The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Office of Inspector General (OIG), referred alleged violations to HUD’s Office of Program Enforcement for action under the Program Fraud Civil Remedies Act based on two audits of DHI Mortgage Company Ltd.  (DHIM) that found it did not follow HUD requirements when it underwrote Federal Housing Administration (FHA)-insured loans with prohibited restrictive addenda to the…

We audited Coconut Grove Apartments due to concerns expressed by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Office of Multifamily Housing Programs regarding the management of the project.  The main concern was that the owner may have diverted project funds for nonproject expenses.  Our audit objective was to determine whether Coconut Grove’s owner operated its Sections 223(f) and 241(a)-insured multifamily…

We audited NOVA Financial & Investment Corporation based on a referral from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Quality Assurance Division detailing a separate lender that originated Federal Housing Administration (FHA)-insured loans that contained ineligible downpayment assistance gifts.  The HUD Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) analysis identified NOVA as a lender with the highest origination…

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General audited Allen Mortgage, Limited Liability Company, a Federal Housing Administration (FHA) nonsupervised lender. We selected Allen Mortgage for audit based on its high default and claim rate for the FHA-insured loans sponsored in Region 5. Our objectives were to determine whether (1) Allen Mortgage complied with HUD’s regulations, procedures, and…

We audited the Federal Housing Administration (FHA)-insured loan process at MetLife Bank’s (lender) branch in Scottsdale, AZ, to determine whether the lender underwrote FHA-insured loans and implemented a quality control plan in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements. We selected the lender because it had an FHA default rate of 7.41 percent for loans underwritten in Arizona between April 1…

We reviewed Federal Housing Administration (FHA)-insured loan settlement documents from two branches of DHI Mortgage Company, LTD (DHI Mortgage), in Arizona. During a previous audit of loan origination by the same branches (audit report number 2009-LA-1018), there was information indicating that the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (Act) might have been violated; however, we were unable to report on the issue at the time. Our…

We completed a review of the Retreat at Santa Rita Springs (community), a Federal Housing Administration (FHA)-insured multifamily project under Section 231 of the National Housing Act. Our audit was in response to a request for audit from Representative Gabrielle Giffords of the 8th District of Arizona. The owner defaulted on the $29.9 million U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)-insured mortgage in November 2009,…

We audited Federal Housing Administration (FHA)-insured loan processes at two DHI Mortgage Company, LTD (DHI Mortgage), branches in Scottsdale, AZ, to determine whether DHI Mortgage originated, approved, and closed FHA-insured single-family loans in accordance with U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requirements. We recently conducted an audit of DHI Mortgage’s Tucson and Scottsdale branches and identified…

We audited FHA-insured loan processes at two DHI Mortgage Company, LTD (DHI Mortgage) branches in Tucson and Scottsdale, Arizona, to determine whether DHI Mortgage originated, approved, and closed FHA-insured single-family loans in accordance with HUD requirements. We chose DHI Mortgage because the Scottsdale, Arizona, branch had a default rate that was double the default rate for FHA-insured loans for the state of Arizona, and then…

We audited Campaige Place at Jackson (Campaige Place) to determine whether it used its project funds in compliance with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) regulatory agreement and other federal requirements. Campaige Place did not use its project funds in compliance with HUD’s and other federal requirements. Specifically, we determined that: •Owner advances of $73,750 were repaid when the project had no…