London Letting Agents Refuse Black Tenants

[Ologhai Jones]

BBC website: London letting agents 'refuse black tenants'.

An undercover BBC investigation has exposed letting agents who are selecting tenants for landlords by their race.

Secret filming in London reveals techniques many letting agents claim they use.

[singlemalt]

Disgraceful. It's actions like this that sets us all back and the two muppets dishing out the discrimination know nothing of even their own history. They should hang their heads in double shame.

[Damik]

Disgraceful. It's actions like this that sets us all back and the two muppets dishing out the discrimination know nothing of even their own history. They should hang their heads in double shame.

Perhaps these new Asian buyers in London have this kind of requirements ???

[blackgoose]

Lots of them discriminate against men in favour of women as well. That does not suit the establishment agenda, so it will not get reported.

[Guest unfunded_liability]

BBC website: London letting agents 'refuse black tenants'.

One of the benefits of an ethnically diverse London is you get to see all races and religions in varying positions of responsibility: doctors, lawyers, bankers, teachers, and this can only be positive in breaking down prejudices and preconceived ideas. Still prejudice persists, and not necessarily just from white towards non-whites. I know Asian parents who would disown their daughters if they married a black man.

[Guest eight]

Disgraceful. It's actions like this that sets us all back and the two muppets dishing out the discrimination know nothing of even their own history. They should hang their heads in double shame.

I wouldn't want a racist landlord either and I'm white. At least if you allow people announce to the World that they're idiots then everybody knows where they stand.

[Bloo Loo]

One of the benefits of an ethnically diverse London is you get to see all races and religions in varying positions of responsibility: doctors, lawyers, bankers, teachers, and this can only be positive in breaking down prejudices and preconceived ideas. Still prejudice persists, and not necessarily just from white towards non-whites. I know Asian parents who would disown their daughters if they married a black man.

I have an asian female friend who leads a double life,,,one with her family and one with her white boyfriend,,,they are living together, have done for years, but the family refuse to meet along with her boyfriend,,,,not race,,,religious prejudice.

Love conquers all.

[faloos]

I wouldn't want a racist landlord either and I'm white. At least if you allow people announce to the World that they're idiots then everybody knows where they stand.

You must all get Real !! If you wish to rent , buy an apt in a posh part of London / New york the Owners have a meeting to see if you are a suitable client , that could mean is he a Jew ? because in New York you may have to be, as they rule the territory.

[rollover]

Perhaps these new Asian buyers in London have this kind of requirements ???

Visa rules for Chinese coming to the UK to be relaxed

[Executive Sadman]

Lots of them discriminate against men in favour of women as well. That does not suit the establishment agenda, so it will not get reported.

I saw a nice 2bed bungalow on RM recently, clicked on it, 'over 55s only'.

Think they wanted to start a 'gay village' in france a few years back. Didnt take off, but there were no legal qualms about it.

[pjw]

In a free society, this would be called freedom of association.

I used to live in Hackney - where it was difficult to get a haircut, as local black-run hairdressers simply told you if you went in "we only do Afro hair". Eventually, I found a Turkish-run place there to have a haircut.

[Executive Sadman]

In a free society, this would be called freedom of association.

I used to live in Hackney - where it was difficult to get a haircut, as local black-run hairdressers simply told you if you went in "we only do Afro hair". Eventually, I found a Turkish-run place there to have a haircut.

Government loves control. First it was forced segregation, now its forced integration. People just cant be left to mutually agree who to associate with...what then would the government have left to do!

[shindigger]

I worked as a letting agent in the NW1 area for about a year back in the 90s.

It is hard to imagine meeting a bigger set of ***** in the rest of my born days.

Only job i've been fired from.

Hateful people.

[singlemalt]

In a free society, this would be called freedom of association.

I used to live in Hackney - where it was difficult to get a haircut, as local black-run hairdressers simply told you if you went in "we only do Afro hair". Eventually, I found a Turkish-run place there to have a haircut.

Some people!

That's like walking into a Ford garage and then complaining because they can't service your Toyota.

I'd hazzard a guess that most hairdressers/barbers who cater mainly for European hair likewise wouldn't have a clue where to start with afro hair.

I don't see your problem.

[Dorkins]

In a free society, this would be called freedom of association.

I used to live in Hackney - where it was difficult to get a haircut, as local black-run hairdressers simply told you if you went in "we only do Afro hair". Eventually, I found a Turkish-run place there to have a haircut.

The alternative could be worse. I'm white, and the worst haircut I ever had was from a black hairdresser in Brixton. Chunks of hair were randomly gouged out all over the place. I could have done better spending an hour with a pair of scissors in front of the bathroom mirror. Actually, that's what I had to do afterwards to try and moderate the damage.

[John51]

About 20 years ago I rented a bedsit and the LL would only take male tenants. His view was that female tenants caused him too much trouble.

The final straw being a female police officer who brought a (male) colleague back for some hanky panky. Then her supervisor turned up as she was supposed to be on duty. Supervisor banging on the window, her running naked out the back door clutching her uniform. Garments thrown over the fence with her following. Knickers on in one garden, bra on the next. Fully dressed by the time she got to the last garden.

As he said, If a guy brings a girl back for a jump and she turns bandit, the guy just throws her out, end of problem.

[pjw]

We've got to create a free society where the chips fall where they fall. Close down the Equality industry. Close down all the tribunals. If you're sacked - take it on the chin. If the landlord doesn't want you because you're black, white, female, male, etc - crawl under your stone and don't make a scene about it. The state should not be intervening to enforce equality.

[Executive Sadman]

We've got to create a free society where the chips fall where they fall. Close down the Equality industry. Close down all the tribunals. If you're sacked - take it on the chin. If the landlord doesn't want you because you're black, white, female, male, etc - crawl under your stone and don't make a scene about it. The state should not be intervening to enforce equality.

The likelihood is some kind of defacto unofficial legislation would emerge anyway. If an employer creates a contract which says 'i can fire you at will for anything other than the reasons listed here without compensation' not many people are going to take the job. 'If it says I cant fire you for anything other than the reasons listed, most would take the same job.

I dont think anyone should be forced to rent somewhere to anyone...however, its other tenants right, some might say duty even, to boycott, or within the confines of non-harrassment, picket that landlord or agent. When they get the government involved or demand laws are made that violate the freedom of association, then my sympathy disappears. Government should merely ejudicate disputes, not take sides, even if it is against 'unpleasant' politically incorrect viewpoints.

[Guest TheBlueCat]

The likelihood is some kind of defacto unofficial legislation would emerge anyway.

Unless it also involves shutting down the entire legal system, then it's called the common law. It mostly seems to produce a better result than the statute stuff anyway, so sounds like a good idea to me.

[BlokeInDurham]

The likelihood is some kind of defacto unofficial legislation would emerge anyway. If an employer creates a contract which says 'i can fire you at will for anything other than the reasons listed here without compensation' not many people are going to take the job. 'If it says I cant fire you for anything other than the reasons listed, most would take the same job.

I dont think anyone should be forced to rent somewhere to anyone...however, its other tenants right, some might say duty even, to boycott, or within the confines of non-harrassment, picket that landlord or agent. When they get the government involved or demand laws are made that violate the freedom of association, then my sympathy disappears. Government should merely ejudicate disputes, not take sides, even if it is against 'unpleasant' politically incorrect viewpoints.

So would you agree that people should be free to murder someone based on "not liking their ethnicity"? After all the free market solution will see the perpetrator getting lynched by right-minded people and that will be okay, won't it?

Or is death bad, but homelessness an acceptable sop to the free market?

[Ologhai Jones]

So would you agree that people should be free to murder someone based on "not liking their ethnicity"? After all the free market solution will see the perpetrator getting lynched by right-minded people and that will be okay, won't it?

Or is death bad, but homelessness an acceptable sop to the free market?

This seems to be muddying the waters. Isn't murder illegal even if it has nothing to do with ethnicity? The motive being ethnicity doesn't make murder right. But it wasn't deemed to be wrong because of the ethnicity angle either, was it?

Choosing one tenant (or employee, or person to go down to the pub with, or...) over another isn't inherently illegal (like murder is).

Is it wrong for Peter Jackson to be on the lookout for short, white people to appear in a movie he's planning?

[StainlessSteelCat]

I have an asian female friend who leads a double life,,,one with her family and one with her white boyfriend,,,they are living together, have done for years, but the family refuse to meet along with her boyfriend,,,,not race,,,religious prejudice.

Love conquers all.

Sadly quite a common occurrence. I know of two couples where the parents of the Asian chap refuse to even acknowledge the white female partner - even once kids have arrived. Damn shame, but ultimately it's the grandparents who lose out due to their bigoted ignorant intolerance.

[BlokeInDurham]

This seems to be muddying the waters. Isn't murder illegal even if it has nothing to do with ethnicity? The motive being ethnicity doesn't make murder right. But it wasn't deemed to be wrong because of the ethnicity angle either, was it?

Choosing one tenant (or employee, or person to go down to the pub with, or...) over another isn't inherently illegal (like murder is).

Is it wrong for Peter Jackson to be on the lookout for short, white people to appear in a movie he's planning?

But discriminating on ethnicity is illegal, just like murder. You were proposing to remove laws to be replaced by "free market" solutions. If racial discrimination, why not murder (for whatever reason)?

Violent loss of life and homelessness are both social ills. Why should anyone have to suffer either to pander to a political philosophy?

(Your theory would hold some intellectual water if you could assume that discrimination were likely to occur equally in all directions so as to affect everyone equally, but even then, why would you actively choose a system in which everyone was barred from housing rather than no-one? Apart from anything else it would impede the very free market in housing that you espouse!)

And, yes, it would be wrong for Peter Jackson "to be on the lookout for short, white people to appear in a movie he's planning" if what he's really after is someone who can adequately play a hobbit.

[motch]

But discriminating on ethnicity is illegal, just like murder. You were proposing to remove laws to be replaced by "free market" solutions. If racial discrimination, why not murder (for whatever reason)?

Violent loss of life and homelessness are both social ills. Why should anyone have to suffer either to pander to a political philosophy?

(Your theory would hold some intellectual water if you could assume that discrimination were likely to occur equally in all directions so as to affect everyone equally, but even then, why would you actively choose a system in which everyone was barred from housing rather than no-one? Apart from anything else it would impede the very free market in housing that you espouse!)

And, yes, it would be wrong for Peter Jackson "to be on the lookout for short, white people to appear in a movie he's planning" if what he's really after is someone who can adequately play a hobbit.

I'd doubt it's worth Lennox Lewis turning up for the interview though..

[Ologhai Jones]

But discriminating on ethnicity is illegal, just like murder. You were proposing to remove laws to be replaced by "free market" solutions. If racial discrimination, why not murder (for whatever reason)?

I don't think I've proposed that. Perhaps you're confusing me with someone else.

The discussion over whether murder is legal/moral is simply a different one than what this thread was about. It's not fundamentally different--but it is a different subject. Your bringing murder into it didn't seem to me to help in deciding if discrimination on the grounds of ethnicity is moral and/or should be illegal.

And, yes, it would be wrong for Peter Jackson "to be on the lookout for short, white people to appear in a movie he's planning" if what he's really after is someone who can adequately play a hobbit.

If it is deemed that the kind of people who can adequately play a hobbit are short, white ones, then is there a difference?

If it's okay to choose someone over someone else on ANY grounds (even merit), then I'm a bit hazy on why it's not okay to choose someone over someone else for ALL reasons. Even choosing based upon merit discriminates against those with less merit. And I'm really not being flippant (just in case you think I'm attempting to be).