preview

Community Case Study

Decent Essays

Respondents Carmen Marine Cooperative and Cagan Management Group, Inc. (Respondents) deny that they retaliated against Complainant based on a previous Complaint filed at the Commission or failed to accommodate based on her son’s disability. Respondents state that Complainant and her husband applied for membership in the Cooperative in April of 1999, for a two-bedroom apartment for themselves and their son. They were approved and on May 13, 1999, Complainant and her husband purchased their membership. Soon after, Complainant, her husband, and minor son Anthony moved into unit 1409.

As to the noise, Respondents assert throughout Complainant’s membership, they have received numerous noise complaints from other residents about the noise …show more content…

Department of Housing and Urban Development regulations and maintains its waitlists according to the policy delineated in the Cooperative's membership selection plan. Respondents state that they determine priority based on the following the HUD regulations and [Cooperative] documents. Respondents state that the Cooperative should always accommodate qualifying family size at the time application [is] filed, and must meet family needs according to agreement regulations. Family size should always have priority over a single applicant. In case of the same family size applicants, seniority will have priority.
Respondents state that Complainant filed an application for a three-bedroom unit in 2006 and was placed on the waitlist. Respondents explain that the Building has a limited number of three-bedroom units so it is not unusual that applicants would remain on the waitlist for an extended period. Respondents continually audit the waitlist to ensure that all applicants are properly qualified for and still desire a three-bedroom unit. Respondents state that on November 14, 2014, in response to an audit, Complainant confirmed that she still desired a three-bedroom unit and had a family size of four people. Respondents state that there was no indication that the request for a larger unit was as a reasonable accommodation for Complainant’s son and husband's disability

Get Access