured home industry, experts predict the first test cases will likely deal with mortgage lending and government tax credits and grants. At some point, someone will no doubt bring a suit against a community owner who wants to close the community and repurpose the land.
One is reminded how the unintended affects of Dodd-Frank have impacted the MH industry. ##
(Image credit: photographerdirect)
