Nation’s largest landlord accused of Section 8 discrimination in California

Greystar, the nation’s largest landlord, has been accused of refusing to accept Section 8 housing vouchers in California.

In a complaint filed with the California Department of Human Rights, the watchdog group Housing Rights Initiative identified 53 examples of Greystar offices and property managers in California saying they do not accept vouchers. The complaint is the result of a months-long investigation in which undercover agents posed as employers and recorded phone calls with Greystar employees to check compliance.

“During the calls, our investigators ask questions any employer would ask: utilities, hiring, etc.” said Aaron Carr, executive director of the Housing Rights Initiative. “At the end of the interview, they asked the million dollar question: ‘Do you accept rental assistance?’ Again and again the answer was no.”

The investigation included six states: California, Hawaii, Maryland, Michigan, New Jersey and Virginia, and Washington DC Almost half of the violations were found in the Golden State, including 15 in LA and six in Pasadena.

“We’ve never uncovered this many violations at one company,” Carr said, adding that the previous high was about 10 violations, while this investigation uncovered 114.

In one case, an investigator called Jardine Hollywood, an apartment complex on De Longpre Avenue, asking about the availability of two-bedroom apartments and whether Section 8 vouchers could be used to pay the rent. In a recording of the call shared with The Times, a Greystar employee said, “We are not taking any Section 8 vouchers in this building.”

In another, an investigator called the Luxe Pasadena, a property on Walnut Street, asking if there were any studios available. When the conversation turned to Section 8, the employee said, “I was told we don’t do that here.”

In a statement, Greystar said the company “remains committed to fair housing in everything we do. Greystar provides training and expects our team members to comply with all applicable laws.”

Fair Employment and Housing Act Complaints Center, the law of the land which prohibits landlords from discriminating against potential tenants based on factors such as race, gender, ancestry, national origin, etc. In 2020, California added. source of income list, which means landlords cannot evict a tenant if they plan to pay rent using a Section 8 voucher.

The Section 8 program is one of the most powerful state and federal tools to combat homelessness. Launched in 1974, it funds the employment of more than 2.3 million people across the country, including more than 600,000. in California and 78,000 in LA Voucher holders typically pay about 30% of adjusted gross income, and government agencies cover the rest of the rent.

Vouchers are very valuable, too waiting list finding them takes years. Carr said the discrimination is felt more in places like LA, where the ongoing housing crisis raises the difficulty of finding a home.

“We find discrimination everywhere, but the highest levels of discrimination tend to be in tight markets,” Carr said, adding that the city’s lack of housing also contributes to the problem.

Carr said he hopes the appeal leads to three things: Greystar dropping allegations of discrimination; enforcement to ensure continued compliance; and reporting on how many voucher holders apply and are accepted at Greystar locations.

Section 8 discrimination has been an ongoing battle since California made it illegal.

The law has led to several legal battles, including one woman who filed a $100,000 lawsuit last year because of a brief exchange with Zillow, according to the report. LA Times review. In those cases, many defendants told The Times they did not understand the law.

However, Carr said Greystar doesn’t get the same reason.

“They know better,” he said. “This is one of the most powerful, well-resourced companies in the world. They have the best employees and the best lawyers, and they choose not to accept housing vouchers.”

Last year, Greystar fixed the case accusing the real estate giant of conspiring to keep rents illegally high, agreeing to pay $7 million in fines and fines.