Fair Housing Conciliation Agreements

Information by State  Print version

The Fair Housing Act requires HUD to bring parties in a housing discrimination case together to attempt conciliation in every fair housing complaint. The choice to conciliate the complaint is completely voluntary on the part of both parties. Any conciliation agreement signed by HUD must protect the public's interests. If the parties sign a conciliation agreement, HUD will end its investigation and close the case. However, if either party breaches the agreement, HUD can recommend that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) file suit to enforce the agreement.

 

	December:Brown v. Summerplace
	December:Cuevas v. Ontario Townhouses
	December:Jimenez v. Ontario Townhouses
	December:Kendrick v. Summerplace
	December:Ocha v. Ontario Townhouses
	December:Rivera v. Ontario Townhouses
	December:Ruiz v. Ontario Townhouses
	September:Harrison v. Alameda Development Corp
	July:Suscal v. EMC_ Conciliation_Agreement
	March:Legends v. The Warmington Group
	February:Solomon v. Riverside First Baptist Homes et al
	September: Kendrick & Sativa Johnson v. Desert Rose Apartments,LLC

2007- Conciliation Agreements

	December 2007: National Origin Conciliation Agreement with Ontario Townhouses
	December 2007: Familial Status Conciliation Agreement with Summer Place Apartments
	November 2007: Familial Status Conciliation Agreement with Dalmark Management Group, LLC and Ridge Crest Apartments, L.P., of St. Louis, and Argent Ridge Crest, Inc.
	October 2007: Disability Conciliation Agreement with Infinity Management
	January 2007: National Origin Conciliation Agreement with Nashua Housing Authority in Boston, MA

2006 - Conciliation Agreements

	August 2006: Race/National Origin Conciliation Agreement with SouthStar Funding LLC
	June 2006:Familial Status Conciliation Agreement with Silver Creek Estates