24 C.F.R. § 582.320

Termination of assistance to participants

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Termination of assistance. The recipient may terminate assistance to a participant who violates program requirements or conditions of occupancy. Recipients must exercise judgment and examine all extenuating circumstances in determining when violations are serious enough to warrant termination, so that a participant's assistance is terminated only in the most severe cases. Recipients are not prohibited from resuming assistance to a participant whose assistance has been terminated.

(b) Due process. In terminating assistance to a participant, the recipient must provide a formal process that recognizes the rights of individuals receiving assistance to due process of law. This process, at a minimum, must consist of:

(1) Written notice to the participant containing a clear statement of the reasons for termination;

(2) A review of the decision, in which the participant is given the opportunity to present written or oral objections before a person other than the person (or a subordinate of that person) who made or approved the termination decision; and

(3) Prompt written notice of the final decision to the participant.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 2004–2014 · leading case: Westchester Gardens, L.P. v. Lanclos, 43 Misc. 3d 681 (N.Y. City Civ. Ct. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Westchester Gardens, L.P. v. Lanclos, 43 Misc. 3d 681 (N.Y. City Civ. Ct. 2014). · cites it 3× “ursuant to CPLR 3211 (a), arguing that the petition fails to correctly and sufficiently plead the regulatory status of the premises in accordance to RPAPL 741 (4), and that landlord additionally failed to comply with federal procedural due process protections and with other…”

Angelo J. Melillo Ctr. for Mental Health v. Denise B., 3 Misc. 3d 730 (2004). “” (See also 24 CFR 582.320.) The petitiorier contends that since the condition of continued treatment was breached, the eviction of the respondents may proceed.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.