| |
 |
|
Washington State FAIR HOUSING UPDATE |
|
Housing provider must keep disabled residents connected By the Seattle Office for Civil Rights A prominent Seattle housing provider has decided not to appeal a recent ruling by King County Superior Court in a pair of disability-related fair housing cases, and has agreed to judgments imposed by the Seattle Hearing Examiner. The two cases go back a long time. The Seattle Office for Civil Rights (SOCR) originally issued findings of reasonable cause in 2005. The Hearing Examiner affirmed SOCR's findings in November 2006. The provider then appealed the Hearing Examiner's ruling to King County Superior Court. The cases involved two disabled residents living in an apartment community in South Seattle. One resident, who lived on the third floor, required in-home dialysis treatments three times a week, took food deliveries once a week and received drop-in assistance from his family and friends. The other resident had a similar situation. Management was aware of both tenants' conditions and disability-related needs. In 2003, the housing provider became very concerned about security at the apartment community, including criminal activity involving both residents and non-residents. Management took a number of actions to improve security. In addition to increasing the police and managerial presences at the community and evicting some problem-tenants, the provider deactivated the front-door buzzer system in August 2004. With the buzzer no longer in service, residents were required to physically go down to the front door to let their guests inside. It was an inconvenience to some tenants, but a serious hardship for the two disabled residents who filed discrimination charges – they had to work out their own solutions, like throwing a key out the window to let in a dialysis assistant. In one instance, ambulance workers were delayed in responding to an emergency because they couldn't get inside the building. A few weeks after the buzzer was turned off, one of the residents requested that it be reactivated for his unit. Throughout the fall of 2004, the issue remained unresolved, even though management knew of the accommodation request. The housing provider finally did reactivate the buzzer in February 2005. SOCR's original investigation showed clear evidence of the provider's failure to provide a reasonable accommodation. In its appeal to the Hearing Examiner, the provider tried to argue that it was unaware of the extent of the resident's disability. The Hearing Examiner found that management had completely ignored the man's original request for an accommodation even though it knew of his disability, and that the provider made no effort to learn more about the tenant's situation. The Hearing Examiner also found that management made no attempt to determine if the buzzer could be reactivated for an individual resident. The housing provider has agreed to pay $5,000 to one of the charging parties and $7,000 to the other, whom the Hearing Examiner found to have experienced a more severe impact from the provider's actions. "We are very pleased that these cases have finally been resolved," said Julie Nelson, Acting Director of SOCR. "It is very hard to prove illegal discrimination under the parameters established by the courts, so when we do issue a finding of cause we strongly advise our respondents to agree to a fair settlement. Court appeals serve only to prolong the injustice for charging parties, and to drive up the eventual judgment costs for housing providers." Have a question about fair housing in Seattle? Call the Seattle Office for Civil Rights at 206-684-4500 (TTY 206-684-4503), or find SOCR on the Web at www.seattle.gov/civilrights. OCR Fair Housing Home Page | Comments Updated: Feb. 20, 2008 King County | DES | OCR | News | Services | Search Links to external sites do not constitute
endorsements by King County. |