Source of income discrimination is putting housing providers in major legal trouble. In this episode of Case Files, we dissect a costly settlement involving the California Civil Rights Department (CRD) and a housing provider who allegedly refused to accept a resident’s Section 8 voucher—even after the law changed.
What made the initial refusal a red flag, and how did the owner’s mixed signals lead to a $145,000 penalty? Tune in to understand why staying current on protected categories is non-negotiable and learn the practical takeaways for safeguarding your organization from avoidable liability.
Timestamps/Show Highlights:
- 00:00 – Textbook Discrimination: The case that exemplifies why housing providers must update policies when protected categories change.
- 02:32 – Red Flags in Communication: How mixed signals about rent amount and voucher acceptance became evidence of discriminatory intent.
- 03:04 – FEHA Violation: Analyzing California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) on source of income protections.
- 04:51 – $145K Settlement Breakdown: Details on the monetary and non-monetary consequences, including five years of oversight.
- 06:23 – Key Takeaways: Why ignorance of a law change is not a defense and the importance of consistent communication.
- 08:29 – Compliance is Non-Negotiable: Why your policies and staff training must always match current fair housing law.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed