DHS Secretary Ben Carson, NYC HPD Facing Class Action Over Double, Triple Rent Increases

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

Eleven current/former tenants of Linden Plaza, a 1,527-unit state and federally subsidized housing project in New York City, have filed a proposed class action lawsuit against Ben Carson, Secretary of the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and three other entities over a decade-long pattern of “preservation transactions” that the complaint describes as being “perversely and ironically” responsible for substantial rent increases. In addition to Secretary Carson, the 28-page lawsuit alleges Linden Plaza Preservation L.P.; Linden Plaza Associates, L.P. (owner defendants); and the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) have caused some Linden Plaza residents to go hungry, forego child care, or even become homeless after their rents doubled or tripled due to measures reportedly given the green light by the defendants.

This lawsuit is simply the latest in a long legal battle against the defendant’s alleged actions, the plaintiffs say, noting that they have “intrepidly commenced eight pro se lawsuits—six in federal court and two in state court” because, in truth, no time exists in which Linden Plaza residents can wait to find “affordable lawyers willing to take this matter on.” And, the plaintiffs concede, the lawsuits have been beneficial to an extent, as they’ve prompted HUD and HPD to produce documents containing information not previously disclosed to the plaintiffs.

“Simply put, the documents disclosed by United States attorneys in 2014 and then by HPD in March 2016, substantiate what [the plaintiffs] and many had intuited when, somehow, a ‘preservation transaction’ left them infinitely worse off than they would be in a market development: that the entire process for increasing tenants’ rent was flawed because it was based on impermissible data.”

 From here, the lawsuit explains rents at Linden Plaza skyrocketed because the owner defendants’ applications to HUD for rental increases were based on $50 million in additional financing the companies never received, effectively leaving renters holding the bag.