The guidance, which went into effect on March 7, 2007, requires federally funded apartment owners to translate a broad array of documents in multiple languages. It also provides for verbal translations for people who do not read in their native language.
HUD asked the US District Court for the District of Columbia to dismiss the case on the grounds of ripeness and standing. The Court agreed. "HUD's intent in promulgating this guidance may indeed have been regulatory–it may have been done to make the requirement more palpable and to encourage greater 'voluntary compliance'," the Court said in its ruling. "However, until an actual plaintiff with standing comes forth regarding damages incurred in trying to comply or failing to comply with the HUD LEP "policy guidance," the court has said there is no basis for the NMHC/NAA suit.
The Court also clarified that the guidance is a clarification of an existing obligation. The guidance was issued in response to a 2000 Executive Order noting the need for federal agencies to comply with Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
The NMHC/NAA had argued that HUD should bear costs and responsibility of translating basic program documents. In addition, the industry associations argued that owners should not be responsible for assuring the competency of translators and interpreters.
Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.
Once you are an ALM Digital Member, you’ll receive:
- Breaking commercial real estate news and analysis, on-site and via our newsletters and custom alerts
- Educational webcasts, white papers, and ebooks from industry thought leaders
- Critical coverage of the property casualty insurance and financial advisory markets on our other ALM sites, PropertyCasualty360 and ThinkAdvisor
Already have an account? Sign In Now
*May exclude premium content© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.