Lawsuit alleges building’s owners illegally advertise bedrooms that lack windows, effectively blocking tenants who use subsidies
WASHINGTON, June 5, 2025 /PRNewswire/ — This week, the Equal Rights Center (ERC), represented by Legal Aid DC, sued the owners of a DC apartment building alleging that since at least 2020, the building has illegally discriminated against low-income tenants who use housing vouchers to pay a portion of their rent.
Attorneys from Legal Aid DC representing the ERC filed the lawsuit in DC Superior Court on June 3 against Archstone North Capitol Hill 2 LP and AvalonBay Communities, Inc., the developers and owners of the AVA NoMa, a 438-unit apartment building in DC’s NoMa neighborhood. The complaint alleges that the owners violated DC’s consumer protection and anti-discrimination laws by discouraging voucher holders from applying and preventing them from being approved for leases. Under DC law, it is illegal to discriminate against tenants or prospective tenants who use vouchers. This discrimination, the suit claims, stemmed from the owners’ illegal false advertising.
The ERC, a national nonprofit civil rights organization based in the District, first became aware of the problem when its clients with vouchers expressed concern about not being able to rent at AVA NoMa. The organization investigated further, revealing that the property’s management may have known about this issue as early as 2020 and failed to make changes. As part of the investigation, an ERC tester called the building’s office to ask about renting with a voucher. The leasing agent told the tester that its units aren’t passing DC Housing Authority (DCHA) inspection and acknowledged that some units don’t have bedrooms with windows as required. DC housing code requires all bedrooms to have a window or frosted glass letting in some amount of natural light.
AVA NoMa, located at 55 M Street NE, has advertised a mix of studio apartments and one-, two-, and three-bedroom units for rent since it opened to tenants in 2018. However, about half of these units’ “bedrooms” don’t have windows, meaning they do not qualify as bedrooms under DC housing code. The building’s website advertises 57 three-bedroom units. In reality, the suit alleges, not a single unit has three bedrooms that meet the legal standard. The lawsuit alleges this type of false advertising violates DC’s consumer protection laws.
ERC Executive Director Kate Scott comments, “DC’s housing code requires windows in bedrooms as a matter of basic health and safety. The complaint alleges that AVA NoMa skirted this basic requirement, and played fast and loose with its tenants’ well-being.”
The Housing Choice Voucher Program gives low- and moderate-income DC residents the flexibility to choose where they live by subsidizing rent at a privately owned rental property like AVA NoMa. A tenant pays a portion of their rent based on their income, and the voucher covers the rest. Each year, DC sets limits on how much rent a voucher can cover based on the size of the unit and will only approve tenants to live in units with “reasonable” rent levels. A unit also must pass DCHA inspection before a prospective tenant can use a voucher to rent it.
Because AVA NoMa misrepresents the number of units per bedroom, it is unlikely that renters with vouchers interested in living there will be able to successfully make it through the lease-up process and move in. For example: A voucher holder might apply for a unit that AVA NoMa advertised as a three bedroom for $4,850 per month. But when DCHA inspects the unit, it finds that only one of these rooms has a window, and so accurately classifies the unit as a one-bedroom. The agency would likely then determine that $4,580 is an unreasonably high monthly rent for a one-bedroom unit in that area, and the voucher holder would not be allowed to lease it.
Scott continues “While all tenants could have been endangered by this alleged false advertising practice, the complaint describes how renters who use vouchers weren’t even able to get their feet in the door at AVA NoMa because of it. Unfair advertising and discrimination are unacceptable, and we hope that by taking this action, we’re creating more safe housing opportunities for all renters in the District.”
“What may seem like semantics or a marketing tactic is actually dangerous for all DC residents, especially tenants using Housing Choice Vouchers,” said Megan Browder, Legal Director for Systemic Advocacy and Law Reform at Legal Aid DC. “In practice, it has meant that for years, residents with vouchers have been unfairly turned away from the AVA NoMa when its units don’t live up to the way they’re advertised. We hope that this suit will end this discriminatory practice.”
The lawsuit asks the Court to find that Archstone North Capitol Hill 2 LP and AvalonBay Communities, Inc. violated the DC Consumer Protection Procedures Act and to order them to immediately correct their advertising.
Read the complaint.
MEDIA CONTACT:
Kate Scott
Executive Director, Equal Rights Center
[email protected], 202-370-3220
ABOUT THE EQUAL RIGHTS CENTER: The ERC is a civil rights organization that identifies and seeks to eliminate unlawful and unfair discrimination in housing, employment and public accommodations in its home community of Greater Washington D.C. and nationwide. The ERC’s core strategy for identifying unlawful and unfair discrimination is civil rights testing. When the ERC identifies discrimination, it seeks to eliminate it through the use of testing data to educate the public and business community, support policy advocacy, conduct compliance testing and training, and, if necessary, take enforcement action. For more information, please visit www.equalrightscenter.org.
ABOUT LEGAL AID DC: Legal Aid DC is the District’s oldest and largest general civil legal services organization. Legal Aid provides free legal services to low-income DC residents on issues including housing, domestic violence and family law, public benefits, consumer law, and immigration. Through its Systemic Advocacy & Law Reform program, Legal Aid advocates for policy changes that benefit and pursues affirmative litigation that benefits its wider client community.
SOURCE Equal Rights Center
