Fair Housing Advocates Reach Agreement to Expand Accessible Housing Opportunities for Residents with Disabilities to Over 5,300 Apartments in the South

The National Fair Housing Alliance (NFHA) and the Tennessee Fair Housing Council (TFHC) have announced an agreement with Gross Residential Properties that will expand accessible rental housing opportunities in Alabama, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee. The agreement covers 13 properties containing more than 5,300 apartments in these states. Under the settlement, Gross Residential has committed to making changes at 13 apartment complexes to ensure they are accessible to people with disabilities.

The agreement comes after a joint investigation by NFHA and TFHC that led to a housing discrimination complaint filed with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in March 2024. Through HUD’s complaint conciliation process, the parties quickly and efficiently reached an agreement that will notably increase accessible housing for persons with disabilities. Under the Fair Housing Act, it is unlawful for a housing provider to refuse to make reasonable accommodations necessary to provide persons with disabilities an equal opportunity to use and fully enjoy their homes.

Under the agreement, Gross Residential will: (1) Comply with the Fair Housing Act, including its accessibility provisions; (2) Make accessibility modifications to the 13 properties named in the complaint;(3) Notify residents in affected apartments of their right to request a modification to remove the below-sink cabinetry; (4) Develop no new multifamily units that include a kitchen design with an angled sink as depicted in the complaint; (5) Require staff to undergo training about building accessible apartments and the requirements of the Fair Housing Act; (6) Require an independent inspection of the accessibility modifications at the 13 apartment complexes and certify that they meet the accessibility standards; (7) Include in all residential leases a statement of Gross Residential’s commitment to fair housing laws and its policy to provide reasonable accommodations to applicants and residents who have disabilities; and (8) Pay $525,000 in damages and attorneys’ fees.

“People with disabilities in Middle Tennessee will have more housing options as a result of this agreement,” said Martie Lafferty, TFHC’s Executive Director. “Searching for a new place to live is stressful for everyone. Imagine finding an apartment you like and realizing you can’t use the kitchen because there’s not enough turning space for your wheelchair. We appreciate Gross Residential’s willingness to work with TFHC and NFHA to identify solutions that ensure people with disabilities can use and enjoy their apartment and the common areas of their housing community.”

NFHA and TFHC were represented by Sara Pratt, Esq. and Nick Abbott, Esq., of the noted civil rights law firm Relman Colfax PLLC. NFHA was represented by Morgan Williams, NFHA’s General Counsel, and Scott Chang, Senior Counsel on NFHA’s Enforcement Team. TFHC was represented by Martie Lafferty, TFHC’s Executive Director, and William Cox, TFHC’s Staff Attorney.

A copy of the Complaint is here.

A copy of Read the HUD Conciliation Agreement is here.

Federal Court Advances Landmark Housing Discrimination Case Against Deutsche Bank, Ocwen, and Altisource to Trial

 

On April 1, 2025, the National Fair Housing Alliance (NFHA) and 19 fair housing organizations achieved a significant legal victory as a federal district court in Chicago denied the defendants’ motions for summary judgment in a critical 2018 housing discrimination lawsuit, National Fair Housing Alliance, et al. v. Deutsche Bank National Trust, et al. This decision now paves the way for the lawsuit against Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, Ocwen Financial Corp., and Altisource Portfolio Solutions, Inc. to proceed to trial. Plaintiffs allege that these defendants engaged in discriminatory practices by failing to uphold their duty to maintain and market foreclosed properties in Black and Latino neighborhoods to the same standards as those in predominantly white areas, in violation of the federal Fair Housing Act (FHA).

The lawsuit, filed in 2018 by NFHA and 19 other fair housing organizations, builds on an extensive 2010-2017 investigation in the wake of the mortgage foreclosure crisis. Evidence in the complaint shows stark inequities. The investigation found that homes in white neighborhoods were methodically maintained and marketed, while properties in Black and Latino neighborhoods were left in severe disrepair, contributing to safety hazards, declining property values, and worsening economic conditions in historically underserved communities. Plaintiffs presented evidence the Court has permitted to be presented at trial that these disparities in maintenance were attributable to neighborhood racial composition, not to non-racial factors, and that race played a statistically significant role in the differential treatment.

The over-120 page ruling, delivered by U.S. District Judge Manish S. Shah, (N.D. Illinois) allows Plaintiffs’ disparate treatment and disparate impact claims to move forward against all defendants. The Court cited evidence of mortgage servicers Ocwen and Altisource abdicating their obligations to maintain properties, and a host of policies that may be shown at trial to cause negative outcomes in communities of color, compared to other neighborhoods. The Court held that trustees like Deutsche Bank can be held liable under the FHA for the discriminatory activities of their mortgage servicers. Judge Shah also recognized that plaintiffs had established sufficient standing to pursue the FHA case in federal court, finding that the critical services that plaintiffs offer were “sufficient to demonstrate that defendants’ REO conduct perceptibly impaired the organizations’ core activities.”

“This is a pivotal decision - not only for NFHA and our partners but for underserved communities across the country that have long endured neglect and inequitable treatment,” said Lisa Rice, President and CEO of NFHA. “This case isn’t just about holding Deutsche Bank, Ocwen, and Altisource accountable. It’s about beginning to repair some of the harm that continues to ripple through communities as a result of discriminatory housing practices. This decision carries the promise of hope for neighborhoods that were disproportionately targeted for predatory loans and negatively impacted by the foreclosure crisis. It’s a clear step forward in the fight for equity and justice.” Plaintiffs are represented by Soule, Bradtke & Lambert, Relman Colfax PLLC, and the Dane Law Firm.

Deutsche Bank in June 2013 settled a lawsuit with the city of Los Angeles for $10 million after it was accused of allowing hundreds of foreclosed properties under its ownership to fall into slum conditions, leading to the destabilization of whole communities.

The full order can be viewed here.

Read the April 3, 2025 NFHA press release.

Read the February 1, 2018 Banker & Tradesman article.

More Buffalonians to be Protected from Housing Discrimination with New Legislation

 

Fair Housing law expansions were passed in April 2025 to guarantee protection for more citizens of Buffalo, New York, with minority status, according to a spokesperson with the Buffalo Common Council. The laws now cover those with disabilities, those apart of the LGBTQ+ community, those from other countries, and those who require housing vouchers or public assistance. Race, religion, and national identity are already protected by the Fair Housing Act of 1968. The legislation was passed on April 1st, the first day of National Fair Housing Month.

A recent study by the Partnership for the Public Good of Buffalo - A City Divided: A Brief Study of the History of Segregation in Buffalo - found that Buffalo-Niagara is one of the most racially segregated metropolitan regions in the nation. While racial segregation has declined slightly in recent years, economic segregation has increased, resulting in neighborhood conditions growing worse – not better – for most people of color in the area. The metro area itself is ranked sixth most segregated in the nation on the white-black index, and twenty-first most segregated on the white-Hispanic index (“Segregation Results from 2010,” Census Scope, March 18, 2012, http://censusscope.org/dev/content/segregation-results2010).

Redlining’s detrimental and exclusionary consequences remained prevalent in 2024, causing myriad health, environmental, housing, and economic disparities throughout Buffalo’s East Side (James Coughlin, "City of Redlined Neighbors: Redlining in Past and Present Buffalo," Peace Chronicle: The Magazine of the Peace and Justice Studies Association (Spring, 2024).

This critical legislation will give the City of Buffalo’s Fair Housing law teeth to ensure that everyone in Buffalo is treated equally when purchasing or renting a home,” said Fair Housing Officer Harold Cardwell, Jr. “The ability to find safe and sustainable housing of your choice is an inalienable human right.” Realtors and landlords in the city will be required to make “reasonable” accommodations for those with disabilities, including equal housing language and symbols. Exclusions will be removed for those who own fewer than 20 housing units and fines will be increased for first-time and repeat violations. More time will be given to resolve accusations.

“The ugly legacy of housing discrimination can be seen in cities across the nation, and we see its toxic aftermath in the disparities that impact black communities and low-income households here in the City of Buffalo,” said Majority Leader Leah Halton-Pope. “With this legislation, we will help ensure that no Buffalonian is denied fair access to housing simply for being who they are.”

Read the April 16, 2025 Buffalo WIVB Channel 4 article.

Partnership for the Public Good

Thurgood Marshall Institute Releases Housing Justice Publications in Honor of National Fair Housing Month

To commemorate the 57th anniversary of the passage of the National Fair Housing Act, the Legal Defense Fund’s (LDF) is releasing two housing justice publications. The first publication – Barred from Housing: The Discriminatory Impact of Criminal History Restrictions in Tenant Screening – highlights how public and private housing providers often use overly broad and restrictive criminal record policies that limit housing opportunities. According to the report, these policies may violate the Fair Housing Act by having unjustified discriminatory effects on Black tenants.

The second publication is a podcast episode entitled “The Promises and Threats of Algorithms in Housing,” which details the increased use of algorithms and predictive technologies in the housing industry. Guests on the episode, including Maryland Legal Aid, argue that while algorithmic technologies have the potential to increase equity by removing human bias from decision-making, there is very little transparency and oversight over these tools and there is clear evidence that these technologies are replicating and amplifying existing biases.

“Access to safe, affordable housing is critical to the fight for a stronger, more equitable, and more prosperous country,” said Karla McKanders, Director of the Thurgood Marshall Institute (TMI). “At a time when the administration is undermining fair housing policies and cutting funds for various programs meant to remedy housing discrimination, our publications draw attention to the prevalence of housing discrimination and the continued need for essential housing protections to ensure all communities have access to safe, dignified, and affordable housing. We are proud to work alongside advocates from across the country to make the dream of fair housing a reality for those who are most often denied it.”

These publications are an extension of the TMI’s efforts to advance LDF’s mission of ensuring equitable access to housing for Black families and communities. To learn more about housing discrimination and the work being done to fight it, view The Black-White Racial Wealth Gap and Bad Housing Blues: Discrimination in the Housing Choice Voucher Program in Memphis, Tennessee.

Founded in 1940, the Legal Defense Fund (LDF) is the nation’s first civil rights law organization. LDF’s TMI is a multi-disciplinary and collaborative hub within LDF that launches targeted campaigns and undertakes innovative research to shape the civil rights narrative. 

Read the April 15, 2025 Legal Defense Fund article.

Ballot Measure Seeks to End Discrimination Based on Source of Rental Income in Lincoln, Nebraska

In Lincoln, Nebraska, housing advocates and national civic engagement organizations hope that a ballot measure in a May 6th special election can end the practice and allow tenants to tap into vital rent affordability assistance such as the federal Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. In 2022, more than 2 million families nationwide used housing vouchers, rental assistance that subsidizes households’ rent. “Source of income discrimination is when someone is turned away from housing because of the way that they would pay for that housing,” said Kasey Ogle, a senior staff attorney at Appleseed Nebraska, an organization that advocates for just causes. “It is a common and pervasive practice to turn tenants away because of Section 8 housing vouchers.”

In the absence of federal protection for voucher holders, source of income discrimination has frequently served as a proxy for race, disability, and gender discrimination. According to the American Bar Association (ABA), some 66% of federal Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) recipients are Black or Latino; 26% of households with an HCV have at least one family member living with a disability; and 77% of HCV households are female headed. In St. Louis, Missouri, for example, 94% of HCV recipients identify as Black or African American: “A refusal to accept [HCVs] means African-Americans are disproportionately turned away from these housing providers” (Metropolitan St. Louis Equal Housing and Opportunity Council, Locked Out/Locked In: Section 8 Discrimination in St. Louis City, 2019). 

To codify source-of-income discrimination protections, Ogle and other advocates are working with national groups such as the Fairness Project, a nonprofit with a track record of effecting change through ballot measure initiatives. After the coalition crafted a persuasive message and outreach plan, it gathered more than 15,300 signatures to get source-of-income discrimination protections on the ballot. Lincoln’s City Council unanimously voted in early March to have the ballot proposition ready for voters.

Ogle said that the proposition amends the city’s ordinances on antidiscrimination laws to include lawful sources of income as a protected class in housing matters. The amendment also empowers the local equal employment opportunity commission investigative unit, the Lincoln Commission on Human Rights, to investigate and prosecute complaints of discrimination based on the source of income.

“About a third of people who get a housing choice voucher from the local housing authority have to return that voucher because they’re unable to find someplace that will rent to them using that voucher,” Ogle said. If tenants are unable to find a suitable home, the vouchers must be returned to the housing authority. Because Section 8 vouchers are annually renewed, the risk of not being able to remain in a home due to source of income discrimination is palpable. Sometimes the landlord has refused to renew a lease because they do not want to cooperate with the housing authority anymore, Ogle said. In Lincoln, the number of people without a home as of January 2025 rose by almost 10% from January 2024. Some of those displacements occurred due to almost 2,400 eviction filings last year in Lancaster County, where Lincoln is the county seat.

As of 2025, only 24 states (including Maryland) and roughly 180 municipalities have clear antidiscrimination laws based on source of income, with some others joining in, according to a recent policy memo from the Washington, D.C.-based Poverty and Race Research Action Council (PRRAC). For example, Kansas City, Missouri passed an ordinance in June 2024.

 These state laws and local ordinances have varying degrees of effectiveness. Only about 60% of voucher holders are protected against source-of-income discrimination, the PRRAC estimates. 

National advocates who helped get the Lincoln proposition on the ballot say propositions are a good way to get around legislative logjam. Kelly Hall, the executive director of the Fairness Project, said that local advocates tried to get the City Council in Lincoln to pass source-of-income discrimination protections. Hall said this ballot measure may get these protections across the finish line.

Read the April 16, 2025 Prism article.

Read the March 19, 2025 ABA American Bar Association article.

(Image courtesy of Kansas City, Missouri.)

New York State Attorney General's Office Stops Illegal Source of Income Housing Discrimination in the Albany Capital Region

 

New York Attorney General Letitia James has stopped two brothers and their spouses who own three rental buildings in the Capital Region from illegally denying housing opportunities to low-income renters. An investigation by the New York Office of the Attorney General (OAG), found that Greg and John Karian – who own or manage 24 rental units in buildings located in Glenmont, Albany, and Troy – violated New York’s human rights laws by refusing to rent to New Yorkers with housing vouchers. The Karians advertised that they do not accept Section 8 vouchers and charged exorbitant fees on late rent payments in violation of the law. As part of a settlement with OAG, the Karians and their employees must rent at least three units to applicants using housing vouchers, undergo anti-discrimination training, and take other actions to make housing more accessible for low-income renters.

Rental vouchers such as the Section 8 Housing Choice voucher program provide housing assistance to the lowest-income households to rent decent, safe housing in the private market. These programs also aid senior citizens and disabled persons on fixed incomes, displaced families, and homeless individuals with disabilities.

The OAG opened an investigation into the Karians’ alleged discrimination in September 2024 after online rental listings for their properties warned that they did not accept renters using Section 8. Throughout the investigation, OAG found multiple instances of discriminatory practices, including refusing to rent, lease, or negotiate with prospective tenants who intended to pay for some or all of their rent with housing subsidies; advertising that their rental properties do not accept Section 8 housing vouchers; and charging exorbitant fees of $100 for late rental payments.

The settlement with OAG requires the Karians: (1) to rent at least three units to applicants who use a housing subsidy within the next year, and must also renew the lease of these tenants for at least a one-year term, provided the tenant elects to renew; (2) to attend anti-discrimination training and implement an anti-discrimination policy to distribute to everyone involved in the rental process at their properties; (3) to publicly advertise their acceptance of Section 8 and other housing subsidies by placing an “Equal Housing Opportunity” sign at each of their properties and indicate they are an “Equal Housing Opportunity Provider” on any advertisement, listing, or social media post; (4) to provide OAG with copies of the application, lease, and renewal lease of any applicant or tenant who pays for all or some of their rent with housing subsidies and must update their lease to limit late fees to 5% of the monthly rent or $50, whichever is lower, and solely one late fee may be charged per month; and (5) to pay $3,000 in penalties and $6,000 more if they do not comply with the terms of OAG’s agreement.

It is illegal in New York State for any owner, managing agent, broker, or any other representative to refuse to rent, sell, or lease housing to any person based on their source of income. New Yorkers who suspect they are victims of source of income discrimination are encouraged to file a complaint online.

Read the April 15, 2025 New York State Attorney General's office press release.

New York Attorney General Sues Payday Lending Companies for Exploiting Workers with Illegal Loans

 

New York Attorney General Letitia James has sued payday lenders MoneyLion Inc. (MoneyLion) and DailyPay, Inc. (DailyPay) for taking advantage of tens of thousands of New Yorkers with illegal high-interest loans that violate New York usury laws. The Attorney General's office alleges that both MoneyLion and DailyPay make paycheck advance loans to hourly workers in exchange for fees and tips, pretending to simply be advancing “earned” wages. Due to the short terms of the loans, the fees MoneyLion and DailyPay charge amount to outrageous annual interest rates in the triple digits, frequently up to 750%. Both payday lenders also engage in abusive tactics that push workers to frequently take out new loans to cover gaps created by their prior loans. With these lawsuits, Attorney General James is seeking to stop MoneyLion and DailyPay’s illegal payday lending practices in New York, obtain restitution for thousands of impacted workers, and impose civil penalties.

In a typical transaction with DailyPay or MoneyLion, a worker receives a small amount in advance of their paycheck (usually less than $100) and repays that amount, plus fees and tips, in 7-10 days. The result is an extremely high annualized interest rate ranging between 200-350% on average, but rates for these short-term loans can reach much higher. For example, DailyPay’s most common loan, a seven-day $20 paycheck advance offered for $2.99 actually reflects an annual interest rate of over 750%. Over half of all MoneyLion loans impose annual interest rates above 500%.

Attorney General James also alleges that both companies employ deceptive advertising to entice workers into taking out their exploitative loans. MoneyLion promises instant access to funds, 0% interest rate, and a fee-free product. Actually, it charges mandatory fees for all loans where funds are immediately available, which can be as high as $8.99 for a $100 advance scheduled to be repaid in two weeks from when the loan is issued. This reflects an annual interest rate of 234%. To extract even more money from its customers, MoneyLion asks for tips on top of its fees and establishes an artificial limit of $100 per transaction that forcing workers to take out repeat loans and pay repeat fees just to receive the $500 they are promised in MoneyLion’s advertisements.

It is alleged that DailyPay engages in similar fraudulent and deceptive practices. It contracts with employees’ companies, requiring employers to send their workers’ paychecks directly to the lenders first on payday, which allows it to deduct all amounts it is owed before passing on any remaining balance to employees. While it promises workers interest-free advances and financial benefits, DailyPay collects fees on about 90% of its loans.

DailyPay filed a federal lawsuit last week against AG Letitia James, seeking to block the state’s action.

Read the April 14, 2025 NY State Attorney General press release.

Read the April 15, 2025 PaymentsDive article.