After what happened at the hearing in state court and the HCHRC still ignoring my request for a swift determination, I sent an email to HUD. The NCHRC’s mishandling of the case not only raised serious concerns about bias and transparency but also gave the opposing attorney an opening to weaponize the unresolved complaint against me in court.
I expedited this request to HUD to ensure oversight, demand accountability, and prevent further harm — and made it clear I was prepared to take the issue public if necessary to protect my rights and advocate for others facing the same barriers. I dual-filed and they should have stepped in, but I didn’t hear back from them either.
Although this request ultimately pushed NCHRC to issue a determination, I wasn’t informed promptly because they negligently sent it to the wrong address — even though I had already provided my current one. It took 12 days for the determination to reach me, and the delay, especially between Raleigh and Durham, only further demonstrates the investigator’s carelessness and disregard for basic procedural responsibilities.
24 CFR 103.110. Reactivation of referred complaints.
(c) The substantially equivalent State or local agency has failed to commence proceedings with respect to the complaint within 30 days of the date that it received the notification and referral of the complaint; or the agency commenced proceedings within this 30-day period, but the Assistant Secretary determines that the agency has failed to carry the proceedings forward with reasonable promptness.