The Biopsychosocial Spiritual elements of a full client understanding: Complaint to HUD regarding violation of HUD Codes by South West Behavioral Health Services.

Dear Paul,

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) has received your HUD 903 online housing discrimination complaint form.  The information listed at the end of this email is the data you submitted.  Your complaint of housing discrimination will be routed to the appropriate regional office for processing. Your complaint will be reviewed by a fair housing specialist to determine if it alleges acts that might violate the Fair Housing Act. The specialist will contact you for any additional information needed to complete this review. If your complaint involves a possible violation of the Fair Housing Act, the specialist will assist you in filing an official housing discrimination complaint.  Please feel free to contact FHEO at the main discrimination hotline number 800-669-9777 (800-927-9275 for the hearing-impaired) or refer to the state toll-free number breakout listed below.

What happened?:
The following is to also document neglect of case worker, Margret Finn and Johnny Garcia of South West Behavioral Health Services, in Phoenix, Arizona–3450 N 3rd St, Phoenix, AZ 85012 (602)257-9339.  Client #1 is me, Paul Dewitt Goree and Client #2 Angel Thurman (mis-placed roommate). Please note that additional information regarding the incidences are also available on-line at:




4# video of assault from roommate:–G-fAnAA

I moved into hopwa housing program July 2012. The following are the HUD codes violated by case managers Margret Finn and Johnny Garcia:

24 CFR 574.310(e), HOPWA regulations require agencies to create a formal process for handling the termination of participants from HOPWA assistance. Termination procedures should include the following elements:
I was terminated from the housing program based on two false premises. First, I let another client who was terminated the day before me, wait in my apartment: while Mr. Garcia came to unlock the door of his apartment, so that he could retrieve his property. At no time did I know that this prior client was trespassing. Mr. Garcia was informed by the Phoenix Police department, that he could not inform me of my guest trespassing status without a property manager or the police department. Mr. Garcia preluded the officers, handed me a termination letter, and then proceeded to call the police: after the fact, violating my civil liberties. The second request on Mr. Garcia�s termination report, stated that I failed to enroll in a drug treatment program. No prior written documentation from Mr. Garcia suggest that I needed to attend a drug treatment program and information from my former roommate and his addiction were assumed upon me. As it turns out my case manager and I decided to enroll in a program just to satisfy Mr. Garcia�s request, but my Ryan White Insurance did not cover the cost of drug test, which Mr. Garcia made mandatory. All of this information regarding drug usage is based on Mr. Garcia�s assumption and not once was a drug test requested of me.

24 CFR 83.306(d), Information related to covered disabilities or handicaps during their housing programs screening or participant selection process. Though it limits what information a provider can gather about a persons disabilities, the Act does allow a provider or property owner to ask other questions for the following purposes, safety: Mr. Garcia’s screening of client# 2 Angel Thurman did not presume a future hostile environment for both clients, due to client #2  mental diagnoses (which was voluntarily conveyed to me, by Mr. Thurman and was also conveyed to me by Mr. Garcia (violating confidentiality). Mr. Garcia neglected to screen client for possible mental disabilities, which resulted in a stressful environment for me (see Youtube Video :–G-fAnAA ) I had to call for emergency assistance several times for Mr. Thurman’s extreme anxiety attacks. The EMT and Phoenix Police department both times, stated that they would contact Mr. Garcia and request a separation intervention, stating that this living arrangement was hostile. Mr. Garcia failed to comply with the EMT and Police departments� request, leaving me and Mr. Thurman in a hostile arrangement.
Why do you believe you are being discriminated against?:
I believe I am being discriniated against because my civil liberities have been violated by Mr. Garica and Mrs. Finn.

On the termination report, Mr. Garcia stated that I violated HUD/HOPWA housing by letting unwarranted guest in my apartment. The unwarranted guest was a prior HOPWA client which Mr. Garcia terminated. The guest was waiting on Mr. Garcia to unlock his prior apartment so that he could remove his property. Mr. Garcia took from 9AM-3PM to attend to this matter, and came to my apartment with at termination report for me and told me that my guest is in violation of HOPWA and that he would be back with the police. When he arrived with the police, the police informed Mr. Garica that he could not inform me of my guest status and that only a property manager or police could inform me of my guest trespassing status. At that point I asked my guest to leave.

Mr. Garcia and Mrs. Finn also violated my 4th amendment rights as stated in internent blog: Mrs. Finn and Mr. Garcia delayed intervention of a hostile environment and required me to share my private property with Mr. Thurman (who had purchased his own property).

Who do you believe discriminated against you?:
First Name: Johnny          Last Name: Garcia

First Name: Margaret      Last Name: Finn
Organization: South West Behavioral Health Services
Address: 3450 N 3rd St, Phoenix, AZ 85012 (602)257-9339

RESPONSE FROM HUD -Lopez, Claudia L (

Dear Complainant:
            The above-referenced housing discrimination inquiry was received by the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development pursuant to federal fair housing laws.  This claim has been administratively closed for lack of jurisdiction because federal fair housing laws do not cover the subject matter and/or bases of the alleged discrimination.  This office only has power to address issues recognized under federal fair housing laws.  We cannot address any other legal matters.  We believe that you should address your concerns as follows.  Since your problem concerns the administration of the HOPWA program, you are advised to contact the following representative in the HUD Office of Community Planning and Development in Phoenix, AZ:  Noemi Ghirghi, at (602) 379-7173, fax (602) 379-3985.
            This administrative closure does not represent a judgment upon the merits of the allegations contained in the claim.  The Fair Housing Act provides that, notwithstanding this action by the Department, a complainant may file a civil action in an appropriate United States District Court, or a State Court, no later than two (2) years after the occurrence or the termination of the alleged discriminatory housing practice(s).  The computation of this two-year period does not include the time during which the claim was pending with the Department. Should there be questions about this closure, please contact Claudia Lopez, in our Intake Unit, at (415) 489-6540 or (800) 347-3739 at his or her extension (the last four digits of the 415 number).
            Good luck to you.

One thought on “The Biopsychosocial Spiritual elements of a full client understanding: Complaint to HUD regarding violation of HUD Codes by South West Behavioral Health Services.

  1. paulgoree Post author

    2) Violation of requirements–(i) Basis. Assistance to participants
    who reside in housing programs assisted under this part may be
    terminated if the participant violates program requirements or
    conditions of occupancy. Grantees must ensure that supportive services
    are provided, so that a participant’s assistance is terminated only in
    the most severe cases.
    (ii) Procedure. In terminating assistance to any program participant
    for violation of requirements, grantees must provide a formal process
    that recognizes the rights of individuals receiving assistance to due
    process of law. This process at minimum, must consist of:
    (A) Serving the participant with a written notice containing a clear
    statement of the reasons for termination;
    (B) Permitting the participant to have a review of the decision, in
    which the participant is given the opportunity to confront opposing
    witnesses, present written objections, and be represented by their own
    counsel, before a person other than the person (or a subordinate of that
    person) who made or approved the termination decision; and
    (C) Providing prompt written notification of the final decision to
    the participant.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s