Final Civil Action – Regions Bank Settled Allegations of Failing To Comply With HUD’s Federal Housing Administration Loan Requirements
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General (OIG), assisted the U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, and the U.S.
September 29, 2016
The Alphabet Group, LLC, Marks Group, LLC, and Imagineers, Inc., Settled Allegations Related to Section 8 Rent Certifications
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General (OIG), assisted the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Connecticut in the civil investigation of The Alphabet Group, LLC, Marks Group, LLC, and Imagineers, Inc. Alphabet and Marks are owners of residential housing in Hartford, CT, and Imagineers administers the Section 8 program for the City of Hartford Housing Authority.
September 19, 2016
The Housing Authority of the City of Stamford, CT Took Appropriate Action to Resolve a Complaint While Complying With Procurement Regulations
We audited the Housing Authority of the City of Stamford, doing business as Charter Oak Communities. We received an anonymous complaint against the Authority related to an alleged improper procurement. The complainant alleged that Authority officials awarded a contract to an employee’s spouse without following procurement and conflict-of-interest requirements. In addition, a previous audit (Audit report number 2012-BO-1002 issued
September 26, 2014
Prysma Lending Group, LLC, Danbury, CT, Complied With HUD-FHA Loan Origination and Quality Control Requirements
We audited Prysma Lending Group, LLC, a nonsupervised lender, located in Danbury, CT, in support of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) goal of improving the integrity of the single-family insurance program.
November 13, 2012
We performed a corrective action verification review of the audit recommendations made on the procurement practices of the Housing Authority of the City of Danbury for finding 5 of Audit Report Number 2004-BO-1004, issued December 5, 2003. This review was based on a complaint.
January 05, 2012
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) – Office of Inspector General (OIG) reviewed 46 Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans that Pierce Commercial Bank underwrote as an FHA direct endorsement lender. Pierce was a supervised FHA direct endorsement lender located in Tacoma, WA. This case was referred to us by OIG’s Office of Investigation.
September 30, 2011
We conducted a review of Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans underwritten by Webster Bank (Webster), an FHA direct endorsement lender. This review was conducted as part of our “Operation Watchdog” initiative to review the underwriting of 15 direct endorsement lenders at the suggestion of the FHA Commissioner.
September 01, 2010
Seattle Housing Authority’s Capacity To Administer Recovery Act Funding Under the Capital Fund Program
The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Office of Inspector General conducted a capacity review of Seattle Housing Authority’s (Authority) capital fund to determine whether there was evidence that the Authority lacked the capacity to adequately administer its Recovery Act funding in accordance with requirements.
April 21, 2010
The City of Meriden, CT, Had Sufficient Capacity To Effectively Administer Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program
In accordance with our goal to review and ensure the proper administration of Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) funds provided under the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (HERA), we conducted a capacity review of the City of Meriden’s (City) operations. The City has responsibility for administering the State’s NSP.
January 19, 2010
The State of Washington Did Not Always Allocate Its Neighborhood Stabilization Program Funds Based on Greatest Need
We audited the State of Washington’s Neighborhood Stabilization Program. The audit was part of our fiscal year 2009 annual audit plan. We selected the State because it was responsible for the distribution of funds to the entitlement areas, as well as to nonentitlement areas for the state of Washington. Our objective was to determine whether the State’s Program implementation was compliant with U.S.
September 15, 2009