Fair Housing Investigative Plan

INVESTIGATIVE PLAN

Investigator: Revon L. Spain – (580) 678-8579 Date: 07/10/2020

HUD Date Filed: 04/15/2020

I. Case Identification Data:

A. Case Name: Metropolitan Fair Housing Council, Inc. v James Wakefield, Jr.

HUD File Number: 06-20-8766-8 FHIP Referral: YES

HUD Inquiry Number: 618253

B. Complainant:

Metropolitan Fair Housing Council, Inc. (MFHC)

312 NE 28th Street, Suite #112

Oklahoma City, OK 73105

Complainant’s Representative:

Shafeeq Islam, Enforcement and Testing Coordinator

Respondent:

James Wakefield, Jr. (“Owner”)

507 Fairlane Drive

Sapulpa, OK 74066

II. Persons To Be Interviewed:

1. Shafeeq Islam

2. James Wakefield, Jr.

III. Allegations/Issues

DOV: 03/20/2020 SIGNED Complaint Form: YES

Basis: Familial Status – Children Under 18

Issue: 804(c) – Discriminatory Statement or Advertisement

HEMS Issues: 320 – Discriminatory Advertising, Statements, and Notices

380 – Discriminatory Terms, Conditions, Privileges, or Services and Facilities

430 – Otherwise Deny or Make Housing Available

On or around March 20, 2020, a staff member of the Metropolitan Fair Housing Council of Oklahoma, Inc. (MFHC), a private enforcement initiative grantee of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), discovered an online ad posted by James Wakefield, Jr. (Respondent) on Craigslist.com. In the “housing for rent” section, the duplex located at 708 S. Division Street, Sapulpa, OK is a 2-bedroom, 1-bath listed at 750 square feet. The ad states “Have quiet senior tenant on one side would like to have same or near for this side. Space is small, perfect for 1 or maybe a couple…”

Complainant alleges the ad placed by the Respondent is a limitation and exclusion of a protected class and discriminates against families with children. While the ad does not specifically state “no children”, Complainant feels this bona fide ad implies the act of excluding families with children by the implicit language used in the ad, specifying a specific preference.

Complainant further feels the discriminatory housing practices by the Respondent caused their staff to divert valuable time and resources away from other projects to investigate the complaint.

IV. Facts To Be Determined To Prove/Disprove Allegation

DIRECT EVIDENCE ELEMENTS OF PROOF

804(c) – Direct Evidence

PRIMA FACIE

Prima Facie 804(c) – Discriminatory Statement or Advertisement

· Complainant is a member of a protected class.

· Respondent made, printed or published a notice, statement or advertisement with respect to the sale or rental of a dwelling.

· The notice, statement or advertisement indicated a preference, limitation, or discrimination based on a protected class.

Elements of proof

· Evidence of diversion of resources

· Evidence of injuries suffered because of alleged discrimination

VI. Records To Be Examined:

· (Damage Worksheet) Evidence of diversion of resources

· (Damage Worksheet) Evidence of injuries suffered because of alleged discrimination

· Time Sheets

Metropolitan Fair Housing Council, Inc. v James Wakefield, Jr. (“Owner”): 06-20-8766- 8

Page 2 of 2