2.10.3 Defenses
2.10.3 Defenses aetrahan Mon, 01/23/2023 - 14:56Both the HUD Tenancy Addendum and the owner’s HAP contract explicitly state that nonpayment of the housing authority’s portion of the rent is not a lease violation and that the tenant is only responsible for the tenant share.1 This is very important in cases where the PHA has withheld the HAP because of landlord noncompliance with program requirements.
La. R.S. 9:3259.2 states that the application for and/or the receipt of any federal or state rent subsidy shall not be considered as payment of rent and shall not be a defense to an eviction. Thus, a landlord’s acceptance the rent subsidy cannot be used to dismiss an eviction suit on the basis of acceptance of rent. The landlord must accept the tenant share in order for acceptance of rent to be a defense to the eviction.
If a tenant loses the eviction hearing and properly seeks a suspensive appeal, the PHA should not take action to terminate the tenant from participation or cancel future HAP payments on the basis of the eviction.2 However, a tenant is still liable for the fulfillment of all other family obligations under the HCVP program.
An eviction judgment for non-payment of rent may result in termination from the HCV program unless the tenant can prove that no rent is owed. When a tenant is behind on rent, upon request many judges will enter a consent judgment in which the parties mutually agree on a move-out date and there is no finding of fact. Some PHAs will not propose termination from the HCVP following such judgments.