Fundamentals of Fair Housing Investigation - Appendix



Table of Contents TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u Table of Contents PAGEREF _Toc53149835 \h iExercise 1.1—Case Intake PAGEREF _Toc53149836 \h 1Exercise 1.2 Case Study PAGEREF _Toc53149837 \h 3Format for an Investigative Plan PAGEREF _Toc53149838 \h 4Case Analysis Worksheet PAGEREF _Toc53149840 \h 9Exercise 1.1—Case IntakeOn or about March 10, 202_, Michael and Pamela K. (Black) acquired the services of Michele N. (White), a real estate agent with ACME Real Estate to assist in locating a single-family home in Anytown, USA. Mr. and Mrs. K. received approval for bond money and a loan with Pennywise Mortgage to purchase a home. On March 15, 202_, Mr. and Mrs. K. (Black) entered into a sales agreement to purchase Earl and Deborah C.’s (White) home at 104 Dana Street for $183,000. Ms. Katherine B. (White) of B.’s Real Estate listed the property for sale. The parties agreed to close on the property on or about April 26, 202_.On April 20, 202_, Mr. and Mrs. K. and agents B. and N. conducted the final home inspection at the subject property. As they were leaving the house after completing the inspection, Ms. N. saw a man in the yard next door. Smiling, she asked him if he would like to meet his new neighbors. He walked over to them and introduced himself as Chris H. (White), shaking Mrs. K.’s hand, then Mr. K.’s hand. Mr. H. said: “You have got to be kidding me. You have got to be joking. You brought (sic) this house? [His tone of voice was of disbelief.] Man, why do you want to live here?” Mr. K, smiling, replied, “It’s quiet; seems like a nice neighborhood.” Mr. H replied, “Yeah, it is—it’s an all-White neighborhood. [He began backing away.] You are kidding me!” Pointing to his backyard, Mr. H. said, “That’s why my dogs were going crazy, and my wife had to go calm them down. They don’t like Blacks either. [His voice began to change into anger.] You couldn’t find anywhere else to live? You don’t see me moving to Anyothertown, USA.” Mrs. K. replied, “Sir, we aren’t from Anyothertown. We live less than three minutes away from here. We’re Christian people. Our children will have to catch the bus here.” Mr. H. replied, “We’re Christians too! And we don’t want Blacks here. You don’t see me moving to Anyothertown. That’s why I moved out here. My next-door neighbor, who owns a gun shop in town, feels the same way I do. I can’t believe this!” He turned and started toward his neighbor’s house as if to go tell him. Mr. and Mrs. K. stated that Mr. H.’s remarks upset them so much that Mrs. K. cried hysterically. They left the scene fearing for their safety because they were unsure what Mr. H. would do next.Ms. N. stated that after the incident occurred, she attempted to get the K.s to go inside their future home. She said it upset the K.s so much that they left the premises. By letter dated April 23, 202_, Mr. and Mrs. K. informed the C.s of their decision to cease the process of purchasing the property at 104 Dana Street. The letter stated: Dear Mr. and Mrs. C.,We, Michael and Pamela K., have ceased to continue with the process of closing and purchasing your home.As a family, we are afraid for our lives to live next to a human being whom (sic) releases such hatred and fear onto other human beings. We were harassed and felt threatened in the presence of the next-door neighbor. No person should be allowed to decide where another may or may not live. On April 20, 202_, the decision was made for us by another person. We feel to live on 104 Dana Street at this time would be signing our lives, children, and family to a lifetime of threats, insults, harassment, and possibly death. Please understand our fears and position on this matter. We are truly, truly sorry. Michael and Pamela K.April 23, 202_On April 26, 202_, the C.s exercised their right to receive the $500 earnest money deposit from the K.s as liquidated damages resulting from the Ks’ breach of the contract to purchase the C.s’ home. Exercise 1.2 Case StudyOn or about April 2, 202_ Susan B., the mother of a 16-year-old daughter, saw an advertisement in the internet edition of the Anytown Tribune for an apartment which was very close to her job. The ad stated,Cumberland/Kennedy—2 BR/1 BA, wshr/d, Eat-in kit, prkg, or trans, $875.Susan B. called 773-123-4567, which turned out to belong to tenants David and Cecilia L. They had bought a house and were trying to sublet.Susan made arrangements to see the apartment on or around April 3, 202_. Susan B. came to view the unit without her daughter. Susan B. told Cecilia L. that she liked the unit, so Cecilia L. asked the landlord, Demetria V., to come downstairs to meet Susan B. When Demetria V. came into the room, Cecilia L. introduced Susan B. and said that Susan B. wanted to rent the apartment. Susan B. explained to Demetria V. that she worked with computers three blocks away for a company she had been at for seven years and that she could afford the apartment. Demetria V. asked, "What about your husband?" Susan B. told her, "I don't have a husband."Demetria V. asked her who would occupy the apartment, and Susan B. told her that she and her 16-year-old daughter would. Right away, Demetria V.’s whole attitude changed. She said, "Oh, no. I have had too many problems with teenagers here." Susan B. explained to her that her daughter was a good kid, that she goes to church, she goes to school, and she has nice friends. Demetria V. said, "Well, okay. But if I rent to you and I have any problems, you're going to have to leave. You do one thing wrong, you'll be out right away, no questions asked."Susan B. was very uncomfortable. She felt Demetria V. did not want to rent to her. Also, her daughter has friends of many races, and Susan B. was concerned that she would be evicted the first time any of her friends came over. She was under pressure to move, so she decided that she would just look elsewhere.On either April 20 or April 21, 202_, Cecilia L. called Susan B. and said, "I'm having trouble renting it. Would you still want to take the apartment? Do you want to try again with Demetria?" Susan B. told Cecilia L. no because she had just signed a lease. Cecilia L. was very upset and she complained that she had shown to a lot of people, and Demetria V. was probably going to keep her security deposit and try to stick them with the rent for the rest of the lease. Susan B. told Cecilia L. to contact the Leadership Council's Fair Housing Center. Susan B. knew when she saw the apartment that it was illegal for Demetria V. to discriminate against her and her daughter but, at the time, she had more pressing concerns, and Cecilia was the one who had to keep dealing with her.Cecilia L. contacted the Leadership Council, and they called Susan B. to get her account of what had happened with Cecilia L. and Demetria V. Format for an Investigative PlanEvery agency has its own investigative plan format. Perhaps the simplest format just puts the name of the case at the top and provides space to list each allegation and the legal theory for each allegation.917575132080CASE NAMEALLEGATIONS AND THEORY:35052027305001. right5080002. right2540003.Then the plan could contain columns with the following headings: Investigative QuestionsWho?What?Where?The investigative questions are simply those questions that must be answered to investigate the case. The investigative questions begin with jurisdiction issues, then go to the elements of the prima facie case for the first allegation, then to any defense to the prima facie case, then to the elements of the prima facie case for the second allegation and that defense, and so on.The “Who?” relates to who knows the answer to the question. Sometimes it will be the complainant, sometimes it will be one of the respondents, and sometimes it will be a third-party witness.The “What?” is usually a description of a record or document. For example, it might say “leases,” “applications,” “property tax records,” or “phone bills.”Finally, the “Where?” column is sometimes needed to indicate where a particular document or record is located.Investigative QuestionsWho?What?Where?EXAMPLE:A White female sees a “house for rent” sign on a house in a suburban area in Reading, Pennsylvania. She calls the number on the sign (411-422-2222); the phone is answered by a female. She makes an appointment to see the house. When she arrives, she is accompanied by her two children, ages 2 and 4. She goes to the front door and knocks; a White female answers the door. The applicant says she has come about the house. The White female says she is sorry, but she just cannot rent the house to someone with children. The applicant says, “Oh, okay,” and leaves. The applicant has filed a complaint with HUD alleging discrimination based on familial status.What are the allegations?Refusal to rent based on familial status in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3604(a).Refusal to negotiate based on familial status in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3604(a).Discriminatory statement based on 42 U.S.C. § 3604(c).What is the theory for each allegation?Refusal to rent based on familial status in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3604(a)—Direct evidence/unequal treatmentRefusal to negotiate based on familial status in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 3604(a)—Direct evidence/unequal treatmentDiscriminatory statement based on 42 U.S.C. § 3604(c)—Direct evidence/unequal treatmentThe applicable legal theory is direct evidence because the respondent allegedly made a statement that openly made a direct limitation on the property based on familial status. This example is going to be considered as part of the plan in an unequal treatment case because, if there were no witnesses, the chances are high that the respondent will deny making the discriminatory statement. In that case, the discriminatory statement is contested, and the case will be investigated as an unequal treatment case.What are the jurisdictional questions?Investigative QuestionsWho?What?Where?How was the complainant injured?Were there financial losses?Is the complainant still looking for a house?What size house did she need? Was there anything special about this house?plainant.Receipts, bills, description of this house.Are there other complainants? Who else was going to live in the house? Names, relationship, ages?How were they injured?Other adult potential residents.Receipts, interview.Interview of other potential residents.When did the incident occur?Complainant. Respondent who answered the door. Respondent owner, if different.Property tax records, reverse lookup for phone number.Internet, property tax office, county clerk.Criss-cross directory.Who is the respondent? Who was the female who answered the door?Who is the owner?Respondent owner. Respondent who opened the door.Property tax records, records showing the address of the owner.Telephone directory, property tax office, county clerk.Is the property covered?How many single-family houses does the respondent own or rent including his or her own house(s)?How many sales or rentals during the past 24 months? Was a real estate agent or broker involved?Was the house advertised for rent in any written form?Was there a discriminatory notice or advertisement?Respondent owner. Respondent who opened the door, if different. Investigator observation.Property tax records showing the number of units and ownership and address used for tax bills.Property tax office. On-site observation.How many units are in the house? Where does the respondent live?What are the prima facie case elements in a refusal to rent case (they are almost identical as those in a refusal to negotiate case)? Questions are developed to expand the evidence supporting or refuting these elements.Investigative QuestionsWho?What?Where?Is the complainant a member of a protected class?How did the respondent know that?Complainant. Respondent who opened the door.Did the complainant present herself and seek to apply?Complainant. Respondent who opened the door.What were the complainant’s qualifications? Question: does it matter?Complainant. Respondent.Was the complainant passed over or rejected?Was there a refusal to negotiate with the complainant?Was the house available when the complainant arrived?Was an application taken from the complainant/was one offered? Was there a discussion of the terms of rental?Is the house still available? To whom was it rented?When was it rented? When did the successful applicant apply?Complainant. Respondent owner. Respondent who opened the door, if different.Successful applicant.Application, lease.Application, lease.What is the familial status of the successful applicant?Respondent. Successful applicant.What are the defenses?Investigative QuestionsWho?What?Where?What is the respondent’s version of what happened?Was the house available to be rented to the complainant?Why or why not?Did the respondent refuse to consider the complainant because she had children?Is there a reason for not renting to families with children?Is there a policy of not renting this house or other houses to families with children?Has the respondent ever rented to families with children? In which locations?Respondent who answered the door. Owner, if different.What are the issues relating to damages?Investigative QuestionsWho?What?Where?How has this incident affected the complainant?Has it caused changes in her life or that of her family?Was there something that made this house particularly important to the complainant?Has the complainant sought counseling?All complainants.Any medical or counseling bills or records.Does the complainant think about the situation often?Case Analysis Worksheetright13589000Case Name right12953900Case Number(s)right13271500Investigator’s Name right13588900Date completed JURISDICTIONStanding Evidence:Statute of Limitations Evidence:Covered Respondent and Dwelling Evidence:Subject Matter Jurisdiction Evidence:ALLEGATION 1right12651800LEGAL THEORY: Element of Prima Facie CaseSupports:Refutes: Element of Prima Facie Case:Supports:Refutes:Element of Prima Facie Case: Supports:Refutes:Element of Prima Facie Case:Supports:Refutes:Element of Prima Facie Case and Evidence That Supports or Refutes It:Supports:Refutes: Defense:Supports:Refutes:Defense:Supports:Refutes:Defense:Supports:Refutes:Defense:Supports:Refutes:Missing Information:RECOMMENDATION: Cause No Cause ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download