Fair Housing Defense : Fair Housing Lawyer & Attorney : Fox Rothschild Law Firm : Federal Fair Housing Act (FHA), Discrimination Complaints

A question I regularly get asked is who is responsible for paying for a reasonable accommodation or a reasonable modification. Here is a brief summary.

A reasonable modification is a structural change made to an existing premises occupied by a person with a disability (and disability is typically defined as an individual with a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activity) in order to afford such a person the full enjoyment of the premises. Reasonable modifications can include structural changes to interiors and exteriors of a unit as well as common areas. A reasonable accommodation is a change, exception, or adjustment to a rule, policy or practice used in running a community. A person with a disability can request either a reasonable accommodation or reasonable modification.  It is good practice to solicit written accommodation requests, but there is no requirement in the law that the requests come in writing.

For conventional communities, the general rule is that management is responsible for absorbing the cost of a reasonable accommodation (to the extent there is a cost associated with changing a policy or procedure) but that the resident is responsible for paying for the costs related to a modification of a unit or common area. In practice, management will often agree to some type of cost sharing with the resident as a part of the interactive process expected under the Fair Housing Act (FHA).

That being said, housing that receives federal financial assistance is covered by both the FHA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.  Under the Section 504 implementing regulations, structural changes (reasonable modifications) needed by a resident with a disability must be paid for by the housing provider (management) unless providing them would be an undue financial and administrative burden or would represent a fundamental alteration of the program.  Indeed, there are also times when management can also offer to meet the resident's needs through a different accommodation. 

Requests for accommodations or modifications can be made at any time. It is important that management respond to requests in a timely manner. Failing to respond (or an undue delay in responding) can lead to a housing discrimination complaint and a probable cause finding which never should have been issued. Don’t let that unnecessarily happen to you.

Just a Thought.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

This blog has been up and running for a few months now. To be honest, I did not know what to expect. Would anyone (in addition to my Mom – by the way, Hi Mom!) actually want to read it? Would anyone think issues related to housing discrimination and compliance with the Fair Housing Act are worth learning about?

Well, the verdict is in. And I have to say I am gratified. On a regular basis I receive correspondence and/or messages for individuals with questions related to fair housing and housing discrimination. I am very pleased and will continue to post issues of interest related to fair housing on this blog.

That being said, I do need to make clear that I represent apartment owners and professional apartment management companies. In other words, I do not represent residents, applicants, and former residents who believe they have been discriminated against. It is not because of a true legal conflict of interest (which would be the case if I took a case against one of my clients), but because I want my clients to know that I will not take the opposing side of an issue in my next case. 

I trust you will understand. And I very much appreciate you checking in on this blog.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

I have been defending housing discrimination cases for over ten years. I have a docket of cases stretching from Alaska to Florida and just about everywhere in between. My cases get investigated by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") in addition to many state, city, and county agencies.

The goal of this blog is to provide a forum for issues of interest to apartment owners and management companies as well as professional management employees. I also hope we can share available resources.

If you are in the apartment ownership or management arena, you are committed to following the federal Fair Housing Act ("FHA") as well as the many state and local laws which prohibit discrimination in housing. Noting that you do not discriminate on the basis of race, color, sex, disability, national origin or familial status is only a good start.

On its face, the law seems simple enough: don’t discriminate. All applicants and residents should be treated equally and with respect. But, each situation is fact intensive and requires an individualized review of the circumstances. Plus, not every jurisdiction is the same:

• what about those which add source of income as a protected class?
• Should you accept vouchers?
• Do you know the difference between a reasonable accommodation and a reasonable modification?
• Who pays for a reasonable modification?
• Does a request for a reasonable accommodation have to be related to the claimed disability?
• What is Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and why are two agencies investigating the same complaint?
• Can I have occupancy standards for my apartments?
• How can you confirm that a complaint has been filed by a disgruntled resident seeking to prevent an eviction?
• What do you do when the investigator asks you to halt eviction proceedings in an effort to settle the case?
• How do you handle an investigator who wants to interview all of your employees? Or review all your files?
• What about when the investigator who wants to knock on the doors of your residents?
• Should you still evict a resident even after he has filed a fair housing complaint?
• Should you place an advertisement in a church flyer?

Those are just some of the issues I hope to explore. I will do my best to give some insight based on my experience and offer solutions.

There will be no lectures here, but I will try to leave you with --

Just A Thought.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

No one in the professional apartment management business supports housing discrimination. We support the federal Fair Housing Act (“FHA”) as well as the many similar state statutes and regulations. We train our employees to both follow the letter and spirit of the law.

We are in the business of leasing quality apartment homes to all applicants who meet the non-discriminatory resident selection criteria for a particular property. In addition to being against the law, our management teams are evaluated and compensated (at least in part) on obtaining the highest possible occupancy percentage they can. In other words, in addition to being against the law, discriminating against otherwise qualified applicants would cost property management staff money. Nevertheless, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) staff (as well as the staffs at various state, county, and city agencies) monitor our work and investigate allegations of discrimination.

To illustrate, in fiscal year 2008, there were 470 HUD employees in regional and field offices as well as 113 employees in HUD’s headquarters. As such, HUD’s fair housing staff last year was just under 600 employees.

HUD’s fair housing budget for salaries and expenses last year was just under $67 million dollars. Additionally, HUD's Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP) – which is a made up of state and local government agencies tasked to investigate allegations of housing discrimination – grants totaled over $25 million in fiscal 2008. The budget for HUD’s Fair Housing Initiatives Program (FHIP) – which was created to increase compliance with the FHA through the use of private enforcement and educational activities – was another $24 million last year. 

In short, HUD spent over $116 million investigating housing discrimination last year. HUD’s budget for its Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity has generally increased over the years. I see no change in 2009 going forward. 

We need to follow the law and get it right when dealing with our residents and applicants. If we don’t, then the knock on the door will be a fair housing investigator. And then you may really need to call me. 

Just A Thought.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Fair Housing Act (as well as various state and local anti discrimination laws) sets some limits with respect to what management can and cannot do in the applicant selection process. As you evaluate applications, always be cognizant of what you can – and importantly what you cannot say. Prepare a resident selection criteria. And follow it. With every prospect and applicant.

It is absolutely appropriate to run a criminal background check and to set reasonable standards for what types of prior offense record will disqualify an applicant from your community. While HUD’s guidelines suggest management only look back five years for certain offenses, the regulations make clear that management has discretion to look farther back in time. Also, be aware that certain jurisdictions also limit how far back management can look. It is imperative, however, to run the same background check on each applicant and to score each applicant in the same manner. Many management companies contract with a third party vendor to perform this service. It is obviously never appropriate to only run background checks on applicants believed to be of certain races or national origins.

Similarly, you can and should check an applicant’s income, credit, and references. As with criminal background screenings, be consistent. Run the same check on every applicant. While it is not a protected class under the Fair Housing Act, an ever growing number of states and localities have included source of income as a protected class. That means you cannot discriminate against an applicant if he or she has a housing voucher. In such a jurisdiction, management should factor in the voucher and adjust the scoring criteria. Other protected classes in certain jurisdictions are marital status and sexual orientation. As such, knowing the laws in your jurisdiction can help reduce the chance of a housing discrimination complaint.

Rental decisions need to be made on legitimate, non-discriminatory criteria. The decision to rent an apartment, in part, reflects an assessment of risk. Management should engage in an “interactive process” with applicants in an effort to ensure everyone is treated appropriately.

All members of the leasing office staff must be trained in fair housing. Additionally, it is also important to ensure your maintenance staff is trained as well as service professionals regularly interact with residents. Importantly, the owner and/or management company can be held liable for discriminatory conduct done by employees.

It may seem self evident, but it is crucial to be consistent when dealing with applicants and residents. For example, if management arbitrarily sets higher standards when renting to members of a racial minority – the door is open for a lawsuit. Similarly, if you give one person a break (such as lowering the security deposit for a single mother but not other residents), you will unnecessarily risk a charge of discrimination from other applicants or residents.

Just A Thought.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

I have been defending housing discrimination cases for over ten years. I have a docket of cases stretching from Alaska to Florida and just about everywhere in between. My cases get investigated by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD") in addition to many state, city, and county agencies.

The goal of this blog is to provide a forum for issues of interest to apartment owners and management companies as well as professional management employees. I also hope we can share available resources.

If you are in the apartment ownership or management arena, you are committed to following the federal Fair Housing Act ("FHA") as well as the many state and local laws which prohibit discrimination in housing. Noting that you do not discriminate on the basis of race, color, sex, disability, national origin or familial status is only a good start.

On its face, the law seems simple enough: don’t discriminate. All applicants and residents should be treated equally and with respect. But, each situation is fact intensive and requires an individualized review of the circumstances. Plus, not every jurisdiction is the same:

• what about those which add source of income as a protected class?
• Should you accept vouchers?
• Do you know the difference between a reasonable accommodation and a reasonable modification?
• Who pays for a reasonable modification?
• Does a request for a reasonable accommodation have to be related to the claimed disability?
• What is Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and why are two agencies investigating the same complaint?
• Can I have occupancy standards for my apartments?
• How can you confirm that a complaint has been filed by a disgruntled resident seeking to prevent an eviction?
• What do you do when the investigator asks you to halt eviction proceedings in an effort to settle the case?
• How do you handle an investigator who wants to interview all of your employees? Or review all your files?
• What about when the investigator who wants to knock on the doors of your residents?
• Should you still evict a resident even after he has filed a fair housing complaint?
• Should you place an advertisement in a church flyer?

Those are just some of the issues I hope to explore. I will do my best to give some insight based on my experience and offer solutions.

There will be no lectures here, but I will try to leave you with --

Just A Thought.

Welcome.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

The Fair Housing Act ("FHA") was adopted in 1968 and later amended to add additional protected classes. The original 1968 law was designed to prevent discrimination based on: race, color, religion, and national origin. In 1974, the FHA was amended to prevent discrimination based on sex.  In 1988, the FHA was again amended to add handicap (disability) and familial status as protected classes. 

In addition to federal law, some state laws and local ordinances provide additional protections based on categories including: source of income, marital status, sexual orientation, occupation, age, and criminal history. 

The FHA covers most housing. In some circumstances, the FHA exempts owner-occupied buildings with no more than four units, single family housing sold or rented without the use of a broker, and housing operated by organizations and private clubs that limit occupancy to members.

The FHA protects: 

• residents,
• applicants,
• and prospective applicants.

 Those are easy. The FHA, however, also protects: 

• the guests of your residents,
• fair housing testers,
• and management company employees. 

Under the law, it is illegal to retaliate against an employee who helped a resident, applicant or prospective applicant to exercise his or her rights under the FHA. 

Indeed, from my experience, HUD remains very concerned when they believe any type of retaliation has taken place. If such an allegation comes up, do your best to confront it first. If you do not and a complaint gets filed, I will have to deal with it later.

Just A Thought.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks

A "reasonable accommodation" is a change, exception, or adjustment to a rule, policy, practice or service that may be necessary for a person with a disability to have an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. To show that a requested accommodation may be necessary, there must be an identifiable relationship – or nexus – between the requested accommodation and the individual’s disability. 

Relatively simple reasonable accommodation requests are those that seek a designated handicapped parking spot or waiver of a "no pets" policy.

The harder decisions come when a request has nothing whatsoever to do with the claimed disability. Additionally, a reasonable accommodation can be denied if providing the accommodation is not reasonable – for example, if it would impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the housing provider or if it would fundamentally alter the nature of the provider’s services.

Also, a housing provider has an obligation to provide prompt responses to a request for a reasonable accommodation. An undue delay in responding to a requested accommodation may be deemed to be a failure to provide that reasonable accommodation.

A reasonable modification is a structural change made to existing premises occupied (or to be occupied) to a person with a disability in order to afford such a person full enjoyment of the premises. Reasonable modifications can include structural changes to interiors and exteriors of communities as well as to common and public use areas. A request for a reasonable modification can be made at any time during a residency.

As with a reasonable accommodation, to show that a requested modification may be necessary, there must be an identifiable relationship – or nexus – between the requested modification and the individual’s disability. Furthermore, the requested modification must be reasonable. Examples of modifications includes grab bars in bathrooms or lowering of kitchen cabinets to a height suitable for persons in a wheelchair.

The general rule concerning costs involving reasonable modifications is that the resident is required to pay for them at conventional communities and that management is required to pay for them at affordable communities. To be sure, there are many times when management at a conventional property will work with a resident and engage in some type of cost sharing in an effort to further attempt to meet the needs of our valued residents.

The bottom line is to work with your residents and engage in the interactive process contemplated under the FHA and its implementing regulations. If management cannot grant the request for an accommodation or modification, is there an alternative accommodation or modification that would effectively address the requester’s disability-related needs? If there is, you should propose it. And you should document in writing your proposed solution.

Just A Thought.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks