In late 2025, a deeply troubling sequence of events unfolded at Channel Point Apartments, a Greystar-managed property in Long Beach, California. After a Black disabled resident filed a formal complaint with the California Civil Rights Department (CRD) alleging discrimination, harassment, and racial misconduct by property staff, Assistant Manager Tran Banh retaliated by filing a false Workplace Violence Restraining Order (WVRO) against him.

Days after submitting this retaliatory filing, Tran Banh went out on maternity leave, making herself unavailable for hearings, testimony, or accountability. The timing strongly suggests the WVRO was not filed for safety, but to silence, discredit, and retaliate against a Black resident engaged in legally protected civil-rights activity.

Background: A Black Resident Files a CRD Complaint — Then Retaliation Begins

Before the restraining order was filed, the Black resident submitted a detailed complaint to the California Civil Rights Department documenting:

• Racially discriminatory treatment by Property Manager Kathy Scheiwe
• “Jim Crow–style” comments and intimidation by Kathy’s husband, Brent
• An assault by a contracted security guard, who later confessed he was “told to do it” and apologized
• Management attempting to alter the resident’s leasing file after the assault
• Retaliatory conduct that escalated only after the civil-rights complaint was filed

Under California law, filing a CRD complaint is a protected activity. Property management is strictly prohibited from retaliating against any tenant for engaging in civil-rights reporting, especially when the tenant is part of a protected class such as race.

Yet shortly after the resident filed his CRD complaint, Tran Banh initiated a baseless WVRO petition containing false statements and no evidence.

The Filing Was Retaliatory — Not Protective

Workplace Violence Restraining Orders in California are intended to protect employees from credible threats. However, the petition filed by Tran Banh contained:

• No threats
• No violent behavior
• No witnesses
• No police reports
• No history of aggression
• No workplace contact

Significantly, the resident had already moved out on September 30th, making the idea of a future threat impossible. Filing a WVRO under these circumstances — and immediately after a CRD complaint — is clear retaliation.

For a Black resident already subject to racial harassment, being falsely labeled as violent carries additional racial implications that cannot be ignored.

The Timing: Filing → Immediate Maternity Leave

The most telling part of the sequence is the timing:

Immediately after filing the WVRO, Tran Banh went on maternity leave.

This timing suggests the restraining order was:

• A tactical filing
• Intended to insert false allegations into court records
• Designed to derail the CRD investigation
• A way to avoid scrutiny, hearings, or cross-examination
• A deliberate attempt to obstruct the resident’s civil-rights case

Such tactics misrepresent the intent of workplace-safety laws and exploit the judicial process.

A Pattern of Racially Motivated Retaliation at Channel Point

The sequence mirrors a pattern commonly seen in fair-housing and civil-rights retaliation cases involving Black tenants:

1. A Black resident asserts his civil rights
2. Management becomes defensive and hostile
3. False allegations replace accountability
4. Legal filings are weaponized
5. The accuser avoids court or accountability

California’s Fair Housing laws clearly prohibit retaliation, making the conduct by Banh and management particularly alarming.

Why False WVROs Are Especially Harmful When Directed at Black Residents

Weaponizing a WVRO against a Black resident:

• Reinforces dangerous racial stereotypes
• Harms the resident’s reputation
• Interferes with employment and disability matters
• Creates misleading legal records
• Discourages reporting of discrimination
• Undermines civil-rights investigations

This misuse of the legal system is not just improper — it is a civil-rights issue.

Conclusion

After a Black resident filed a Civil Rights Department complaint, Assistant Manager Tran Banh retaliated by filing a false Workplace Violence Restraining Order, then immediately went on maternity leave to avoid accountability.

The resident had already moved out, posed no threat, and had documented racial discrimination and assault — yet Banh weaponized a legal tool intended for safety to silence a whistleblower.

This incident raises serious concerns about:

• Greystar’s oversight
• Racial bias in property management
• Retaliation after protected civil-rights activity
• Abuse of legal procedures
• Violations of fair-housing laws

The pattern is unmistakable: this was retaliation — and it targeted a Black resident for asserting his civil rights.