Illegal for landlord to refuse on food preference?

[dave7108]

Is it illegal to not have a tennant based on what food they like?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/nov/08/no...

Edited by dave7108 on Wednesday 8th November 14:50

[superlightr]

if you think a type of cooking is going to damage your property then you can restrict and try to stop that from happening.

ie continued cooking of curries using gyi oil is the issue. Certain nationalities tend to use this oil in the cooking of their curries.

clearly a landlord can't say a race or colour of a person they don't want to let to as that is illegal.

Edited by superlightr on Wednesday 8th November 14:56

Edited by superlightr on Wednesday 8th November 14:57

[TooMany2cvs]

dave7108 said:

Is it illegal to not have a tennant based on what food they like?

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/nov/08/no...

I thought this was going to be a "Vegetarian only" huff.

If you really believe that Wilson is basing his decision on food preference, then I have a slightly used bridge to sell you.

Here's a clue. "No coloured people" versus https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/secti... - the whole "because" onwards is just a waste of breath attempt to justify exactly what he knows is quite rightly 100% illegal and has been since the Race Relations Act 1965 stopped his ilk putting up "No dogs, no blacks, no Irish" signs.

If he was worried about cooking smells (here's another clue: people of all shades and backgrounds cook curries), then he could simply put a term in the tenancy that said the property had to smell nice on vacation, and slog it out with the deposit protection arbitration people. It probably wouldn't be any more enforceable than any other explicit cleaning description, but it'd make him feel happier.

[cuprabob]

At first glance I thought it was Ted Moult

[dave7108]

[CAPP0]

This is also a very old story. He lives in my part of the world, he and his (quite fantastically unattractive) wife used to buy up whole developments of new houses off plan. They own, or at least did, a ridiculously high number of properties.

[Amateurish]

"No coloured people" ... "This has got nothing to do with the colour of someone’s skin,” Hmmm

[vikingaero]

He's a publicity we and this time a stupid equalities organisation bit and took him to Court. Hard to work out which one is the more stupid.

[98elise]

CAPP0 said:

This is also a very old story. He lives in my part of the world, he and his (quite fantastically unattractive) wife used to buy up whole developments of new houses off plan. They own, or at least did, a ridiculously high number of properties.

They own about 1000 BTL's, and they certainly own whole streets of houses.

They seem to be a particularly unpleasant couple with no empathy for any of their tenants.

[chow pan toon]

98elise said:

CAPP0 said:

This is also a very old story. He lives in my part of the world, he and his (quite fantastically unattractive) wife used to buy up whole developments of new houses off plan. They own, or at least did, a ridiculously high number of properties.

They own about 1000 BTL's, and they certainly own whole streets of houses.

They seem to be a particularly unpleasant couple with no empathy for any of their tenants.

He has to be on here

[anonymous-user]

vikingaero said:

He's a publicity we and this time a stupid equalities organisation bit and took him to Court. Hard to work out which one is the more stupid.

If bigots like this guy go unchallenged, they will just carry on regardless. It is the job of the EHRC to enforce anti discrimination law.

[spikeyhead]

98elise said:

CAPP0 said:

This is also a very old story. He lives in my part of the world, he and his (quite fantastically unattractive) wife used to buy up whole developments of new houses off plan. They own, or at least did, a ridiculously high number of properties.

They own about 1000 BTL's, and they certainly own whole streets of houses.

They seem to be a particularly unpleasant couple with no empathy for any of their tenants.

I suspect that RBS owns the houses, probably on 100% mortgages and can't work out how to unwind the situation.

[TooMany2cvs]

vikingaero said:

He's a publicity we and this time a stupid equalities organisation bit and took him to Court. Hard to work out which one is the more stupid.

Yes, because it's really, really stupid to stop landlords putting up "No dogs, no blacks, no Irish" signs, isn't it?

[anonymous-user]

In the late nineties I did a gig for the EOC (the predecessor of the EHRC) against a Dudley factory owner who insisted that only men could work on the shop floor and only women could work in the office. He was a real throwback, was adamant and unrepentant about his position, and felt that he was being unfairly repressed by Big Government. The landlord in the current case sounds like another caricature from the fifties. Even his use of language ("coloureds") is old school. I think that we can use old school language too and say that he's a "racialist".

[mr rusty]

We like cooking curries, but when the recipe calls for dry roasting fenugreek seeds, we do it outside! This is the spice that gets into everything and has that certain smell that everyone knows.

[nikaiyo2]

Breadvan72 said:

In the late nineties I did a gig for the EOC (the predecessor of the EHRC) against a Dudley factory owner who insisted that only men could work on the shop floor and only women could work in the office. He was a real throwback, was adamant and unrepentant about his position, and felt that he was being unfairly repressed by Big Government. The landlord in the current case sounds like another caricature from the fifties. Even his use of language ("coloureds") is old school. I think that we can use old school language too and say that he's a "racialist".

Why don't we use more modern language and just call him a stupid fukwhit?

[donkmeister]

The guy sounds like a complete tit, and that is from hearing him interviewed on local radio rather than a third party reporting on it.

I am white but half foreign (Anglo-Saxon) and I love various smelly foods. I know my foods are smelly because my FIL has banned me from bringing certain foods into his house due to their aroma.

If I tried to rent a house and the landlord said "no curries/garlic/fish" (rather than "I don't like people of a different skin tone to my own") is that legal?

I wonder if Swedish landlords ever ban surstromming? I used to work with a Swede who forbade it from his house as the liquid would splash onto the fixtures and render the house uninhabitable.

[fido]

I'm a bit confused as to what he is alleged to have said and what the actual advert said. Don't see a problem with him not letting his property out to people who are cooking curries, however if the advert says 'No <insert race or nationality>" then clearly that is discriminatory and illegal. The curry thing would bother me as well. I like eating curries but the lingering smell would ruin a property for me. I'm not going to be baited by the 'coloured' thing - one of the most racist landlords(lady?) I've ever had was a middle-eastern lady. It was never explicitly stated but she wouldn't take black tenants and wanted face-to-face interviews - this guy doesn't appear to fall in that category even if he is a bit 'old-fashioned' with his language.

Edited by fido on Thursday 9th November 11:19

[Gavia]

spikeyhead said:

I suspect that RBS owns the houses, probably on 100% mortgages and can't work out how to unwind the situation.

Whilst the subject of the OP is clearly a complete prick, there’s no need for you to be so jealous of his success. He spotted a market way before anybody else and ran it very successfully to get to this point.

Put away the green eyed monster, it’s not very becoming.

[TooMany2cvs]

fido said:

I'm a bit confused as to what he is alleged to have said and what the actual advert said.

He is alleged to have said "No coloured people, because they cook curries".

donkmeister said:

If I tried to rent a house and the landlord said "no curries/garlic/fish" (rather than "I don't like people of a different skin tone to my own") is that legal?

Legal? Absolutely. Enforcable? Not one tiny bit.