Key takeaways
- Philadelphia’s FPO has been amended to provide stronger protections against SOI discrimination that apply to current and prospective tenants
- It is unlawful in Philadelphia to represent that a property does not accept or is not eligible for housing assistance vouchers and for any person to fail to cooperate in completing and submitting documents necessary to receive housing vouchers.
- Several tenant-friendly procedural changes have been adopted that will likely increase enforcement of the SOI discrimination claims under the FPO.
The Philadelphia City Council recently amended its Fair Practices Ordinance (FPO) to expand protections against source of income (SOI) discrimination in housing within city limits. Although SOI discrimination has long been unlawful in Philadelphia, there has been a historically low incidence of reported SOI claims. The recent amendments are aimed at not only clarifying the scope of the FPO but also expanding both substantive and procedural protections afforded to tenants and prospective tenants.
Pursuant to the FPO amendments, the definition of “source of income” now specifically includes “the Housing Choice Voucher (sometimes referred to as “Section 8”) Program and other comparable rental voucher programs.” Additionally, effective December 4, 2024, it is unlawful in the city of Philadelphia to: (i) advertise or communicate that housing vouchers cannot be used to rent or buy a property; (ii) refuse to rent or restrict services or repairs in a manner that denies access to voucher holders; and (iii) undertake premeditated delays or otherwise fail to cooperate with a request to complete or submit necessary paperwork for processing rental vouchers promptly. Importantly, these prohibitions apply to both current and prospective tenants.
Procedurally, the amendments also enhance tenant protections during the administration and enforcement process. Except in cases seeking only to compel compliance with the FPO, claimants must still make complaints in the first instance to the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations (the Commission). However, unlike in the prior version of the FPO, which conferred upon claimants a right to commence litigation if the Commission failed to resolve the complaint within one year, the amended FPO provides that, in housing discrimination claims (including SOI claims), the Commission must provide the claimant with a Notice of Right to Sue if the complaint has not been resolved within 100 days. Similarly, whereas parties aggrieved by an order of the Commission have always been entitled to a 30-day window to appeal to the Court of Common Pleas, that appeal window has been tripled to 90 days under the amended FPO for appeals in housing discrimination cases.
The effects of the recent FPO amendments are yet to be seen, but the confluence of enhanced protections against SOI discrimination for current and prospective tenants, expedited timetables for Commission review and expanded appeal rights suggests an intentional effort in Philadelphia to increase private enforcement of SOI discrimination claims. Notably, the FPO has long authorized the Court of Common Pleas (but not the Commission) to award a prevailing claimant compensatory damages, punitive damages, reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs and injunctive relief. Therefore, the expanded protections under the amended FPO carry an inherent risk that violations of the ordinance will lead to similar exposure.
Philadelphia landlords should work closely with counsel to internally audit their programs and policies to assess risk regarding current and prospective tenant enforcement of the FPO. Additionally, as the 100-day anniversary of the FPO amendments’ effective date nears, landlords should consult with counsel and remain vigilant regarding claims filed in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas under a claimant’s Notice of Right to Sue.
Client Alert 2025-064