HIV and the FHA

A lawsuit filed May 12 by Lamba Legal on behalf of an alleged victim of housing discrimination against the owner of an assisted living facility in North Little Rock, Arkansas brings to light an aspect of the Fair Housing Act (FHA) that many landlords aren't aware of. Tenants who have HIV (or AIDS, for that matter) qualify for protection under the FHA's ban on disability discrimination because they have a physical impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities.

In this case, the tenant, a retired university provost and minister, was allegedly evicted from the faciliy just after move-in because he has HIV. (He was first diagnosed with the virus in 1987 and disclosed it to the facility at the time he applied, according to the complaint, yet the facility approved his application.) According to the tenant, he did not require any special medical attention, and so the facility was not put in a position of having to provide medical services for which it wasn't licensed.

The tenant seeks compensatory and punitive damages from the facility and attorneys' fees, but also a permanent injunction so that the facility won't deny housing to people because of the fact they are living with HIV/AIDS.

Do you think a housing provider should have the right to reject prospects or evict tenants because they have HIV/AIDS? Do you think the staff of the assisted living facility in this case acted based on outdated and inaccurate beliefs about how the virus is spread? Would you feel comfortable living in a building in which one or more of your neighbors had HIV?

What do you think?

Evicted Because of a "Gay Pride" Car?

Two tenants in Fort Smith, Arkansas claimed their landlord evicted them on Tuesday because the words "Gay Pride" appeared on the side of their car, according to KFSM. One of the tenants, who is reportedly a lesbian and had no problem with the inscription that was apparently the work of a friend, claimed that the on-site manager ordered her to remove it immediately upon noticing it.

The landlord, however, claims that the tenants were evicted because of alleged lease violations, including having too many visitors and parking cars in other tenants' spots.

Although the Fair Housing Act doesn't ban housing discrimination based on sexual orientation, many states offer this protection. Arkansas, however, is not one of them.

Do you believe that words written on a tenant's car should ever be the cause of a tenant's eviction? Should it depend on the message behind the words? Should it matter if the tenant's car is parked off-premises, such as on the street?

What do you think?

For Property Manager, DOJ Claims Tenants Were There for the Touching

Yesterday, the Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a complaint against a man who managed several mobile homes in the West Memphis, Arkansas area, alleging a pattern or practice of sexual harassment in violation of the Fair Housing Act's ban on sex-based discrimination. If the allegations in the complaint are true, then it's clear this is a man who used his position to take advantage of tenants and prospective tenants repeatedly, interfering with their housing and their dignity while thinking nothing of invading their privacy and their person.

The complaint describes the property manager's acts of sexual harassment in strong terms, labeling it as "severe, pervasive, and unwelcome." The man, whose name ironically is "Hurt," is accused of doing the following and more on a regular basis:

• entering female tenants' homes without notice or consent
• touching female tenants in an unwelcome sexual manner
• making verbal sexual advances
• taking steps to evict female tenants who refuse his sexual advances

The DOJ is also after the property manager's wife, who owned or co-owned the mobile homes with him and, the DOJ argues, "knew or should have known" about the sexual harassment but "failed to take reasonable preventive or corrective measures."

Should sexual harassment be treated with harsher penalties than other forms of housing discrimination? If a landlord, property manager, or other housing professional is found to have engaged in severe, repeated sexual harassment, should he or she be barred from managing residential properties going forward?

What do you think?