Require any participating lender to reimburse borrowers that received an FHA loan with borrower-financed downpayment assistance for any fees that were determined to be unreasonable and unnecessary.
2017-LA-0003 | March 01, 2017
HUD Failed To Adequately Oversee FHA-Insured Loans With Borrower-Financed Downpayment Assistance
Housing
- Status2017-LA-0003-001-HOpenClosed
2017-AT-1003 | February 28, 2017
The Puerto Rico Department of Housing, San Juan, PR, Did Not Properly Administer Its Multifamily Special Escrow Funds
Housing
- Status2017-AT-1003-001-AOpenClosed$7,984,429Funds 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.
Submit a plan showing how it will use the $7,984,429 in unspent escrow funds to meet program objectives and increase the supply of low- and moderate-income housing for the residents of Puerto Rico, including a schedule HUD can track to ensure the expenditure.
- Status2017-AT-1003-001-BOpenClosed$2,432,271Questioned 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.
Submit supporting documentation so HUD can reevaluate the feasibility of the three activities and determine the eligibility of the $2,432,271 in escrow funds already disbursed. If HUD determines that an activity has been canceled or is not feasible, the Department must reimburse the escrow account from non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-AT-1003-001-COpenClosed
Submit a plan showing how it will proceed regarding the Yabucoa, Juncos, and Barceloneta housing projects, including a schedule that HUD can track to ensure their completion.
- Status2017-AT-1003-001-DOpenClosed$2,176,733Questioned 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.
Submit supporting documentation showing the reasonableness and allowability of $2,176,733 disbursed or reimburse its escrow account from non-Federal funds.
- Status2017-AT-1003-001-EOpenClosed
Develop and implement written policies detailing procedures and responsibilities related to program administration and monitoring of the escrow program.
- Status2017-AT-1003-002-BOpenClosed
Submit required certifications and supporting documentation showing that residents of escrow-funded activities met the established income limit requirements. Any amounts determined ineligible must be reimbursed to the escrow account from non-Federal funds.
2017-KC-1001 | December 14, 2016
Majestic Management, LLC, a Multifamily Housing Management Agent in St. Louis, MO, Did Not Always Comply With HUD’s Requirements When Disbursing Project Funds
Housing
- Status2017-KC-1001-001-AOpenClosed$17,414Questioned 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 support showing that $17,414 in management fees charged to the projects using a budgeted amount represented actual amounts or repay the difference to each affected project.
- Status2017-KC-1001-001-BOpenClosed$447,345Questioned 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 support that it paid itself $447,345 for eligible purposes or reimburse the appropriate projects for the balance.
- Status2017-KC-1001-001-DOpenClosed
Verify all management fees charged to the projects from 2013 through 2015 were appropriate.
- Status2017-KC-1001-002-AOpenClosed$231,091Questioned 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.
Require Majestic Management to reimburse the appropriate projects their portion of $231,091 for work not completed or overbilled.
- Status2017-KC-1001-002-BOpenClosed$462,281Questioned 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.
Require Majestic Management to provide support that $462,281 paid for procurements was reasonable or reimburse the appropriate projects for the balance.
- Status2017-KC-1001-003-AOpenClosed$11,184Questioned 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.
Reimburse the appropriate projects their portion of $11,184 that it charged for ineligible items.
- Status2017-KC-1001-003-BOpenClosed$48,891Questioned 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 support that $48,891 was spent for eligible purposes or reimburse the appropriate projects for the balance.
2017-KC-0001 | October 13, 2016
FHA Paid Claims for an Estimated 239,000 Properties That Servicers Did Not Foreclose Upon or Convey on Time
Housing
- Status2017-KC-0001-001-AOpenClosed$2,238,721,464Funds 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.
PriorityPriorityWe believe these open recommendations, if implemented, will have the greatest impact on helping HUD achieve its mission to create strong, sustainable, inclusive communities and quality affordable homes for all.
Issue a change to regulations at 24 CFR Part 203, which would avoid unnecessary costs to the FHA insurance fund, allowing an estimated $2.23 billion to be put to better use. These changes include (1) a maximum period for filing insurance claims and (2) disallowance of expenses incurred beyond established timeframes.
Status
The Federal Housing Administration (FHA) reported that the recommendation cannot be closed out without the publication of the FHA Maximum Claim Rule. The proposed changes have been on HUD’s regulatory agenda since Spring 2020 but, as of July 2025, the Office of Single Family Housing does not have an estimated publication date.
Analysis
To fully address this recommendation, HUD must publish the FHA Maximum Claim Rule. Implementation of this rule should result in HUD putting $2.23 billion to better use.
2015-LA-1009 | September 29, 2015
loanDepot’s FHA-Insured Loans With Downpayment Assistance Funds Did Not Always Meet HUD Requirements
Housing
- Status2015-LA-1009-001-EOpenClosed$72,210Questioned 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.
Reimburse FHA borrowers $25,700 for fees that were not customary or reasonable and $46,510 in discount fees that did not represent their intended purpose.
2015-LA-1010 | September 29, 2015
loanDepot's FHA-Insured Loans With Golden State Finance Authority Downpayment Assistance Gifts Did Not Always Meet HUD Requirements
Housing
- Status2015-LA-1010-001-EOpenClosed$13,726Questioned 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.
Reimburse $13,726 to FHA borrowers for the fees that were not customary or reasonable.
2015-AT-0002 | August 20, 2015
HUD’s Office of Multifamily Asset Management and Portfolio Oversight Did Not Comply With Its Requirements For Monitoring Management Agents’ Costs
Housing
- Status2015-AT-0002-001-AOpenClosed
Comply with its Management Agent Handbook requirements that stipulate HUD must perform management reviews of the management agent’s central office activities as well as regular onsite reviews of functions carried out at the projects. These central office reviews should be performed at least once every 18 months.
2015-CH-0001 | July 30, 2015
HUD Did Not Always Provide Adequate Oversight of Its Section 203(k) Rehabilitation Loan Mortgage Insurance Program
Housing
- Status2015-CH-0001-001-AOpenClosed$792,837Questioned 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.
We recommend that HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Single Family Housing require the lenders to support that the repairs to the properties associated with the 32 loans without evidence of permits complied with local code or reimburse HUD $792,837 for the escrow repair funds.
- Status2015-CH-0001-001-BOpenClosed$305,395Questioned 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.
We recommend that HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Single Family Housing require the lenders to support that the repairs to the properties associated with the six loans were not structural repairs or indemnify HUD for the four active loans with a total estimated loss of $222,073 and reimburse HUD for the actual loss of $83,322 incurred on the sale of two properties associated with FHA case numbers 052-4308836 and 034-8239100.