Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Crochet v. Housing Authority Of The City Of Tampa, 37 F.3d 607 (1994)

Citation
Crochet v. Housing Authority Of The City Of Tampa, 37 F.3d 607 (1994)
Parent Document
Crochet v. Housing Authority Of The City Of Tampa, 37 F.3d 607 (1994)
Effective Date
1994-11-04

Other Sections in This Document (42)

Full Text

728 chars
29
The Tenants ignore the fact that any tenant who contests an amount allegedly owed to TECO may utilize any grievance procedure TECO may have or may contact the state regulatory authority. Moreover, their attempt to convert TECO's policies into state action are unpersuasive. We also note, as did the district court, that THA's executive director filed an affidavit stating that THA "has agreed to advance all or part of any security deposit an affected resident cannot pay because of demonstrated hardship prior to the change, and allow such residents to enter into a promissory note to repay THA." (R.1-29 at 3) (quoting Evans Aff., R.1-22 p 11). The district court also quoted TECO's director of customer service as stating: