tranquility
Senior Member
Just so everyone's clear on the facts (not the law) here's a quick summary. They have been a bit slippery, I believe in part because the OP has received advice from an assistance advocate.
Since I'm only going to list the OP's claims and not the reasonable assumptions from them, I welcome changes and additions.
1. OP, while living with her daughter in a two bedroom apartment on government assistance, broke her leg.
2. The leg did not heal properly and the OP went to therapy.
3. At or about the same time her daughter moved out of the apartment, the therapy benefits from the insurance also ended.
4. The management wanted the OP to move to a one bedroom apartment and/or wanted to evict her for no reason even though there were lots of empty two bedroom apartments available and un-rented.
5. Because of the end of her therapy-related insurance benefits, the reasonable accommodation requested by the OP for her disability is to remain in the two bedroom apartment so she could use the second bedroom to store an exercise machine she will use to work out. It is a similar machine to what she used in therapy.
6. As an additional claim to the apartment, she requested to bring in a roommate she knew so government guidelines would be satisfied for the rental assistance to a two bedroom apartment. The management response was they want to evict her for other reasons.
7. It is a civil rights violation for the management to not allow her to stay in the apartment because of one of the conflicting arguments of the need of the extra bedroom as a reasonable accommodation to her disability or as the ability to stay in the apartment with the taking in of a qualified roommate for the extra bedroom and satisfying government requirements for payment on a two bedroom apartment.
Right? What do we need to add or subtract?
Since I'm only going to list the OP's claims and not the reasonable assumptions from them, I welcome changes and additions.
1. OP, while living with her daughter in a two bedroom apartment on government assistance, broke her leg.
2. The leg did not heal properly and the OP went to therapy.
3. At or about the same time her daughter moved out of the apartment, the therapy benefits from the insurance also ended.
4. The management wanted the OP to move to a one bedroom apartment and/or wanted to evict her for no reason even though there were lots of empty two bedroom apartments available and un-rented.
5. Because of the end of her therapy-related insurance benefits, the reasonable accommodation requested by the OP for her disability is to remain in the two bedroom apartment so she could use the second bedroom to store an exercise machine she will use to work out. It is a similar machine to what she used in therapy.
6. As an additional claim to the apartment, she requested to bring in a roommate she knew so government guidelines would be satisfied for the rental assistance to a two bedroom apartment. The management response was they want to evict her for other reasons.
7. It is a civil rights violation for the management to not allow her to stay in the apartment because of one of the conflicting arguments of the need of the extra bedroom as a reasonable accommodation to her disability or as the ability to stay in the apartment with the taking in of a qualified roommate for the extra bedroom and satisfying government requirements for payment on a two bedroom apartment.
Right? What do we need to add or subtract?