LANDMARK: Reasonable Accommodation Denial Leads to Record Settlement

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced Monday that it has obtained the largest-ever settlement in connection with an individual housing discrimination case. The $1.25 million agreement with an Alabama property management company stems from a tenant's request for a reasonable accommodation, which the company allegedly denied.

What's interesting about this case is how a single denial of an accommodation request could wind up costing a management company so dearly. The reason? The tenant allegedly suffered severe damages as a direct result of the denial.

According to the first amended complaint filed March 17, 2009, the tenant requested to rent a ground-floor apartment in the 196-unit Mobile, Alabama non-elevator building to accommodate a physical disability. Although he needed to use full-length leg braces and crutches on account of paraplegia, he was offered an apartment on the second floor with the understanding that he would soon be transferred to a ground-floor unit. In the meantime, the apartment's small size meant the tenant had to keep his physical therapy equipment in storage on the ground floor.

Despite several follow-up requests and apparent promises, the company didn't allow the tenant to transfer to the ground floor, at one point citing a new rule barring all transfers, according to the complaint.

In November 2007, the tenant fell down the stairs from his second-floor apartment, requiring surgery and the need for a wheelchair.

Without admitting liability or wrongdoing, the company agreed Monday to pay $1,195,000 in monetary damages to the tenant, plus $55,000 in fees and costs to the federal government for the alleged Fair Housing Act violation based on disability.

In addition to the record monetary award and penalty, the consent decree requires the company to obtain fair housing training for employees and monitor their compliance, maintain non-discriminatory practices and procedures, and appoint an employee as "Reasonable Accommodation Facilitator," charged with managing all new requests at the more than 11,000 units in 85 properties across 15 states that the company manages.

Given the facts, do you think this settlement is fair? Do you believe landlords and property management companies need to become more aware of how the law protects people with disabilities?

What do you think?

Large DOJ Settlement Shows How Waiting List Mismanagement Can Prove Costly

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced on Monday that it reached a $270,000 fair housing settlement with the Housing Authority for the city of Royston, Georgia (RHA), which owns and manages seven low-income apartment complexes there.

According to the DOJ's press release, the RHA maintained a waiting list for its apartments but would often ignore the list in favor of selecting prospects based on race. The DOJ also alleges that the RHA steered black prospects to certain apartments or complexes and offered them inferior rental terms and conditions than prospects of other races.

In addition to the creation of a $270,000 fund, which is intended to compensate tenants and prospects who claim to have been harmed by the RHA's alleged race-based discrimination, the settlement allows tenants who believe they were unfairly assigned to one RHA complex based on race to request a transfer.

When a building has no vacancies, putting prospects on a waiting list is a great way to help ensure people get apartments in a fair manner. But, as this case shows, a waiting list that's not strictly enforced can become a liability trap. Whether the true reason behind a waiting-list exception is racism or mere disorganization, landlords who make such exceptions are likely to find themselves with some explaining to do.

Government Fair Housing Report Shows Disability Continues to Top Complaint List

On Friday, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) announced the release of its first annual report on the state of fair housing since President Obama took office. More fair housing complaints again have been filed based on disability than on any of the Fair Housing Act's (FHA) other protected classes, according to the report's findings.

Of the 10,242 complaints filed with HUD and its fair housing partners, nearly half (44%) alleged disability discrimination. The next most common basis for discrimination was race (31%), followed by familial status (20%).

In addition, the report noted that:

• This is the fourth consecutive year in which the number of fair housing complaints rose about 10,000.


• The most common issue (alleged in 55% of complaints) was discrimination in the terms or conditions of the sale or rental of property. The next most common issue was refusal to rent (in 24% of complaints), followed by failure to make a reasonable accommodation to allow a person with a disability an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling (in 22% of complaints).


• Aside from injunctive and other nonmonetary relief, HUD and Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP) agencies obtained more than $8 million as a result of their enforcement efforts. In addition, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) recovered more than $850,000 in damages and civil penalties in Fair Housing Act cases that were investigated and charged by HUD.

Federal law requires HUD to report on its fair housing findings and progress each fiscal year. HUD offers a complete copy of its new report, entitled "The State of Fair Housing: Annual Report on Fair Housing FY 2009" through its Web site.

Fair Housing Report Describes 2009 Efforts As 'Step in the Right Direction'

In an annual report issued Wednesday, the National Fair Housing Alliance (NFHA) announced that housing discrimination in the United States remained at a near-historic level in 2009, with the number of complaints surpassing 30,000 for the second year in a row. The number of actual violations per year, however, are estimated at four million.

Although the report concludes that greater efforts need to be undertaken to combat unfair housing, it also acknowledges government programs and initiatives that are "a step in the right direction." For example, the report notes a landmark settlement requiring that Westchester County, N.Y. build new affordable housing in segregated neighborhoods, and it points out that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed its highest number of FHA lawsuits since 2002.

The NFHA also reported that 93 private non-profit fair housing organizations had nearly twice the caseload in 2009 as the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the DOJ, and over a hundred state and local government agencies combined.

Read more about these trends and others in the NFHA's 2010 Fair Housing Trends Report, "A Step in the Right Direction."

Fair Housing Month: HUD or DOJ?

Do you believe that a landlord or other party has violated your rights under the Fair Housing Act (FHA)? If so, you can try suing the offender in federal or state court. Or, as I blogged last week, you may prefer the easier, less expensive option known as the administrative route, which involves having the federal government pursue your claim on your behalf.

The federal agency responsible for investigating the facts and handling your claim is the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). If HUD determines there's reasonable cause to believe you've been disriminated against, your case will normally be heard by an impartial HUD administrative law judge. However, if you or the other party prefers, your dispute may be litigated in federal court, in which case the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) will file the complaint on your behalf.

The DOJ also has the authority to sue parties who may be engaged in a "pattern or practice" of discrimination, or where a denial of rights to a group of people raises an important public issue.

Return tomorrow for the twenty-ninth part of this special "Fair Housing Month" feature at Fairhousingblog.com.

Fair Housing Helper™ Ushers in 2010 With Fairhousingresources.com

Fair Housing Helper™, owner of Fair Housing Blog, is pleased to announce the launch this week of Fair Housing Resources by Fair Housing Helper™, or Fairhousingresources.com.

Designed for multifamily professionals, tenants, apartment hunters, and others seeking reliable information about housing discrimination laws in the United States, the site offers visitors access to an abundance of useful information directly from the home page.

At Fairhousingresources.com, you can find:

• Information on Fair Housing Helper™ training and Fair Housing Blog by Fair Housing Helper™, with a scrolling showcase of the latest blog posts.


• The full text of the Fair Housing Act (FHA), which you can search or browse by section.


• The official FHA regulations from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).


• The latest fair housing news from across the Web.


• Information on state fair housing laws, including a handy, interactive "Protected Classes Tool."


• Links to important fair housing cases and enforcement efforts by HUD and the Department of Justice.


• A summary chart of related laws, including descriptions and links to the laws and their regulations.


• Key government guidance, from reasonable accommodations to terrorism concerns.


• Links to topical articles written by Fair Housing Helper™'s founder and president, Ron Leshnower, for the Apartment Living / Rental site of About.com, a part of The New York Times Company.


• Industry jobs and events listings, with the ability to post your own jobs and events for free.

Fairhousingresources.com is the third addition to the Fair Housing Helper™ family of Web sites. Fairhousinghelper.com offers training for multifamily professonals, and Fairhousingblog.com is dedicated to covering a variety of interesting, timely housing discrimination issues while inviting thoughtful discussion.

GAO Says DOJ Should Indicate Reasons for Rejecting Fair Housing Complaints

On December 3, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report on how the Department of Justice's (DOJ) Civil Rights Division can increase its enforcement efforts. After reviewing the Division's activities between 2001 and 2007, the GAO recommends that the Division alter its Interactive Case Management System (ICM) to include a field for capturing the reasons that fair housing and other matters are closed. Taking this step would strengthen the Division's ability to account for its efforts, the GAO argues.

The GAO report also noted that most (456 of 517) of the Fair Housing Act (FHA) matters the Division handled were initiated under the DOJ's "pattern or practice" authority, primarily alleging discrimination on the basis of race or disability and involving land use/zoning/local government or rental issues. Most (250 of 269) of the cases filed as plaintiff included an FHA claim. These FHA cases primarily involved rental issues (146) and alleged discrimination on the basis of disability (115) or race (70).

Landlording in a World of Fair Housing Testing

Government and fair housing agencies across the United States have been using so-called "testers" for years to help craft compelling cases of housing discrimination.

Testers are people who call or visit properties to inquire about vacancies. They pretend to be genuinely interested in renting or buying them, but their true, secret purpose is to determine whether a property owner or manager is complying with fair housing laws.

Fair housing testing programs have proven effective at gathering evidence because their targets don't realize they're under investigation and therefore often have their guard down (and their mouth open).

For a good example of how much testers can help a case, you needn't look far into the past. A complaint filed November 23, 2009 by the Department of Justice (DOJ) against an Illinois landlord for discrimination based on race and color shows the type of useful evidence testers can obtain.

According to the complaint, the Illinois landlord allegedly refused to rent a single-family house in a Chicago suburb to a black couple because of their race. The couple suspected race as a factor because after they arrived to look at the property, the landlord was quick to tell them he just rented the house to a white prospect. The landlord also insisted that the couple wouldn't be interested in his other vacancy.

The next day, the wife decided to call the landlord to ask the status of the property they had just visited, without identifying herself. When the landlord told her it was available, this confirmed the couple's suspicions and led them to pursue a fair housing claim.

A local fair housing agency and the DOJ each dispatched testers to contact the landlord in the hope of gathering more evidence to bolster their discrimination case against him.

Here's what the testing produced, according to the complaint:

• The landlord didn't return a phone call from a black tester inquiring about the house.



• The landlord separately told two white testers that the house was available and invited them to see it. While showing the property to each of the white testers, the landlord: a) asked the tester if her husband was black (to which each one said no); b) told the tester about problems he had after unknowingly renting the house to an interracial couple; c) made various statements against renting to black tenants; and d) claimed to have rejected a black prospect's offer to rent the house at the advertised rent with paying a year's worth of rent upfront. The also landlord told one of the white testers that several black people inquired about the house, and he offered a discounted rent to the other tester because she was white.

If there's a landlording lesson to be learned or advice to be gleaned from this type of story, it's this:

Treat all prospects as if they're testers.

Sure, doing so is smart because it means not helping the government build a case against you. But, more importantly and proactively, if landlords require staff not only to get fair housing training but to keep fair housing concerns in mind when interacting with prospects, they'll be much less likely to say or do something that could lead — fairly or unfairly — to accusations of discrimination.

Interesting to note:

• The Department of Justice (DOJ) launched its testing program in 1992. Since then, the DOJ has recruited and trained over 1,000 employees to pose as testers.

LANDMARK: Landlords Agree to Largest-Ever DOJ Rental Housing Discrimination Settlement

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced it filed a proposed consent order to obtain the largest-ever settlement in connection with a rental housing discrimination lawsuit.

Los Angeles Clippers owner and landlord Donald Sterling, his wife Rochelle Sterling, the Sterling Family Trust, and The Korean Land Company, L.L.C. have agreed, without admitting liability or wrongdoing, to pay $2.725 million to settle allegations that they violated the Fair Housing Act by discriminating based on race, national origin, and familial status at apartment buildings they own and manage in Los Angeles.

The complaint, filed in August 2006, alleged that the defendants discriminated against non-Korean prospects and tenants in connection with renting apartments in the Koreatown section of Los Angeles; discriminated against black prospects and tenants in connection with renting apartments in the Beverly Hills section of Los Angeles; and discriminated against families with children throughout the buildings they own or manage in Los Angeles.

In addition to the record monetary award and civil penalty, the consent order, if approved, would require the defendants to obtain fair housing training for employees and monitor their compliance, and maintain non-discriminatory practices and procedures.

The defendants own and manage approximately 119 apartment buildings comprising 5,706 apartments in Los Angeles County. This settlement would also resolve two related lawsuits filed by former tenants at one of their properties.

Racism Again Proves Costly As a Marketing Strategy

If having no black tenants at your apartment complex is your selling point, fire your marketer. That's the message the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is sending to landlords by going after the owners and operators of a Davie, Florida apartment complex for refusing to rent to black people — and boasting about their policy to prospective white tenants.

Sound familiar? That's because the same type of racial marketing strategy was allegedly recently employed at an apartment complex in Alabama, leading the DOJ to file a fair housing complaint against the complex's owner, manager, and maintenance employee (see "Using Racism to Rent Apartments," July 24, 2009).

The owners and operators of the Florida complex have agreed to settle, in light of evidence gathered by DOJ testers that indicate the complex violated the Fair Housing Act (FHA) by:

• Directing the property managers not to rent to applicants who even "appear" to be black;
• Telling white applicants that an advantage of living at the complex is its lack of black tenants;
• Encouraging white prospects to apply for an apartment while discouraging black prospects from doing the same;
• Offering to waive costs such as the application fee only for white prospects.

Under the August 27, 2009 Consent Decree, the complex must pay $115,000 to identified "aggrieved persons," plus up to $25,000 in compensation to additional discrimination victims who still may come forward — as well as a $74,000 civil penalty. The complex has also agreed to have its employees undergo fair housing training and take other steps to prevent violations in the future.

Reshaping of Justice Department Implies Increased Fair Housing Enforcement

A report in today's New York Times indicates a significant shift by the Obama administration in the role of the U.S. Department of Justice's (DOJ) Civil Rights Division.

Attorney General Eric Holder aims to shine the Division's enforcement spotlight on housing and other areas, such as employment, where minorities have been disproportionately treated. The prior administration preferred to focus on individual cases in which there was evidence of intentional discrimination.

In addition to the Division's change in focus, the White House has proposed hiring 50 more lawyers to add muscle to the civil rights enforcement arsenal.

The DOJ and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) are the two federal agencies charged with enforcing the Fair Housing Act (FHA).

Do you agree with this shift in the Division's role? Is the hiring of additional civil rights attorneys an initiative that is long overdue, or is it an inappropriate expenditure of taxpayers' money?

What do you think?

Using Racism to Rent Apartments

The folks at a Clanton, Alabama apartment complex thought they had an effective marketing campaign going. It appears they made efforts to add something they considered desirable to their complex, then used it to promote the complex to prospective tenants. What they probably didn't consider is that if that "something" is related to racism, there's a good chance the federal government will notice and take action.

Sure enough, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) this week announced it's suing the owner, manager, and maintenance employee of the nine-building, 72-apartment complex for a pattern or practice of violating the Fair Housing Act's (FHA) ban on discrimination based on race and color.

Through the use of testing (sending people to apartment complexes to check for fair housing compliance while posing as prospective tenants), the DOJ allegedly uncovered evidence that the complex:

• adopted rental policies to discourage black people from becoming tenants; and


• used the fact that no tenants at the complex were black as a selling point to market the apartments to white tenants.

The DOJ in its complaint seeks damages, a civil penalty, and an order to prevent continued discrimination at the complex.

When You Can Afford the Rent But Can't Pay It

Several tenants at a 46-building apartment complex in Rockland County, New York could afford their apartments, but mental disabilities affected their ability to pay their rent on time, according to the Department of Justice in a May 6, 2009 press release. A local housing services organization has been helping by renting eight apartments from the landlord for its clients while guaranteeing the rent for 12 other apartments.

This arrangement appeared to work until May 2008, when the complex's owners claimed they weren't required to accept the organization's guarantees or treat its clients any differently than other tenants. In November, the owners brought a lawsuit against the organization, the county and its fair housing agency, as well as the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, to protect their rights.

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is now suing the owners, claiming these tenants are legally entitled to be treated differently -- by getting reasonable accommodations for their disabilities under the Fair Housing Act. Because the tenants' disabilities impair their ability to pay rent, the DOJ argues, the complex owners must let the organization assist the tenants in this effort.

Are the complex owners within their rights to require mentally disabled tenants to pay rent on their own? Is a housing service organization's assistance a reasonable accommodation for a disability?

What do you think?

Fair Housing Report Sees Spike in Violations

In a report issued on Friday, the National Fair Housing Alliance (NFHA) announced that housing discrimination in the United States has peaked, with 2008 seeing 30,758 complaints. The NHFA suggested there are two main reasons for this trend:

1. The worsening foreclosure crisis; and
2. Discriminatory Web advertising.

The NFHA also reported that 93 private non-profit fair housing organizations had nearly twice the caseload in 2008 as the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and 107 state and local government agencies combined.

Read more about these trends and others in the NFHA's 2009 Fair Housing Trends Report, "Fair Housing Enforcement: Time for a Change."

Interesting to note:

Founded in 1988 and headquartered in Washington, D.C., the NFHA is a consortium of more than 220 private, non-profit fair housing organizations, state and local civil rights agencies, and individuals from throughout the United States. Through education, advocacy and enforcement programs, the NFHA provides equal access to apartments, houses, mortgage loans and insurance policies for all United States residents.

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?

Are We a 'Nation of Cowards'?

Attorney General Eric Holder, the first African American to be appointed to the office, delivered a somewhat sobering speech to Department of Justice employees yesterday, marking Black History Month.

While praising significant achievements in our country's racial history, Mr. Holder claimed that "in things racial we have always been and continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards." He further noted that there is "no significant interaction" between people of different races outside the workplace, and that much in this regard hasn't changed in 50 years ago.

Here's the relevant excerpt from his remarks:

As a nation we have done a pretty good job in melding the races in the workplace. We work with one another, lunch together and, when the event is at the workplace during work hours or shortly thereafter, we socialize with one another fairly well, irrespective of race. And yet even this interaction operates within certain limitations. We know, by "American instinct" and by learned behavior, that certain subjects are off limits and that to explore them risks, at best embarrassment, and, at worst, the questioning of one’s character. And outside the workplace the situation is even more bleak in that there is almost no significant interaction between us. On Saturdays and Sundays America in the year 2009 does not, in some ways, differ significantly from the country that existed some fifty years ago. This is truly sad. Given all that we as a nation went through during the civil rights struggle it is hard for me to accept that the result of those efforts was to create an America that is more prosperous, more positively race conscious and yet is voluntarily socially segregated.

Do you agree with the new Attorney General? Are we a "nation of cowards" in matters of race? Are we much more integrated in the workplace than in the housing and social arena? If so, why do you think this is the case? What can or should be done to foster understanding and end segregation?

What do you think?

Unwelcome Advances Lead to an Unwelcome Complaint

On January 29, 2009, the DOJ filed a fair housing complaint in a federal district court against both the landlord and manager of 11 single-family dwellings in Ypsilanti, Michigan, alleging "severe, pervasive, and unwelcome sexual harassment."

For at least the last few years, the manager allegedly made unwanted verbal sexual advances, entered female tenants' apartments without permission or notice, granted and denied tangible housing benefits based on sex, and took adverse action against female tenants when they refused or objected to his sexual advances. Although the landlord apparently didn't engage in such conduct, the DOJ believes he should also be held liable because the manager acted as his agent and because the landlord "knew or should have known" about the manager's conduct yet did nothing to stop it.

Assuming the landlord himself didn't commit sexual harassment, should he be held liable in this type of situation? If so, should it be to the same extent as the manager? Should the landlord's liability depend on whether or not he actually knew what the manager was doing?

What do you think?

DOJ Issues Year-End Report on Fair Housing Enforcement

The Department of Justice (DOJ) this month released a "written statement" to report on its efforts in combating housing discrimination across the United States. The report noted several achievements:

• In fiscal years 2007 and 2008, the DOJ obtained settlements and judgments in fair housing and fair lending cases requiring the payment of a total of up to $12 million in monetary damages to victims of discrimination and civil penalties to the government.
  
  
• In fiscal year 2008, 39% of the DOJ's total cases and 45% of its pattern or practice cases alleged race discrimination.
  
  
• In fiscal year 2008, the DOJ conducted more than 600 paired tests, exceeding by almost 25% the number of tests conducted in fiscal year 2007, which in turn significantly exceeded the next highest number of tests conducted in any previous year since the inception of the DOJ's new testing program.

The statement, however, concluded on a more cautiously optimistic note:

In sum, the Division has contributed a great deal to the fight against housing and lending discrimination in this nation. Yet there remains much work to be done, and we will continue to dedicate our energy and resources to exposing and eliminating discriminatory housing and lending practices.

Let's see what 2009 will bring...

Glimpsing the Future of Fair Housing

This has been a pivotal year for the Fair Housing Act, as we have marked the 40th anniversary of the law that famously earned President Johnson's signature on April 11, 1968, exactly one week after the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

As with any anniversary, it has been a time not only to reflect on where we once were and how far we've come, but — even more importantly — where we should be headed and what roadmap will take us there.

Yesterday, coinciding with the anniversary and in the wake of the subprime mortgage crisis, the National Commission on Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity released a much-anticipated report on the state of fair housing.

You may be surprised to learn that, according to the report:

More than four million instances of housing discrimination occur annually in the United States and yet fewer than 30,000 complaints are filed every year. In 2007, the 10 HUD offices processed 2,440 complaints, the 105 FHAP agencies processed 7,700 inquiries, and the 81 private fair housing agencies processed 18,000 complaints. Literally millions of acts of rental, sales, lending, and insurance discrimination, racial and sexual harassment discrimination, and zoning and land use discrimination go virtually unchecked. [Citation: Oral Testimony of Shanna Smith (Atlanta).]

So, where do we go from here?

The Commission offers a number of recommendations, aimed at increasing both the level and the efficiency of fair housing enforcement. Most notably, the Commission pushes for the creation of an independent fair housing enforcement agency to replace the existing enforcement structure at HUD. This new agency would have the staff, support, and resources "to make fair housing a reality."

The Commission's other recommendations include the revival of the President's Fair Housing Council; greater compliance with the Fair Housing Act's requirement that the government and its grantees "affirmatively further fair housing"; the strengthening of the Fair Housing Inititiatives Program (FHIP), which funds fair housing enforcement and education across the country; the adoption of a regional approach to fair housing; the emphasizing of fair housing principles in programs addressing the mortgage and financial crisis; the creation of a stronger fair housing awareness campaign; and the pursuit of a collaborative approach to fair housing issues.

When we look back another 40 years from now, perhaps it will be these recommendations that will have proven their merit in shaping the future of fair housing.

Assisted Living Facility Needs Assistance with Motorized Wheelchair Policy

The Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a fair housing complaint against the owners and operators of a 58-unit Evansville, Indiana independent and assisted senior living facility, on behalf of two tenants who were evicted for their motorized wheelchair use. The complaint, filed November 7, 2008, alleges that the facility's policy of refusing to let tenants use motorized wheelchairs or scooters in their apartments or in the facility's dining room violates the Fair Housing Act's ban on disability discrimination.

In one alleged instance, when one of the evicted tenants arrived at the dining room on his motorized wheelchair, facility employees reminded him of the policy and then attempted to "forcibly remove" him from his wheelchair. The DOJ filing follows HUD's issuance of Charges of Discrimination against the facility on September 25.

Interesting to note:

You may be surprised to read that an assisted living facility is imposing this ban, since you might expect such a place to be particularly attuned to the needs of tenants with disabilities and more aware of disability discrimination laws. According to the complaint, the facility's own admission requirements state that applicants must be "ambulatory," which the administrator explained means "capable of moving from place to place... even if the person required some form of assistance in moving about, be it a cane, walker, or a[n] electric or nonelectric wheelchair or scooter." (Emphasis added.)