HARASSMENT AND RETALIATION

Every tenant in California has an implied right to the quiet use and possession of their residence as a part of their lease or rental agreement. This means that tenants should be able to use their residence under the terms of their lease without substantial interference from other individuals, including their landlord. In addition to this right, California and federal fair housing laws explicitly prohibit discrimination or harassment based upon protected characteristics. These laws also prohibit retaliation against individuals who have reported discrimination or harassment.

The list of protected characteristics under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) includes: race, color, religion, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, source of income, disability, veteran or military status, and genetic information. Harassment is defined under FEHA in two ways: Hostile Environment Harassment and Quid Pro Quo Harassment.

Harassment may pose risks to health or safety, or may rise to the level of criminal violations. If you have experienced threatening or violent harassment, please contact law enforcement or seek immediate legal assistance.

What is Hostile Environment Harassment?

Hostile environment harassment refers to unwelcome conduct that is severe or pervasive enough to interfere with an individual’s use or enjoyment of their housing or housing services. The determination of whether a hostile environment has been created is based upon whether a reasonable person would feel that the environment is hostile under the circumstances. There is no need to show that physical or psychological harm has resulted from the unwelcome conduct, but it may help to show that a hostile environment exists.

For example, refusing to grant reasonable accommodations for individuals with disabilities may be considered hostile environment harassment under FEHA. Individuals with disabilities are entitled to request necessary accommodations as a fair housing protection so that they can have equal access to use and enjoy their housing. By refusing to allow tenants with disabilities to submit requests, or by refusing to grant reasonable requests that are submitted, a housing provider would create a hostile environment in which tenants with disabilities are discouraged from exercising their housing rights.

For more information on harassment, please see our Fair Housing Tip on harassment in housing. You may also review the California Code of Regulations regarding hostile environment harassment under FEHA (2 CCR § 12120 (a)(2) & (3)).

What is Quid Pro Quo Harassment?

Quid pro quo harassment refers to unwelcome requests or demands from a housing provider that require an individual to engage in specific conduct before they can access housing or housing services they are entitled to. This type of harassment may also include demands that tenants engage specific acts to avoid adverse treatment from their housing provider. This type of harassment often involves demands for sexual favors but may include any unwelcomed demands. Even if a tenant gives in to the demands, the demand may constitute quid pro quo harassment.

For example, refusing to allow an applicant to move into an available unit unless they go out on a date with the property manager would be considered quid pro quo harassment under FEHA. Even if the applicant goes on the date and moves into the unit, the landlord’s demand would still be harassment.

For more information on harassment, please see our Fair Housing Tip on harassment in housing. You may also review the California Code of Regulations regarding quid pro quo harassment under FEHA (2 CCR § 12120 (a)(1)).

What kind of conduct qualifies as harassment?

While harassment is often associated with physical contact, harassment can come in many forms, including written, verbal, or other forms of communication. Any of these forms of harassment can constitute hostile environment harassment, quid pro quo harassment, or both.

Below are some examples of conduct that are likely to constitute harassment:

  • Examples of verbal harassment include the use of derogatory comments, slurs, and other language meant to disparage the target of the statements.

  • Examples of physical harassment include touching, pinching, patting, leaning over, intentional rubbing or brushing against another individual's body, grabbing, fondling, kissing, following a person, cornering a person, blocking a person's way, or otherwise deliberately interfering with or impeding a person's movements.

  • Examples of visual harassment include the making or posting of derogatory posters, cartoons, signs, or other documents.

  • Unwelcome sexual conduct, or other unwelcome conduct based upon a tenant’s sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, or sexual orientation is considered harassment.

  • Threatening, intimidating, or otherwise coercing tenants is considered harassment.

  • Taking adverse actions (for example, refusing to rent or delaying repairs to a unit) because a tenant has refused to engage in sexual favors or quid pro quo demands is harassment.

  • Disclosing a tenant’s medical or other confidential information to other tenants or third parties, including disability diagnoses or medical conditions, may be considered harassment.

The examples listed here have been provided to help illustrate what harassment might look like. This list is not exhaustive. If you are unsure whether you are experiencing harassment, you may consider seeking legal advice from our legal team or another legal expert. You can reach our intake line here: https://www.mhas-la.org/contact-us

What if I am being harassed by another tenant?

While the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) directly prohibits harassment from housing providers and their representatives, it does not explicitly cover harassment from other tenants. Tenant-on-tenant harassment involves a third-party – the harassing tenant – who is outside of the housing provider’s control. However, the housing provider may still have a duty to try to prevent the harassment due to third-party liability.

Third-party liability can cause a landlord to be directly liable for the actions of a third-party in limited circumstances. It is triggered when a landlord knows (or should have known) that a third party has engaged in a discriminatory housing practice and the landlord has the power to correct the discriminatory practice.

In the case of tenant-on-tenant harassment, reporting harassment to the landlord may be sufficient to trigger third-party liability. The landlord may have the power to prevent further harassment by enforcing the terms of the lease, which likely prohibit harassment against other tenants as a lease violation. If the landlord refuses to enforce these terms, they may have third-party liability for the other tenant’s harassment, which can result in the landlord being held liable in court proceedings.

For more information on tenant-on-tenant harassment, please see our Fair Housing Tip on harassment in housing. You may also review the California Code of Regulations regarding third-party liability under FEHA (2 CCR § 12010 (a)(1)(C)).

Retaliation

Taking adverse actions against an individual because they have engaged in a protected activity is retaliation. Protected activities include, but are not limited to:

Making a fair housing complaint under the federal Fair Housing Act, the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the Unruh Act, or any other federal, state or local law protecting fair housing rights or prohibiting discrimination in housing;

  • Testifying, assisting with, or participating in a fair housing proceeding;

  • Reporting violations to law enforcement or other government agencies;

  • Encouraging others to report harassment or other housing violations; and

  • Requesting a reasonable accommodation or reasonable modification.

Even if there are valid reasons for taking adverse action against a tenant, that action may still constitute retaliation. For example, if a tenant is being evicted because they are late on rent, but the housing provider is also using the eviction to punish the tenant for filing a complaint with the Civil Rights Department, the housing provider is still violating fair housing protections by engaging in retaliation against the tenant. The tenant can use the retaliation as a defense during the eviction process.

For more information, you can review the California Code of Regulations guidance on retaliation (2 CCR § 12130).