Housing and Civil Enforcement Cases
United States v. White River Regional Housing Authority and Duane Johnson (E.D. Ark.)
On October 14, 2021, the court entered a consent order in in United States v. White River Regional Housing Authority and Duane Johnson (E.D. Ark.). The complaint, which was filed on September 30, 2021, alleged that the White River Regional Housing Authority (WRRHA) and its former employee, Duane Johnson, violated the Fair Housing Act (FHA) by discriminating on the basis of sex when Defendant Johnson subjected the complainant to severe or pervasive sexual harassment. The consent order requires WRRHA to pay $70,000 to the complainant, adopt and maintain an anti-discrimination policy with a complaint procedure, and provide training to its employees on the Fair Housing Act. The settlement also permanently bars Johnson from directly or indirectly participating in the management of any residential rental property and from directly or indirectly participating in any public housing program, including being a manager or employee for any public housing program or having any ownership interest in any entity that provides housing that is the subject of federally funded assistance payments or tenant-based assistance. The case was referred to the Division after the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) received a complaint, conducted an investigation, and issued a charge of discrimination.
United States v. American Honda Finance Corporation (C.D. Cal.)
On October 6, 2021, the court entered a consent order in United States v. American Honda Finance Corporation (C.D. Cal.). The complaint, which was filed along with the proposed consent order on September 29, 2021, alleged that American Honda Finance Corporation violated the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA) by failing to refund pre-paid lease amounts - in the form of capitalized cost reduction (“CCR”) from vehicle trade-in value – that were paid in advance by servicemembers who lawfully terminated their motor vehicle leases upon receipt of qualifying military orders. The consent order requires Honda to pay $1,585,803.89 to 714 servicemembers, pay a $64,715 civil penalty to the United States, make changes to its lease termination and SCRA interest rate benefit policies, and provide employee training.
United States v. Mills Construction Company, Inc., et al. (E.D.N.C.)
On October 26, 2021, the court entered a consent order in United States v. Mills Construction Company, Inc., et al. (E.D.N.C.). The complaint, filed on September 28, 2021, alleged that Mills Construction Company, Inc. and six related owners and developers discriminated against persons with disabilities by failing to design and construct North Carolina multifamily apartment complexes that are accessible to persons with disabilities. Specifically, the United States’ complaint allege that Defendants violated the Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act by designing and/or constructing 38 properties funded with Low Income Housing Tax Credits without the required accessibility features. The consent order requires Defendants to make extensive retrofits to remove accessibility barriers at the apartment complexes, pay $225,000 into a settlement fund to compensate individuals harmed by the inaccessible housing, and pay $50,000 to the United States.
United States v. New Jersey Higher Ed. (D. N.J.)
On October 21, 2021, the court entered a consent decree in United States v. New Jersey Higher Ed. (D. N.J.). The complaint, which was filed on September 20, 2021, alleges that the New Jersey Higher Education Student Assistance Authority violated the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (“SCRA”) when it obtained improper student loan default judgments against two active duty servicemembers by filing affidavits with the court stating that the servicemembers were not in military service when they were, in fact, in military service. The consent decree requires the state agency to pay $15,000 in damages to the each of the two servicemembers and a $20,000 civil penalty (total of $50,000), in addition to adopting various policy changes to prevent future SCRA violations.
United States v. Brisas del Mar Ltd Partnership, et al. (S.D. Fla.)
On September 7, 2021, the court entered a consent order in United States v. Brisas del Mar Ltd Partnership, et al. (S.D. Fla.). The Fair Housing Act complaint, which was filed on August 31, 2021, alleges that the owners and managers of a rental property in Miami, Florida discriminated on the basis of national origin when they rejected a man of Iranian descent for a unit because he was not Hispanic. The consent order requires the defendants to pay $21,500 in damages to the HUD complainant, attend fair housing training, and submit to other standard injunctive relief. The case was referred to the Division after the Department of Housing and Urban Development received a complaint, conducted an investigation, and issued a charge of discrimination.
United States v. Cadence Bank, N.A. (N.D. Ga.)
On August 31, 2021, the court approved the entry of a consent order resolving all claims in United States v. Cadence Bank, N.A. (N.D. Ga.). On August 30, 2021, the United States filed the complaint and proposed consent order. The complaint alleged that, from 2013 to 2017, Cadence engaged in unlawful redlining in the Houston area by avoiding providing credit services to predominantly Black and Hispanic neighborhoods because of the race, color, and national origin of the people living in those neighborhoods. The department also alleged that Cadence’s branches were concentrated in majority-white neighborhoods, that the bank’s loan officers did not serve the credit needs of majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods, and that the bank’s outreach and marketing avoided those neighborhoods. Under the consent order, the Bank will invest $4.17 million in a loan subsidy fund for residents of predominantly Black and Hispanic neighborhoods in the Houston area, $750,000 for development of community partnerships to provide services that increase access to residential mortgage credit in those neighborhoods, and at least $625,000 for advertising, outreach, consumer financial education, and credit repair initiatives. Cadence will also dedicate at least four mortgage loan officers to majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods in Houston and open a new branch in one of those neighborhoods.
Complaint - United States v. Ruredy808, LLC, et al. (N.D. Miss.)
On July 10, 2023, the court entered a consent order in United States v. Ruredy808, LLC, et al (N.D. Miss). The complaint, which was filed on August 30, 2021, alleges that the owners of an apartment complex in Oxford, Mississippi violated the Fair Housing Act by refusing to allow a tenant with disabilities to remain in his unit with his service dog and by taking steps to evict him and his roommates. The consent order contains injunctive relief and refers to a separate agreement between the HUD complainant and the defendants in a consolidated case. The case was referred to the Division after the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) received a complaint, conducted an investigation, and issued a charge of discrimination.
United States v. Dominion, LLC (N.D. Ala.)
On September 21, 2021, the court entered an amended consent order in United States v. Dominion Management, LLC, et al. (N.D. Ala.). The complaint alleges that Dominion Management and related owners failed to design and construct multifamily senior living properties with the required accessibility features. Under the consent order, defendants must create a settlement fund of $400,000, pay a civil penalty of $50,000 to the U.S. Treasury, retrofit eight multifamily senior living properties including more than 1,500 units, undergo training, and ensure any new construction meets the requirements of the FHA and ADA.
United States v. Mohamed Bacchus and Alan Zander (E.D. Pa.)
On February 1, 2022, the Court entered a consent order resolving United States v. Mohamed Bacchus and Alan Zander (E.D. Pa.), a Fair Housing Act (FHA) election complaint filed by the United States on August 18, 2021. The complaint alleges that defendants discriminated on the basis of familial status and disability related to their refusal to allow the complainant, who was recovering from addiction to alcohol, to move his pregnant girlfriend and her child into his unit. Under the consent order the defendants will pay a total of $75,000 to the complainant and his child and take actions directed towards preventing future unlawful discrimination, including undergoing training and implementing nondiscrimination policies on the FHA in connection with the rental and management of residential properties. The case was referred to the Division after the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) received a complaint, conducted an investigation, and issued a charge of discrimination.
United States v. Peter Mccarthy and Steps to Solutions, Inc. (D. Mass.)
On May 24, 2024, the Court entered judgment on a May 17, 2024, jury verdict in United States v. Peter McCarthy and Steps to Solutions, Inc. (D. Mass.). The United States’ complaint, filed on August 11, 2021, alleged that Peter McCarthy, who operates a group of residential sober homes in or near Boston, Massachusetts through his company, Steps to Solutions, Inc., engaged in a pattern or practice of sexually harassment of residents of his sober homes in violation of the Fair Housing Act. After a five-day jury trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the United States, finding that from at least 2009 through 2021, the Defendant engaged in a pattern or practice of sexual harassment and denied rights protected by the Fair Housing Act to a group of persons. The jury awarded compensatory and punitive damages totaling $3,805,000 to seven aggrieved persons.
United States v. Perry Homes, Inc. (W.D. Pa.)
On January 3, 2023, the court entered a consent order in United States v. Perry Homes, Inc. (W.D. Pa.). The amended complaint, which was filed on October 8, 2021, alleged that defendants Perry Homes Inc., Robert Whittington and Allyson Whittington discriminated on the basis of disability in violation of the Fair Housing Act by implementing a policy of excluding emotional support animals from rental properties they owned or operated in Cranberry, Zelienople, and Harmony, Pennsylvania. The original complaint was filed on July 23, 2021. The case is based on a HUD complaint that was filed by Southwestern Pennsylvania Legal Services (“SWPLS”), a non-profit legal aid organization whose mission includes combating housing discrimination, after the organization conducted fair housing testing. The consent order requires the defendants to pay SWPLS $15,000 in damages, to comply with the Fair Housing Act, adopt a reasonable accommodation policy, publicize the policy in applications, leases, tenant renewals, and in its rental office, provide training for its employees, and comply with other equitable terms. The case was referred to the Division after the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) received the complaint, conducted an investigation, and issued a charge of discrimination.
United States v. Black and White Garage, Inc. d/b/a Black and White Towing, Inc. (C.D. Cal.)
On August 9, 2021, the court entered a consent order in United States v. Black and White Garage, Inc. dba Black and White Towing (C.D. Cal.). The complaint, which was filed on July 20, 2021, alleges that a towing company violated the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA) by illegally auctioning off a vehicle belonging to an active duty U.S. Marine. Under the consent decree, Black and White must adopt new policies and implement new training requirements, pay $22,000 in compensation to the Marine, and pay a $5,000 civil penalty to the U.S. Treasury.