A salesperson presents a seller with a full-price cash offer from a qualified minority prospective buyer. The salesperson's broker then presents the seller with a less-than-full-price offer from a qualified non-minority prospective buyer. The seller, however, accepts neither offer; instead, he accepts an offer through the salesperson from his neighbor. The neighbor is buying the home solely to prevent a minority family from moving into the neighborhood. In this situation, which party is NOT subject to penalties under fair housing laws?
A. Seller
B. Neighbor
C. Salesperson and broker
D. Non-minority prospective buyer
Answer: D. Non-minority prospective buyer
Explanation: The non-minority prospective buyer was making a legitimate offer, not for discriminatory purposes, and therefore has not violated fair housing laws. The seller, the neighbor, the salesperson, and by extension, the broker, all participated in a transaction made for discriminatory purposes. If a salesperson abets his client in discriminating (as the salesperson apparently did, when the seller turned down the full-price offer from the minority buyer, and the salesperson didn't object), then the salesperson has violated the license law, and by extension so has the broker for not adequately supervising.
You might also like to view...
Intermediate HTML Tables and Formatting horizon-tally adjacent cells?
(a) COL (b) COLGROUP (c) COLSPAN (d) SPAN
If an unfair labor practice case makes it to the U.S. Court of Appeals and one party still refuses to accept the decision:
a. there are no further steps to be taken b. the case may be taken for final review by the U.S. Supreme Court c. the case may be taken for final review by Congress d. the case may be taken for final review by the U.S. Labor Board e. none of the other choices are correct