The following are examples of disparate impact discrimination:
Minimum Loan Policies
This minimum loan amount policy is shown to disproportionately exclude potential minority applicants from consideration because of their income levels or the value of the houses in the areas in which they live. The lender will be required to justify the “business necessity” for the policy.
See also Agreed Order, US v. Luther Burbank Savings , No. 12-7809 (lender’s $400,000 minimum loan amount policy in its wholesale channel alleged to result in discrimination on grounds of race and national origin).
The lender’s policy may have a disparate impact on individuals with disabilities and the elderly, both of whom are more likely than the general applicant pool to receive substantial nontaxable income.
The lender’s policy is likely to be proven discriminatory. First, the lender is unlikely to be able to show that the policy is compelled by business necessity. Second, even if the lender could show business necessity, the lender could achieve the same purpose with less discriminatory effect by “grossing up” nontaxable income (i.e., making it equivalent to gross taxable income by using formulas related to the applicant’s tax bracket). Joint Statement on Discrimination in Lending ( April 29, 1994).
Insurance Practices
Landlord-Tenant Policies
The post Examples of Disparate Impact Discrimination appeared first on Fair Housing Center of Metropolitan Detroit.
Address: 5555 Conner St., Suite 2244 Detroit, MI 48213-3487
Phone: (313) 579-FAIR
Fax: (313) 963-4817
Email: info@fairhousingdetroit.org
Address: 5555 Conner St., Suite 2244, Detroit, MI 48213-3487
Phone: 313-579-FAIR
Fax: 313-963-4817
Email: info@fairhousingdetroit.org
Address: 5555 Conner, Suite 2244, Detroit, MI 48213-3487
Phone: 313-579-FAIR
Fax: 313-963-4817
Email: info@fairhousingdetroit.org