Certify and provide supporting documentation showing that the identified deficiencies have been corrected for the 8 of 109 properties cited in this audit report.
2017-CH-1011 | September 29, 2017
BLM Companies LLC, Hurricane, UT, Did Not Provide Property Preservation and Protection Services in Accordance With Its Contract With HUD and Its Own Requirements
Housing
- Status2017-CH-1011-001-AOpenClosedClosed on September 03, 2019
- Status2017-CH-1011-001-BOpenClosed$19,280Questioned Costs
Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
Closed on September 25, 2020Reimburse HUD $19,280 in ineligible management fees for 20 properties for which initial services were improperly performed before promotion to ready-to-show status.
- Status2017-CH-1011-001-COpenClosed$6,525Questioned Costs
Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
Closed on September 25, 2020Reimburse HUD $6,525 in ineligible routine inspection fees for 93 properties that contained property preservation and protection deficiencies.
- Status2017-CH-1011-001-DOpenClosed$594,000Funds Put to Better Use
Recommendations that funds be put to better use estimate funds that could be used more efficiently. For example, recommendations that funds be put to better use could result in reductions in spending, deobligation of funds, or avoidance of unnecessary spending.
Closed on September 03, 2019Improve its quality control procedures to accurately track and conduct reviews in a manner that ensures all properties in its active inventory comply with HUD’s and its own requirements to prevent $594,000 in monthly routine inspection fees from being spent over the next year for properties that are not adequately maintained. The quality control procedures should include but not limited to continued training of BLM’s staff and subcontractors on properly identifying and addressing property deficiencies; maintaining sufficient documentation of its monthly quality control reviews and corrective actions; verifying that the datestamped photographs were for the corresponding inspection dates; and regularly updating its tracking mechanism for desktop reviews of inspections to ensure that it conducts desktop reviews for properties that are still in its inventory.
- Status2017-CH-1011-001-EOpenClosedClosed on September 03, 2019
Assess BLM’s performance under the area 4P contract at least quarterly to determine whether it has improved its performance. If its performance does not improve, HUD in coordination with the Office of the Chief Procurement Officer should determine whether BLM has defaulted on its contract and take the appropriate actions.
2017-KC-0010 | September 28, 2017
HUD Generally Ensured That Purchasers In Its Note Sales Program Followed the Requirements Outlined in the Conveyance, Assumption, and Assignment Contracts, but Improvements Are Needed
Housing
- Status2017-KC-0010-001-AOpenClosedClosed on January 22, 2020
Update the terms in the purchase agreement to ensure that the agreements define “extenuating circumstance” in reference to foreclosure avoidance, establish how long stabilization outcomes can continue to be reported as planned, and establish financial or other penalties to hold purchasers accountable in instances of nonreporting and noncompliance.
2017-PH-0003 | September 28, 2017
HUD Did Not Provide Sufficient Guidance and Oversight To Ensure That FHA-Insured Properties Nationwide Had Safe Water
Housing
- Status2017-PH-0003-001-AOpenClosedClosed on August 26, 2019
Direct the applicable lenders to provide evidence that the properties for the 1,383 FHA-insured loans not included in our sample had a safe and potable water source, or that the appraisers had not notified the lender of the water quality issue on their appraisals. If the lenders cannot provide this evidence, HUD should direct them to perform water testing and any necessary remediation to ensure that the properties have a safe and potable water source, or indemnify HUD against future loss.
- Status2017-PH-0003-001-BOpenClosedClosed on August 26, 2019
Take appropriate administrative action against the lenders or appraisers for any cases in which it finds that they did not take appropriate steps to ensure that properties had a safe and potable water source.
- Status2017-PH-0003-001-COpenClosedClosed on August 05, 2019
Develop and implement additional guidance to advise lenders and appraisers when water testing is required for properties serviced by a public water system which has issued a public notice of water contamination.
- Status2017-PH-0003-001-DOpenClosed$238,090,214Funds Put to Better Use
Recommendations that funds be put to better use estimate funds that could be used more efficiently. For example, recommendations that funds be put to better use could result in reductions in spending, deobligation of funds, or avoidance of unnecessary spending.
Closed on August 05, 2019Develop and implement policies and procedures to ensure that appraisers comply with guidance implemented to resolve recommendation 1C, including penalties for failure to comply, thereby ensuring that at least $238,090,214 million is put to better use.
- Status2017-PH-0003-001-EOpenClosedClosed on December 30, 2019
Consider requiring water testing for all FHA-insured properties.
2017-CF-1806 | September 27, 2017
Final Civil Action: PHH Corporation Settled Allegations of Failing To Comply With HUD’s Federal Housing Administration Loan Requirements
General Counsel
- Status2017-CF-1806-001-AOpenClosed$42,600,000Questioned Costs
Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
Closed on October 01, 2018Acknowledge that $42,600,000 of the $65,000,000 in the attached settlement agreement represents an amount due HUD, less DOJ’s civil debt collection fees.
2017-CF-1807 | September 27, 2017
Final Civil Action: Residential Home Funding Corp. Settled Allegations of Failing To Comply With HUD’s Federal Housing Administration Loan Requirements
General Counsel
- Status2017-CF-1807-001-AOpenClosed$1,670,000Questioned Costs
Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
Closed on March 29, 2023Acknowledge that $1,670,000 in the attached settlement represents an amount due HUD less DOJ’s civil debt collection fees.
2017-LA-1803 | September 27, 2017
RMS & Associates, Las Vegas, NV, Improperly Originated FHA-Insured Loans With Restrictive Covenants
General Counsel
- Status2017-LA-1803-001-EOpenClosedClosed on June 01, 2018
Determine legal sufficiency and if legally sufficient, pursue civil and administrative remedies, civil money penalties, or both against RMS, its principals, or both for incorrectly certifying to the eligibility for FHA mortgage insurance or that due diligence was exercised during the origination of FHA loans.
Housing
- Status2017-LA-1803-001-AOpenClosed$2,460,446Funds Put to Better Use
Recommendations that funds be put to better use estimate funds that could be used more efficiently. For example, recommendations that funds be put to better use could result in reductions in spending, deobligation of funds, or avoidance of unnecessary spending.
Closed on March 06, 2019Work with HUD to nullify the restrictions on conveyance that violate HUD policy or indemnify HUD. This action will protect HUD against future losses of $2,434,204 for the 49 loans.
- Status2017-LA-1803-001-BOpenClosed$26,242Questioned Costs
Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
Closed on January 05, 2018Repay HUD $26,242 for partial claims paid on two FHA loans that contained prohibited restrictive covenants.
- Status2017-LA-1803-001-COpenClosedClosed on February 27, 2019
Develop and implement policies and procedures to identify prohibited restrictions on conveyance to ensure that it does not originate FHA loans with prohibited restrictive covenants.
- Status2017-LA-1803-001-DOpenClosedClosed on February 27, 2019
Provide training to its employees regarding HUD’s requirements related to prohibited restrictions on conveyance.
2017-PH-1006 | September 24, 2017
The Owner of Schwenckfeld Manor, Lansdale, PA, Did Not Always Manage Its HUD-Insured Property in Accordance With Applicable HUD Requirements
General Counsel
- Status2017-PH-1006-001-AOpenClosed$3,465,509Questioned Costs
Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
Provide documentation to show that payroll costs totaling $2,019,496 and any payroll costs incurred outside our audit period, including fiscal year 2017, were reasonable and necessary expenses for the operation of the project or repay the project from nonproject funds for any amount that it cannot support.
- Status2017-PH-1006-001-BOpenClosed$56,021Questioned Costs
Recommendations with questioned costs identify costs: (A) resulting from an alleged violation of a law, regulation, contract, grant, or other document or agreement governing the use of Federal funds; (B) that are not supported by adequate documentation (also known as an unsupported cost); or (C) that appear unnecessary or unreasonable.
Provide documentation to show that other direct costs totaling $56,021 and any direct costs incurred outside our audit period, including fiscal year 2017, were reasonable and necessary expenses for the operation of the project or repay the project from nonproject funds for any amount that it cannot support.