On 3/12/09, Sumant Srivathsan <[email protected]> wrote:
> You can choose not to consider the restricted use properties in your hunt
> for a home. Those who are restrictive will lose out on rental income, and
> may eventually be forced to raise those restrictions. Basic economics, no?
>

Maybe not.  Sometimes people will rather make a loss and keep a
certain segment of people out.

For instance, here in Nairobi if you are an indian you can get quoted
a lower rent for housing in certain parts of the city (where there is
a high concentration of indians) than if you are an african looking to
live there.

The same applies to buying property.  I know an african guy who was
willing to pay almost double the asking price for a particular
property - but was refused the sale.

On the other hand, in Italy i was reading a newspaper article about
tenant - landlord litigation where the landlord was unwilling to
extend the lease for a bangladeshi citing food smells which upset the
other tenants - and reduced the rental value of his housing complex.

Reply via email to