(a) Payments under HAP contract. Housing assistance payments are paid to the owner in accordance with the terms of the HAP contract. Housing assistance payments may only be paid to the owner during the lease term, and while the family is residing in the unit.
(b) Termination of payment: When owner terminates the lease. Housing assistance payments terminate when the lease is terminated by the owner in accordance with the lease. However, if the owner has commenced the process to evict the tenant, and if the family continues to reside in the unit, the PHA must continue to make housing assistance payments to the owner in accordance with the HAP contract until the owner has obtained a court judgment or other process allowing the owner to evict the tenant. The PHA may continue such payments until the family moves from or is evicted from the unit.
(c) Termination of payment: Other reasons for termination. Housing assistance payments terminate if:
(1) The lease terminates;
(2) The HAP contract terminates; or
(3) The PHA terminates assistance for the family.
(d) Family move-out. (1) If the family moves out of the unit, the PHA may not make any housing assistance payment to the owner for any month after the month when the family moves out. The owner may keep the housing assistance payment for the month when the family moves out of the unit.
(2) If a participant family moves from an assisted unit with continued tenant-based assistance, the term of the assisted lease for the new assisted unit may begin during the month the family moves out of the first assisted unit. Overlap of the last housing assistance payment (for the month when the family moves out of the old unit) and the first assistance payment for the new unit, is not considered to constitute a duplicative housing subsidy.
[60 FR 34695, July 3, 1995, as amended at 80 FR 8246, Feb. 17, 2015]
Notes of Decisions
Sabi v. Sterling, 183 Cal. App. 4th 916 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 3× “” ( 24 C.F.R. § 982.311 (a) & (b) (2010).) Other methods of termination are termination of the HAP contract and termination of PHA assistance to the family.”
Dellita Johnson v. City of Detroit & City of Detroit Hous. Comm'n, 446 F.3d 614 (6th Cir. 2006).
“The Caswell Court concluded that “[bjecause neither we nor Caswell can point to a specific statutory provision in the Housing Act that confers a right *629 relevant to DHC’s alleged violation of 24 C.F.R. § 982.311 (b), Caswell cannot pursue his claim under § 1983.”
Long v. Dist. of Columbia Hous. Auth., 166 F. Supp. 3d 16 (D.D.C. 2016).
“2005), the Sixth Circuit considered, post-Gonzaga, a Program participant’s claim that his PHA violated 24 C.F.R. § 982.311 (b), which requires PHAs to continue making assistance payments to an owner until the owner obtains a court judgment allowing an owner to evict the tenant,…”
Taylor v. Hous. Auth. of New Haven, 267 F.R.D. 36 (D. Conn. 2010).
“” 24 C.F.R. § 982.311 (a). These payments are made under a housing assistance payment (“HAP”) contract.”
Woods v. Willis, 825 F. Supp. 2d 893 (N.D. Ohio 2011).
“; 24 C.F.R. § 982.311 (a). *896 Section 8 imposes responsibilities on the tenant, including disclosing income and resources, allowing inspection of the unit, promptly providing the housing authority with eviction notices, notifying the PHA before the family moves from the unit…”
Gill v. Hernandez, 22 Misc. 3d 390 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2008).
“(24 CFR 982.311 [a].) A tenancy addendum must be included in all leases for tenants who wish to receive section 8 subsidies.”
Caswell v. Detroit Hous Comm (6th Cir. 2005).
· cites it 6× “Section 1983 liability for violations of 24 C.F.R. § 982.311 (b) Caswell argues that DHC violated 24 C.”
DeProfio v. Waltham Hous. Auth., 22 Mass. L. Rptr. 677 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2007).
· cites it 5× “6 There are several of these regulations at issue: 24 C.F.R. §§982.311 (b), 982.552(b)(2), and 982.”
— 24 C.F.R. § 982.311(b) — 1 case
DeProfio v. Waltham Hous. Auth., 22 Mass. L. Rptr. 677 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2007).
“6 There are several of these regulations at issue: 24 C.F.R. §§982.311 (b), 982.552(b)(2), and 982.”
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.