NQ Reasons that are safe from litigation (my opinion)

Originally from ticket #5852.

I am now into the NQ reason fields and notice that you have not sanitized your NQ reasons. In the early 1990's there were a spate of law suits and fears on the reason people were refused tours. I had to sanitize the codes and comments. Things like 'dots', 'blacks', 'drunk', 'old people' and such had to be gentrified.

Here are some examples of potential (in my opinion) litigious NQ reason:

SINGLE MAN
SINGLE WOMAN, you are basing the qualification based on SEX, therefore breaking numerous HUD and merchant laws.

Option: Use the word SINGLE, I don't know of any equal rights yet based on marital status

Underage or Overage: discriminating based on age, which does not work with some HUD things.

Solution: Age not same as Invitation (Over or Under is determined by the birthdate).

One Legger: very derogatory should be "Without Spouse"

Not much sense codes:

Unemployed: Steve Jobs was unemployed when he was first CEO of Apple in the late 1990's, Numerous visitors to Las Vegas are unemployed and gamble for a living.

Solution: Income not as in invitation, or simply INCOME

Two codes mean the same thing:

ID's DON"T MATCH and Not Cohabs: Meaning they are not married.

Thats all for now!

Jim Forte - +40735224025050
Magna Timeshare Software, Florida