On March 18, 2020, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) authorized the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) to implement a 60-day moratorium on foreclosures and evictions for single family homeowners with FHA-backed mortgages. Similarly, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) also directed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to suspend foreclosures and evictions for single family mortgages for at least 60 days. These moratoriums were intended to curb the effects of the coronavirus (COVID-19) on homeowners and in connection with the proclamation of the COVID-19 outbreak as a national emergency.

The 60-day moratorium for FHA, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac mortgages took effect on March 18, 2020. For FHA mortgages, the moratorium applies to all FHA Title II Single Family forward and Home Equity Conversion Mortgage (reverse) mortgage programs and covers the initiation of foreclosures up to completion of foreclosures in process. Evictions from properties secured by FHA, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac single family mortgages are also on hold for 60 days.

In addition to HUD and FHFA moratoriums, all evictions and foreclosures are indefinitely suspended in the counties of Nassau County and Suffolk County.

HUD issued the revised FHA Single Family Housing Policy Handbook on March 27, 2019. Updates are set forth on pages 2-17.

This Handbook details the requirements to do business with the Federal Housing Administration from origination to servicing and loss mitigation together with claims and enforcement.

While the document is primarily for mortgage lenders, real estate brokers who do business with HUD should review pages 102 and 964, as the Handbook details certification, recertification and enforcement.

The Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice announced a new initiative that brings local law enforcement, legal service providers, and DOJ officials together in order to encourage victims to report instances of sexual harassment, increase awareness, assist in obtaining necessary resources for relief, and ultimately, continue the vigorous enforcement of the Fair Housing Act’s ban on sexual harassment.

This initiative stemmed from four cases in 2017, wherein DOJ recovered over $1 million in damages for claims of sexual harassment and violations of the Fair Housing Act. Two of those cases are U.S. v. Kansas City, Kansas Housing Authority and U.S. v. Tjoelker.

On September 29, 2017, DOJ executed a settlement agreement resolving a case against Kansas City Kansas Housing Authority (KCKHA). The Complaint alleged KCKHA employees engaged in a pattern or practice of sexually harassing female housing applicants and residents. One defendant even admitted in sworn deposition testimony that he exposed himself to multiple females. In the agreement, the fourteen aggrieved females were awarded $360,000 in monetary damages. In addition, KCKHA was ordered to implement a written policy against sexual harassment, including a formal complaint procedure to be approved by DOJ and to pay a $5,000 civil penalty to the United States.

On October 3, 2017, DOJ also executed a settlement agreement against Frank Tjoelker, owner and/or manager of rental dwellings in Grand Rapids, Michigan. The Complaint also alleged that he engaged in a pattern or practice of sexually harassing actual and prospective female tenants. Allegations include unwelcome sexual comments and advances, unwanted groping or touching, offers for housing benefits in exchange for sexual favors, and taking or threats of taking adverse housing actions for those who object to such harassment or refuse to grant sexual favors. Under the settlement agreement, Tjoelker was ordered to pay $140,000 to compensate the ten victims and a $10,000 civil penalty to the United States.

Although DOJ only executed settlement agreements to obtain resolutions on the above-mentioned cases and such agreements are binding only among the parties involved, it is likely that DOJ will apply similar penalties in future settlement agreements or decisions on violations of the Fair Housing Act’s sexual harassment ban. See U.S. v. Bailey, U.S. v. Barnason, and U.S. v. Bathrick.

In this regard, as evidence of good faith compliance with the Fair Housing Act, real estate professionals are encouraged to establish written policies against sexual harassment, to train their employees and agents to identify and refrain from engaging in acts of sexual harassment, and to establish procedures for handling complaints.