HPFHC Housing Discrimination Reports for North Dakota
|
|
Click image for PDF
ADVOCACYWe assist people across North Dakota who are experiencing discrimination in their housing transaction or living environment. Our intake specialists work directly with clients to obtain the housing they need or remedy the situation they are already in through landlord mediation or by assisting them through the administrative complaint process. |
EDUCATIONWe provide fair housing education and outreach to housing consumers, housing industry groups, and local governments. This work includes conducting presentations and trainings, producing and distributing fair housing materials, participating in panel discussions, and being a resource for housing discrimination questions. We also partner with agencies and organizations across the state to promote fair housing policies and practices in North Dakota. |
ENFORCEMENTWe investigate situations where housing discrimination may have occurred through our testing program. Discrimination found through our testing program can be used to assist clients in their housing discrimination complaints or used in an organizational complaint with the goal to end discriminatory practices in the state. |
RECENT CASES
HPFHC Case NO 19-1123: HPFHC worked with a woman in Grand Forks who lived in a top floor unit. Her doctor suggested she avoid stairs and move to a ground floor unit. HPFHC helped her write a reasonable accommodations request. Because no ground floor unit was available at the time, she was granted early termination of her lease without penalty.
HPFHC Case NO 19-1052: HPFHC advocated for a man who had a recent amputation and had arranged to have a ramp put into his rental unit. When he arrived home from the hospital, the ramp was not installed, creating significant barriers in his mobility. Through mediation efforts, his reasonable modification was granted and the ramp was installed.
HPFHC Case NO 19-1112: A woman contacted HPFHC for assistance in a reasonable accommodation request to move to a 2 bedroom unit due to the need for a live-in caregiver after her multiple surgeries. She was able to get the necessary documentation, and her request was granted.
HPFHC Case NO 19-1119: HPFHC was contacted by a tenant who had an emotional support animal. Her property management company had granted her a reasonable accommodation for the animal. A new property manager was hired and insisted that her doctor fill out an emotional support animal form. Her doctor agreed to writing a letter but, per company policy, would not fill out the form. The new property manager was also making her pay a pet fee. HPFHC assisted in resolving the matter with her property manager, who granted her the reasonable accommodation for the assistance animal and did not charge her pet fees.
HPFHC Case NO 18-902: HPFHC worked with a client who has mobility impairments. He was no longer able to lift his legs to get into his bathtub, and his 20 year old carpet and flooring transitions caused him to trip. His property manager denied his reasonable modification requests for laminate flooring and a walk-in or roll-in shower, citing financial hardships at that property. HPFHC assisted the client in filing a case with the NDDOLHR, but HUD also became involved because the company receives federal funding that is meant to off-set the costs of modifications. The case was conciliated with no admission of guilt. The company provided the needed flooring and a roll-in, ADA complaint shower at their cost.
HPFHC Case NO 19-1040: HPFHC was contacted by tenants who were denied a reasonable accommodation for their emotional support animal. Without the consent of the tenants, the company sent their doctor additional paperwork. On that paperwork, the doctor did not indicate that the individual is disabled. However, the client has a diagnosis that is directly listed in the Joint Statement on Accommodations. Because of the timelines and pressure put on the clients to obtain additional documentation or vacate, they chose to euthanize the animal rather than face homelessness. HPFHC helped the clients file a complaint with the NDDOLHR. Their complaint was conciliated with no admission of guilt and with the clients receiving approval to obtain a new emotional support animal without any further paperwork from their doctor.
HPFHC Case NO 18-927: HPFHC helped to conciliate a fair housing complaint against a condo association. The client was denied an emotional support animal despite providing documentation of need. The condo association treated him poorly in the process and made inappropriate statements about his disability in public meetings. The case was conciliated at the NDDOLHR with no admission of guilt. The client received approval for the emotional support animal and a monetary settlement. As part of the conciliation, the management of the condo is required to attend fair housing training.
HPFHC Case NO 19-1050: HPFHC worked with a client who was told by multiple staff members of a management company that it was their policy that they did not accept housing assistance. HPFHC testing evidence confirmed this statement. The client remained homeless due to his inability to secure housing. The case was conciliated at the NDDOLHR with no admission of guilt. The client received a monetary settlement equivalent to the amount he would have received in his voucher for the four months he was homeless. HPFHC advocacy also helped reinstate his housing voucher, which had expired during this process.
HPFHC Case NO 19-1052: HPFHC advocated for a man who had a recent amputation and had arranged to have a ramp put into his rental unit. When he arrived home from the hospital, the ramp was not installed, creating significant barriers in his mobility. Through mediation efforts, his reasonable modification was granted and the ramp was installed.
HPFHC Case NO 19-1112: A woman contacted HPFHC for assistance in a reasonable accommodation request to move to a 2 bedroom unit due to the need for a live-in caregiver after her multiple surgeries. She was able to get the necessary documentation, and her request was granted.
HPFHC Case NO 19-1119: HPFHC was contacted by a tenant who had an emotional support animal. Her property management company had granted her a reasonable accommodation for the animal. A new property manager was hired and insisted that her doctor fill out an emotional support animal form. Her doctor agreed to writing a letter but, per company policy, would not fill out the form. The new property manager was also making her pay a pet fee. HPFHC assisted in resolving the matter with her property manager, who granted her the reasonable accommodation for the assistance animal and did not charge her pet fees.
HPFHC Case NO 18-902: HPFHC worked with a client who has mobility impairments. He was no longer able to lift his legs to get into his bathtub, and his 20 year old carpet and flooring transitions caused him to trip. His property manager denied his reasonable modification requests for laminate flooring and a walk-in or roll-in shower, citing financial hardships at that property. HPFHC assisted the client in filing a case with the NDDOLHR, but HUD also became involved because the company receives federal funding that is meant to off-set the costs of modifications. The case was conciliated with no admission of guilt. The company provided the needed flooring and a roll-in, ADA complaint shower at their cost.
HPFHC Case NO 19-1040: HPFHC was contacted by tenants who were denied a reasonable accommodation for their emotional support animal. Without the consent of the tenants, the company sent their doctor additional paperwork. On that paperwork, the doctor did not indicate that the individual is disabled. However, the client has a diagnosis that is directly listed in the Joint Statement on Accommodations. Because of the timelines and pressure put on the clients to obtain additional documentation or vacate, they chose to euthanize the animal rather than face homelessness. HPFHC helped the clients file a complaint with the NDDOLHR. Their complaint was conciliated with no admission of guilt and with the clients receiving approval to obtain a new emotional support animal without any further paperwork from their doctor.
HPFHC Case NO 18-927: HPFHC helped to conciliate a fair housing complaint against a condo association. The client was denied an emotional support animal despite providing documentation of need. The condo association treated him poorly in the process and made inappropriate statements about his disability in public meetings. The case was conciliated at the NDDOLHR with no admission of guilt. The client received approval for the emotional support animal and a monetary settlement. As part of the conciliation, the management of the condo is required to attend fair housing training.
HPFHC Case NO 19-1050: HPFHC worked with a client who was told by multiple staff members of a management company that it was their policy that they did not accept housing assistance. HPFHC testing evidence confirmed this statement. The client remained homeless due to his inability to secure housing. The case was conciliated at the NDDOLHR with no admission of guilt. The client received a monetary settlement equivalent to the amount he would have received in his voucher for the four months he was homeless. HPFHC advocacy also helped reinstate his housing voucher, which had expired during this process.