24 CFR 100.143 - Appropriate corrective action. | Title 24 - Housing and Urban Development | Code of Federal Regulations

§ 100.143

Appropriate corrective action.

(a) The report or results of a self-test are privileged as provided in this subpart if the lender has taken or is taking appropriate corrective action to address likely violations identified by the self-test. Appropriate corrective action is required when a self-test shows it is more likely than not that a violation occurred even though no violation was adjudicated formally.

(b) A lender must take action reasonably likely to remedy the cause and effect of the likely violation and must:

(1) Identify the policies or practices that are the likely cause of the violation, such as inadequate or improper lending policies, failure to implement established policies, employee conduct, or other causes; and

(2) Assess the extent and scope of any likely violation, by determining which areas of operation are likely to be affected by those policies and practices, such as stages of the loan application process, types of loans, or the particular branch where the likely violation has occurred. Generally, the scope of the self-test governs the scope of the appropriate corrective action.

(c) Appropriate corrective action may include both prospective and remedial relief, except that to establish a privilege under this subpart:

(1) A lender is not required to provide remedial relief to a tester in a self-test;

(2) A lender is only required to provide remedial relief to an applicant identified by the self-test as one whose rights were more likely than not violated;

(3) A lender is not required to provide remedial relief to a particular applicant if the statute of limitations applicable to the violation expired before the lender obtained the results of the self-test or the applicant is otherwise ineligible for such relief.

(d) Depending on the facts involved, appropriate corrective action may include, but is not limited to, one or more of the following:

(1) If the self-test identifies individuals whose applications were inappropriately processed, offering to extend credit if the applications were improperly denied; compensating such persons for any damages, both out-of-pocket and compensatory;

(2) Correcting any institutional policies or procedures that may have contributed to the likely violation, and adopting new policies as appropriate;

(3) Identifying, and then training and/or disciplining the employees involved;

(4) Developing outreach programs, marketing strategies, or loan products to serve more effectively the segments of the lender's market that may have been affected by the likely violation; and

(5) Improving audit and oversight systems to avoid a recurrence of the likely violations.

(e) Determination of appropriate corrective action is fact-based. Not every corrective measure listed in paragraph (d) of this section need be taken for each likely violation.

(f) Taking appropriate corrective action is not an admission by a lender that a violation occurred.

[62 FR 66432, Dec. 18, 1997]

Title 24 published on 2012-04-01

The following are only the Rules published in the Federal Register after the published date of Title 24.

For a complete list of all Rules, Proposed Rules, and Notices view the Rulemaking tab.

2013-02-15; vol. 78 # 32 - Friday, February 15, 2013

78 FR 11460 - Implementation of the Fair Housing Act's Discriminatory Effects Standard

GPO FDSys XML | Text

Additional Documents

type	regulations.gov
FR Doc.	2013-03375
RIN	2529-AA96
Docket No.	FR-5508-F-02

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, HUD, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity

Final rule.

Effective Date: March 18, 2013.

24 CFR Part 100

Summary

Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended (Fair Housing Act or Act), prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, or financing of dwellings and in other housing-related activities on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status, or national origin. 1 HUD, which is statutorily charged with the authority and responsibility for interpreting and enforcing the Fair Housing Act and with the power to make rules implementing the Act, has long interpreted the Act to prohibit practices with an unjustified discriminatory effect, regardless of whether there was an intent to discriminate. The eleven federal courts of appeals that have ruled on this issue agree with this interpretation. While HUD and every federal appellate court to have ruled on the issue have determined that liability under the Act may be established through proof of discriminatory effects, the statute itself does not specify a standard for proving a discriminatory effects violation. As a result, although HUD and courts are in agreement that practices with discriminatory effects may violate the Fair Housing Act, there has been some minor variation in the application of the discriminatory effects standard. 1 This preamble uses the term “disability” to refer to what the Act and its implementing regulations term a “handicap.” Both terms have the same legal meaning. See Bragdon v. Abbott, 524 U.S. 624, 631 (1998). Through this final rule, HUD formalizes its long-held recognition of discriminatory effects liability under the Act and, for purposes of providing consistency nationwide, formalizes a burden-shifting test for determining whether a given practice has an unjustified discriminatory effect, leading to liability under the Act. This final rule also adds to, and revises, illustrations of discriminatory housing practices found in HUD's Fair Housing Act regulations. This final rule follows a November 16, 2011, proposed rule and takes into consideration comments received on that proposed rule.

This is a list of United States Code sections, Statutes at Large, Public Laws, and Presidential Documents, which provide rulemaking authority for this CFR Part.

This list is taken from the Parallel Table of Authorities and Rules provided by GPO [Government Printing Office].

It is not guaranteed to be accurate or up-to-date, though we do refresh the database weekly. More limitations on accuracy are described at the GPO site.

United States Code

U.S.C. : Title 42 - THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE

42 USC § 2000d–1 - Federal authority and financial assistance to programs or activities by way of grant, loan, or contract other than contract of insurance or guaranty; rules...compliance with requirements; reports to Congressional committees; effective d

§ 3600

42 USC § 3521 to 3527 - Repealed.

§ 4821 - Development of program; consultation; nature of program; safe level of lead; report to Congress

§ 4822 - Requirements for housing receiving Federal assistance

§ 4831 - Use of lead-based paint

§ 4841 - Definitions

§ 4842 - Consultation by Secretary with other departments and agencies

§ 4843 - Authorization of appropriations

§ 4844, 4845 - Repealed.

§ 4846 - State laws superseded, and null and void

Presidential Documents

Executive Order ... 11063

Title 24 published on 2012-04-01

The following are ALL rules, proposed rules, and notices (chronologically) published in the Federal Register relating to 24 CFR 100 after this date.

2013-02-15; vol. 78 # 32 - Friday, February 15, 2013

78 FR 11460 - Implementation of the Fair Housing Act's Discriminatory Effects Standard

GPO FDSys XML | Text

Additional Documents

type	regulations.gov
FR Doc.	2013-03375
RIN	2529-AA96
Docket No.	FR-5508-F-02

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, HUD, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity

Final rule.

Effective Date: March 18, 2013.

24 CFR Part 100

Summary

Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended (Fair Housing Act or Act), prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, or financing of dwellings and in other housing-related activities on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status, or national origin. 1 HUD, which is statutorily charged with the authority and responsibility for interpreting and enforcing the Fair Housing Act and with the power to make rules implementing the Act, has long interpreted the Act to prohibit practices with an unjustified discriminatory effect, regardless of whether there was an intent to discriminate. The eleven federal courts of appeals that have ruled on this issue agree with this interpretation. While HUD and every federal appellate court to have ruled on the issue have determined that liability under the Act may be established through proof of discriminatory effects, the statute itself does not specify a standard for proving a discriminatory effects violation. As a result, although HUD and courts are in agreement that practices with discriminatory effects may violate the Fair Housing Act, there has been some minor variation in the application of the discriminatory effects standard. 1 This preamble uses the term “disability” to refer to what the Act and its implementing regulations term a “handicap.” Both terms have the same legal meaning. See Bragdon v. Abbott, 524 U.S. 624, 631 (1998). Through this final rule, HUD formalizes its long-held recognition of discriminatory effects liability under the Act and, for purposes of providing consistency nationwide, formalizes a burden-shifting test for determining whether a given practice has an unjustified discriminatory effect, leading to liability under the Act. This final rule also adds to, and revises, illustrations of discriminatory housing practices found in HUD's Fair Housing Act regulations. This final rule follows a November 16, 2011, proposed rule and takes into consideration comments received on that proposed rule.

24 CFR 100.143 - Appropriate corrective action.

CFR Toolbox

Law about... Articles from Wex

Find a Lawyer

Get Involved