Century 21 Japan CM

So debito has been lying to us?

What is this law? I’m willing to be educated. but I am not willing to go on a wild-goose chase via Japanese Google searching for something that may not even exist. How do I know when to give up?

If you know if there is actually a law (not just the J Constitution) that makes it illegal to discriminate on the basis of race, and actually yield some punishment, rather than a wishy-washy unenforceable guideline, point me to it, please.

Now, as for discrimination on the basis of visa status (i.e. not having a long-term visa) that is probably legal in many countries, and is rational from a business standpoint.

It is easy for people on either side to muddle up the race vs. foreigner aspect, this being Japan, after all.

As Ponta said, discrimination on the basis of race, religion and so on, is against the constitution of Japan.

However there are no statutes in Japanese law to provide a legal recourse.

In other words, it is illegal to discriminate against someone wanting to rent on the basis of their race or religion, but there are no penalties for doing so.

Thus, any lawsuit against a discriminating landlord is much harder to bring than it would be in Europe.

If you read the whole advice and Fair Housing Act (US) referred to by Ponta, it is clear that discrimination is illegal except for the purpose of discovering illegal or potentially illegal immigrants such as visa overstayers.

The Act basically applies to all homes offered to rent unless the landlord has less than three homes to offer, and even in that case he is not allowed to offer them through an agent. In other words, the Act does not apply to purely private rental agreements.

There may be statutes providing legal recourse, but it’s obvious that more work needs to be done to prevent discrimination based on race, creed, background, etc. The post by Tom in South Florida below clearly illustrates this:

Posting the link again:
Chintai Corporation

Out of 109 listings for apartments, there were 62 stating 外国人不可, and there were 4 stating 外国人要相談, and there were 2 stating 外国人法人のみ. Not counting those 6 listings with extra stipulations, 57% of the listings in just in the Tsu City/Suzuka/Kameyama area don’t allow foreigners. I’m sure if you go and talk to them, there are a certain percentage that will take you in, but it should be illegal to even list apartments with these kinds of stipulations.

The very existence of this kind of website goes against, “expressly forbade landlords from discriminating on the basis of race, creed, background, religion or occupation,” don’t you think? Sure you could sue all 62 apartments, but there is a limit to what an individual can do. And yes, there are plenty of other apartments that do rent to foreigners, but that’s beside the point.

RMilner

“there are no statutes in Japanese law to provide a legal recourse”

Then on what basis do you think someone sued the landlord and got the compensation as in the case above?

“it is illegal to discriminate against someone wanting to rent on the basis of their race or religion, but there are no penalties for doing so.”

True.
In case of Japan, if the judge finds that the discrimination did occur, then the defendant can be ordered to compensate you for actual damages, including pain, and suffering.

In case of HUD in a similar case, as I understand it, the defendant can be ordered to compensate you and/or pay the federal government to civil penalty on behalf of public interest.
Am I correct?

“Thus, any lawsuit against a discriminating landlord is much harder to bring than it would be in Europe.”

Bringing the lawsuit itself is not difficult.

“it is clear that discrimination is illegal except for the purpose of discovering illegal or potentially illegal immigrants such as visa overstayersn.”

Annual report of Fair housing lists the basis of the complaints:disability, race, national origin, sex, religion, color, retaliation.
For some reason, citizenship is not on the list.
I am curious about the case where a foreigner won the lawsuit for discriminating against a non-citizen/alien as in the case I cited.

“In other words, the Act does not apply to purely private rental agreements.”

So do you mean there is no law prohibiting housing discrimination that applies to purely private rental agreement?

I figure there are a number of better ways of going about this:

For example,
- Implement a streamlined process for starting lawsuits in cases of suspected lending discrimination – even a lending dispute small claims court would suffice. If the landlord is found to have discriminated in any way, they would have a month-long period to achieve compliance with the law and if they fail to do so, each subsequent month would result in a fine of roughly 20万円. To add teeth to the law, you could even go as far as making the landlord unable to rent out further apartments after a period of 3 months without compliance (i.e. a removal of license). These changes are not unreasonable and would be very effective for removing discrimination without huge costly lawsuits.

- To ease the mind of the landlord in terms of renting to foreigners, if they wanted to, they could restrict renters to ‘Permanent Resident Visas’, or possibly force renters to pay for rent using domestic credit cards only. Both of these policies indicate a fairly long stay in Japan and would definitely add a sense of security. That’s not to say that every landlord would have to implement these policies, but it would serve as a much better replacement for 外国人不可 or requiring 住民票 – which only citizens can get.

And I agree, that it helps to understand the underlying cause of discrimination, Ponta, but this understanding should only be used as a basis for helping landlords come to compliance with the law. Landlords might have concerns about renting to foreigners, but that is why there are such things as 礼金 and 敷金 – these deposits are huge amounts of money and should more than cover any potential risks.

And I agree with LB that anti-discrimination laws ultimately serve no purpose if the laws are not enforced. That’s why I think a system like I wrote above would be much more effective. As it stands now, for someone looking for an apartment, starting a lawsuit is pretty much a frivolous venture.

Ponta, this may or may not be true, but to be honest, I’ve lived in 3 apartments during my 10 years in Japan, and I’ve never once seen or met my landlord. All of my concerns were relayed to the landlord via a management company or realtor, and communications to me were made via my office (I’ve never been contacted directly about anything). How can there be miscommunication about anything if there is no communication? If we were talking about some old person renting out rooms, there might be some room to debate here, but most of these buildings nowadays are controlled more by management companies that should know better than to discriminate – no matter what the hassle.

I still believe that what discrimination comes down to is money. Lenders are probably concerned about 3 things:

a) concerned the tenant will move out early, possibly skipping rent payments
b) concerned that a tenant may cause damage to the apartment that requires repair
c) concerned that a tenant may cause surrounding neighbors to move out if noise is a problem

All 3 issues have very little to do with communication and more to do with a lender’s bottom line. But when you look at it that way, A and B are more than covered by deposits. Issue C is a bit more difficult because I’ve heard that evicting tenants is extremely hard to do, but I’m sure there are procedures for that as well. Either way, the deposits should have this covered as well. And on top of the deposits, don’t forget that in order to get an apartment, most of the time you need a guarantor. That means there is at least one backup person to contact in cases of extreme problems.

Sorry for intervention…

In my opinion, steady landlords and realtors tend to rely and focus heavily on the reliability and ability of payment of tenants. While some of others are confident of their ability of collecting profits, they may not hesitate to take a harsh way against tenants, to retain their profits. This is difference between bankers and illegal moneylender.

To talk from an advocating position to steady landlords and realtors, their problem is, I think, mainly ignorance and inexperience. What they want is a guarantee first, then they are afraid of various possible troubles mainly caused by cultural differences and language barriers. They have no way to quickly judge, or feel very uncertain of, suitability of foreign persons as a good tenant. On this respect, I agree with ponta’s opinion:

But I believe some warnings and/or orientations to foreigners and educating the landlords will suffice—or at least they will be effective in most of the cases. That is why I think it is vital to raise awareness among the Japanese as well as foreigners by giving accurate information,

However, I fell necessity for an established process having legal force to forbid landlords and realtors rejecting possible tenants just because of being a foreigner.

以前、テレビでみたことがあっただけなので、詳細はわかりません。リンクしたサイトにも、あるいは、下のコメントにもあるように悪質な業者がいるようですね。

Either way you’re going through someone else.

Highly unusual I would suspect. Got any stats?

Of course it’s absurd. I’m making a direct comment at all those that go on about how foreigners can never get an apartment in Japan. In fact it is “quite possible,” and not merely by some miracle.

Only in response to arguments that are unsupportable in the first place.