HUD recently announced that it has charged a landlord and its property managers in Manchester, N.H. with violating the Fair Housing Act by retaliating, threatening, or interfering with a tenant’s fair housing rights. The charge alleges that, after the tenant filed a Fair Housing complaint with HUD, the landlord and property manager conducted a background check on the tenant, contrary to their usual practice of not running background checks on existing tenants, and then sought to evict the tenant based on a long-ago event that the background check turned up.
The Fair Housing Act prohibits housing providers from retaliating against tenants because they exercised their rights under the Fair Housing Act. “Today’s charge sends a strong message that HUD is committed to ensuring that tenants who exercise their fair housing rights are protected from retaliatory evictions,” Diane M. Shelley, HUD’s Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, said in a statement.
An administrative law judge will hear HUD’s charge unless any party to the charge elects to have the case heard in federal district court. If an administrative law judge finds, after a hearing, that discrimination has occurred, they may award damages to the individuals for their losses as a result of the discrimination. The judge may also order injunctive relief and other equitable relief, to deter further discrimination, as well as payment of attorney fees. In addition, the judge may impose civil penalties to vindicate the public interest. If the federal court hears the case, the judge may also award punitive damages to the complainant.
