• Report: #61746

Complaint Review: HUD FHA

Thank You

Read how Ripoff Report saves consumers millions.

  • Submitted: Tue, June 24, 2003
  • Updated: Mon, May 02, 2011

  • Reported By:Denison Texas
HUD FHA
451 7th Street SW, Room 10000 Washington, District of Columbia U.S.A.

HUD FHA Hud corruption fraud tricked and lied to us Washington District of Columbia

*REBUTTAL Individual responds: What to do if potential HUD fraud threatens your deposit

*Consumer Comment: Bank of America & FHA/HUD PREDATORY LOAN - INNOCENT CHILD TO BE LEFT MOTHERLESS, WHILE CROOKED BANKER IS PROTECTED

*Consumer Comment: This matter of yours is "childs play" compared with BLATANT violations HUD does not prosecute!

*Consumer Comment: Money Makes the World Go Around - The Law is an Illusion!

*Consumer Comment: Money Makes the World Go Around - The Law is an Illusion!

*Consumer Comment: Out Come

*Consumer Comment: Out Come

*Consumer Comment: Out Come

*Consumer Comment: Out Come

*Consumer Suggestion: HUD does need to go! ..This agency is bloated, wasteful, corrupt, worthless and often harmful, and it needs to be abolished.

*Author of original report: The Fraud is Continuing - Mortgageit, Dallas, TX. / New York

*Author of original report: Consumers are Losing Rights in Government & more on Fraud in FHA

*Author of original report: Consumers are Losing Rights in Government & more on Fraud in FHA

*Author of original report: Consumers are Losing Rights in Government & more on Fraud in FHA

*Author of original report: HUD FHA Fraud - They Do Not Enforce This:

What's this?
What's this?
What's this?
Is this
Ripoff Report
About you?
Ripoff Report
A business' first
line of defense
on the Internet.
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..

Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™

SEO Reputation Management at its best!

----- Original Message -----
From: Billie
To: Vice-president Richard Cheney ; TX. ATTY GEN. - Greg Abbott ; Senator Kay Bailey Hutchisonable Senator Hutchison ; President George W. Bush ; Comm. of Gov. Affairs
Cc: Mary Vinson - O.A.G. ; Carisa - CBS
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 8:51 PM
Subject: Fraud within the HUD organization


I am sickened by the fact of the fraud, corruption, and bribery...that I am now aware of (and have proof of), within the HUD organization / and of the "good ol' boy - bought & paid for" environment, within the whole housing industry...which includes, but is not limited to, giving huge political contributions (bribes) to political entities/parties. - for them to "look the other way" in matters dealing with consumer protection.

I, and my "associates", have done our homework, and continue to do so. I hope that one day, ALL consumers will know the truth.

Fortunately, it is becoming widely-known.

For some odd reason, Congress (the Senate; the "Committee of Government Reform", and various other branches) do not seem to notice that HUD is even lying to THEM, within our own government, about "what is being done in the HUD program, and what they are doing to "improve" the statistics of fraud, within the FHA program." (Fraudulent Property Flipping; Predatory Lending; Crooked entities; etc.)

They are only telling you what you want to hear. There are definitely major problems, within the HUD organization.

Consumers are starting to realize, what is going on within the HUD organization, and they are not pleased. Our tax dollars are being wasted. (Partly on "bribes". - I am sure you are very familiar with what I am speaking of here.)

Such as the high-ranking HUD official, who was apprehended for accepting an $80,000 bribe + another bribe of a brand new Ferrari car. This high-ranking official was involved in an illegal "Predatory Lending" scheme himself!! (This case has been proven, and is on the record.)

Not only is fraud, corruption, and bribery rampant within the HUD organization, but it is a proven fact...
that "whistleblowers" within the HUD organization, are usually first demoted, to a lower rank/lower paying job - and soon after, they are fired for "untrue, trumped up charges". (This has also been proven.)

Some of these whistleblowers were only months - 1 year from their retirement, and HUD took that away from them too.

There are also thousands, and thousands (at least), of homebuyers who are now living in deficient houses - ALL because of fraudulent activities that have passed through the FHA program.

Not only is the HUD advertising/motto "the American Dream of Homeownerhsip" a deceptive lie, which should instead say, "The Ultimate Nightmare in the U.S.A."...but HUD is also deceiving consumers by making them think that such things as the HUD "Lender Accountability", and the HUD "Homebuyer Protection Plan" will cover the consumers, "due to bad appraisals, repairs not being done before closing, the house being overvalued"...when in FACT, HUD, and HUD employees, are not "enforcing" their own regulations. (Which can be PROVEN)

First HUD "allows" these fraudulent activities, and then HUD "allows" the fraudulent activities to persist, because they are not "enforcing" anything in these fraudulent cases. (And that can be proven.)

HUD employees are also well-known for doing the following:
After a homebuyer proves to HUD that fraudulent activities were involved in their cases, (and HUD's own investigation proves that fact), the HUD employees are then telling the consumers they are giving the crooked builder, crooked appraiser, crooked inspector, or crooked lender...a "Limited Denial of Participation." (LPD) It is then found out later, that the HUD employee did not even send the necessary paperwork to the HUD office in Washington, D.C., for this so-called "sanction" to be carried through.

HUD/ HUD employees do nothing but lie to consumers.
(From what we now know, there are MANY of us who would state that the facts stated above are true, and accurate...in a court of law, and would state many other facts as well.)

There is also no regulating/enforcment of HUD, by our government. For if there was...these scenerios would not continue, and would not continue in such a persistent manner.

Why is all of this fraud, corruption, and bribery happening?...because of MONEY. Why is nothing being enforced?...because of MONEY. Why is HUD being "allowed" to continue their fraud and corruption?...because of MONEY.

"The Federal Housing Administration (FHA) was established in 1934 to help the market after the Great Depression. Today, FHA helps borrowers with low-to-moderate-income purchase homes with low down payments The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) authorizes FHA to insure lenders against foreclosure losses. The "mortgage insurance premium" collected from the borrower on each loan helps defray costs associated with this program. "

Are we to think that these fraudulent activities have been going on since 1934? And isn't it plain to see why so many crooked lending companies are behind the crooked appraisals, crooked inspections, and working with the crooked builders? It is because the lending companies get their money from FHA, even if the home buyers of these deficient houses have to foreclose ("due to non-disclosure" of the deficiencies of the house, by the crooked appraisers, crooked inspectors, and crooked lending companies." / and the repair costs to fix the houses - which are even more than what they paid for the house, or what the house will ever be worth.)
The whole thing is a "Racketeering" circus act.

HUD also hides these cases from Congress.
(It has been stated by others, that documentation and proof of these cases end up in the shredder.)

Lending companies are also hiding the facts of these cases, from the proper authorities. Why? Because the lending companies are IN on the whole thing.

These crooked lending companies are also involved in selling, and reselling, the mortgages of these deficient houses, to other lending companies - without disclosures of any kind: that the houses are majorly deficient; and that the home buyers have already filed formal complaints about these houses, and the fraudulent activities that were involved.

This in itself, is also against the law. Not ONLY are they ripping off home buyers, but they are also ripping off the honest lending companies.

Many, many consumers...are starting to holler that "it is time for HUD to go". If you have not noticed this, then either:

1. You are not noticing anything - the same way you are not noticing fraudulent activities within the HUD organization.
2. You are accepting bribes yourself.
3. You have a relative who works within the housing industry.
4. You just don't give a damn about consumers

In my own case: It has now been PROVEN, that our house was involved in a "Fraudulent Property Flipping" scheme.
The sellers, the "HUD approved" lender, the "HUD approved appraiser", the "HUD approved" inspector, and HUD's non-enforcement of their own regulations, ALL played a part in the illegal activities.

Our house has many major deficiencies. (A quick example would be: On the day of closing, the house did not have working electricity in 1/2 of the house; the central heating unit was duct-taped together, had exposed wiring, and did not work.
The commode would not even flush...and the list goes on and on.
Which also includes lead-based paint, on the exterior and interior of the house.)

We had to give $58,000, for a house that is not worth over $17,000 - $20,000, and repair estimates state: $95,094.71 , "to bring the house up to minumum living standards."

HUD (FHA), and the fraudulent parties that HUD "allows" to participate within the FHA program, have ruined our lives, and the lives of thousands and thousands (at least) of other consumers. (In all states.)

(Note: It has been found, in previous court cases, that:
"Not only does a lending company, appraiser, and inspector have copability to FHA, but THEY ALSO HAVE COPABILITY TO THE BUYER."

HUD / (HUD EMPLOYEES) ALSO HAS A RESPONSIBILITY TO CONSUMERS: To be truthful; To enforce against fraudulent activities. (And there is NO excuse for not enforcing, when HUD KNOWS fraudulent activities have, indeed, been involved.)


----- Original Message -----
From: Billie
To: HUD Secretary Mel Martinez ; HUD Inspector General - Kenneth Donohue
Cc: Nancy Seats - HADD Pres. ; Mr. Wilkirson
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 8:25 PM
Subject: Fw: have our house payments been found yet


Specifically TO: Kenneth Donohue
Specifically TO: Mel Martinez

RE: "Misplaced" mortgage payments; and Fraud within the HUD/FHA program.

Not only have we been defrauded out of $58,000 on this deficient house (over $110,000 over the life-term of the loan), but we are still getting ripped-off to this day.

Chase, and MortgageIT, cannot seem to find what they did with our April & May mortgage payments.

I have shown Chase & MortgageIT a copy of my "Delivery Confirmation", where the postman delivered the money to the Chase mailing address. (It was scanned into the postman's computer scanner, when he delivered it.) I also had that verified.

Although we have proof (& also copies of our money orders) where we paid it...these mortgage companies need to get there _ _ _ _ together because we have had enough of this crap.

That, and the fact that HUD has not enforced this "Fraudulent Propertly Flipping" scheme, has left our lives in a state of turmoil, and we are living in a nightmare.

I recently received information, that HUD employees are known for sitting there cracking jokes and laughing, about home buyers who are living in deficient houses; have had things ripped-off from their houses before moving in after closing; and other similar scenerios. I have also had the pleasure of speaking personally, to some former HUD employees...who are no longer with "the Department".

These facts, and the fact that HUD has refused to enforce our own fraudulent case/ and enforce their own regulations, sickens me.

It has also come to my attention recently, (and has been stated by others) that there is much fraud, corruption, and bribery going on within the HUD organization. I wait for the day, that all of these facts come out in the public's eye - so that they can see what is really going on within the HUD organization...and see what their tax-paying dollars are being used for ("not being used for".)

Thank you,

Billie M. & Hubert E. Teague


----- Original Message -----
From: Billie
To: Vance Morris - Director of Single Familiy - HUD
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 8:05 PM
Subject: Fw: have our house payments been found yet


----- Original Message -----
From: Billie
TO: Jonathan Foxx - Mortgageit, Vice-President
To: Larry Lewis - Mortgageit, Chief of Operations
Cc: Rosemary Hesse - Chase Manhattan Mortgage Co.
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2003 3:31 PM
Subject: have our house payments been found yet


TO: MortgageIT
TO: Chase Manhattan Mortgage Co.
FROM: Billie M. & Hubert E. Teague
RE: Missing/Unposted April & May Mortgage Payments


Hello.

We are wondering if you have found out about the posting of our April & May mortgage payments yet.

We are worried about this, as we now have over $1300 of our money somehow "missing".

Not only did Chase make MIT Lending Co., Dallas, TX. / Mortgageit "buy back" the mortgage, due to non-disclosure of the deficiency of the house, and of our complaints...but NOW we have to put up with this, as well. We have had enough of this mess.

I have also now written a letter to "Homecomings Financial", the "new" lending company (that Mortgageit has now sold the mortgage to - 3 weeks after having to "buy it back")...to see if THEY are aware of the the deficient nature of the house, and of our complaints. (As you are aware, Mortgageit has stated to us that, "Yes, we made all disclosures to Homecomings Financial, about the condition of the house, and of your complaints.")

I'm sure, that Mortgageit also did not disclose the facts to the new lenders, either.

We also have never gotten a "Hello" letter from our "new" lenders, so at this point in time...we do not even know WHO our lenders are, anymore. We also do not know WHO cashed our money orders, for our April and May mortgage payments.

I suppose I will now have to get a tracer put on those.

This house closed on August 14, 2001, and we have been living a nightmare ever since. There is just no end to it, is there...


Thank you,

Billie M. & Hubert E. Teague

Billie
Denison, Texas
U.S.A.

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 06/24/2003 10:54 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/HUD-FHA/Washington-District-of-Columbia-20410/HUD-FHA-Hud-corruption-fraud-tricked-and-lied-to-us-Washington-District-of-Columbia-61746. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.

Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.

Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on HUD FHA

Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Search Tips
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?
REBUTTALS & REPLIES:
0Author 14Consumer 1Employee/Owner
Updates & Rebuttals

#1 REBUTTAL Individual responds

What to do if potential HUD fraud threatens your deposit

AUTHOR: RaymondR - (United States of America)

The U.S. Department of HUD manages Section 8 programs that provide rental housing assistance to private landlords on behalf of registered low-income households across the country. Often, it's not an easy road to travel, though. This occurred to a Bankrate.com reader, who explained to the website's Real Estate Adviser Steve McLinden that she could lose her $1,000 cash deposit on a HUD home due to what she believes to be fraud. The proof is here: What to do if potential HUD fraud threatens your deposit
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#2 Consumer Comment

Bank of America & FHA/HUD PREDATORY LOAN - INNOCENT CHILD TO BE LEFT MOTHERLESS, WHILE CROOKED BANKER IS PROTECTED

AUTHOR: Iwillfight - (United States of America)

Operation Stolen Dreams takes wrong direction

Innocent child to be left motherless, while crooked banker is protected.

Bank of America & HUD bring tragedy to 6yr old little girl

-A first-time home buyer who is a single mom with a low income has been federally indicted on Mortgage Fraud Charges, and is left to blame for the Predatory Loan she received through Bank of America.

As if being the victim in a predatory loan and losing her home to foreclosure wasnt brutal enough for Meggan Alexander, she now faces the terrifying possibility of a 30 year prison sentence that dangles in the hands of a Federal Court; and this punishment would be for something that Bank of Americas loan officer did. The real tragedy for Meggan, though, is living every moment in fear that she may soon be ripped away from a precious little girl who needs, and very much deserves, her mommy.

My Name is Meggan -- and This is the Beginning of My Story:

Predatory doesnt even begin to describe the experience that I went through. Within days of closing the loan on our dream home, I began to discover the true nightmare into which the lender and realtor had lured me. The entire system of ceilings fell in because of hidden water problems, exposing toxic black mold that had been intentionally hidden. The mold was found to be throughout the house, and I was now told by a certified mold inspector that the home was not safe to live in.

Before purchasing our home we had requested a pest inspection upon which our purchase of the home was contingent . We were assured by our realtor and loan officer that the pest inspection had passed with flying colors. But while attempting to remedy the mold problem, the un-thinkable came crawling out of every wall we touched. Termites, Carpenter Ants, and Powder Post Beatles had been feasting on our home for so long that the entire structure was caving in. The damage done by this pest infestation was so bad that while we were living in the house, the hardwood floors upstairs buckled almost 8 inches in a two-day period.

With more inspections, we found more problems that had been intentionally covered up by the sellers and realtors, and the bank lending officer was aware of these problems. The city inspector found layers of dangerous asbestos In every furnace duct. Several contractors told us that to fix the structural damage of our home it would need to be completely demolished and rebuilt, at a cost that would be at least as much as the entire purchase price of the home.

Why did this nightmare happen to Meggan Alexander?

A fraudulent pest inspection that was arranged by the bank officer and the realtor.

An FHA inspection that did not even identify the correct property components or conditions.

A Bank of America lending officer who was getting paid by the number of loans that she completed, and who without my knowledge put fictitious information in my loan file so that she could close my loan and get paid.

A realtor who refused to give me copies of papers that I signed.

This is just a portion of what happened to me as the result of a predatory home loan. I NEED YOUR HELP TO TELL MY STORY! If you will help me tell my story I can provide you with a thick notebook full of photos and documents to tell this story that people need to hear; AND YOU CAN HELP A LITTLE GIRL SAVE HER INNOCENT MOTHER FROM PAYING THE PRICE FOR SOMETHING THAT WAS DONE BY A GREEDY AND PREDATORY BANKER.

I dont have much time to tell this story -- PLEASE CALL ME NOW.

THANK YOU.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#3 Consumer Comment

This matter of yours is "childs play" compared with BLATANT violations HUD does not prosecute!

AUTHOR: Fl_landscam.victims - (U.S.A.)

These issues of yours are miniscule by comparison to the SCAM going on in Bradford County, North Florida that HUD will tolerate after the RIGHT signature is "greased"!

On Hampton Lake in Florida, developers Steve and Edith Smith (Butterfly Enthusiasts and Bible Thumpers) are selling Lake Front home-sites that are ACTUALLY Jurisdictional Wetlands owned and controlled by the State of Florida by virtue of sovereignty. You cannot step foot on any wetlands (legally) or cut a blade of grass! (Build a home, dream on!) And they market this garbage as the Edith Ellen Estates Subdivision! They inherited this worthless property from granddaddy along with their six-figure annual trust fund payments for life , then go around STEALING half paralyzed 83-year old lady's money who are in wheelchairs!!! How low can you get? (Insert proper vocabulary here #$%&&*!!!)

HUD investigates for 2-years and says they are throwing the book at them, but Bible Boy and his partner in crime Wayne E. Douglas, Sr. from Douglas Realty in Starke (Ex-Enron Fame/got out just-in-time!) have their pencil-size wiener attorney James J. Taylor, Jr. make a deal to pay off HUD , AND PUT THEIR STAMP OF APPROVAL ON EVERYTHING while NUMEROUS VIOLATIONS OF STATE & FEDERAL LAW demand PRISON!!! But since the con-artists come from a wealthy pedigree and ripped-off several million dollars from people, they are above the law. By the way the law says 5-years imprisonment for EACH COUNT. That's 3 millenniums! (RECORDS OF EVERYTHING too!)

HUD will tell you in the end just continue to seek the advice of an attorney and go jump in a lake.

And, the EVEN BIGGER SCAM IS: The Chief District Judge of Florida FREDERICK D. SMITH allows developer STEPHEN F. SMITH to countersue his customers back for SLANDER! (Same family and share DNA. Mom & Dad=brother & sister aka hillbilly). Can you all spell CORRUPTION, COLLUSION, CONSPIRACY, FRAUD, and RACKATEERING???

BOTTOM LINE: You (the customer) CANNOT HAVE YOUR CASE EVER HEARD IN A COURTROOM (Bradford County) or even the Appellate Court in Tallahassee? They will NOT let the customer appeal anything because the CON-MEN filed a SLANDER counterclaims they DO NOT EVEN PURSUE!!! So the customer will now enter the LEGAL ABYSS for ETERNITY!!! While all along HUD is funded with tax dollars PAID by the US Citizens of America. What a JOKE!!!

With the Fox Guarding the Henhouse the U.S.A. is DOOMED!!! It's ALL ABOUT THE MONEY. PERIOD!!! That's why everyone is moving to Costa Rica instead of Florida!!!

Buyer Beware, you have been warned!!!
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#4 Consumer Comment

Money Makes the World Go Around - The Law is an Illusion!

AUTHOR: Fl_landscam.victims - (U.S.A.)

HUD will NOT do anything to STOP even the most blatant rip-offs since any decisions are in the hands of a select few. When millions of dollars are stake, the Good Ol' Boys will grease each other's palms to play ball.

For example a 2-year investigation (???) for the following scam currently being marketed to the public: (not stated dishonestly)


Swampland/Jurisdictional Wetlands FOR SALE - $35,000.00+ (Hampton Lake) Bradford County Florida
Lots average 2 plus acres.

For more information see www.fllsv.com

Jurisdictional Wetlands/Swampland Lakefront Lots Edith Ellen Estates Unbuildable Non-Developable Home-Sites in Permitted Subdivision, Homeowner's Association, Paved Road, featured lot is actually a Drainage Easement in Flood Zone, 98% RESTRICTED. LOT CANNOT BE LEGALLY DEVELOPED, CANNOT STEP FOOT ON, CAMP, OR LANDSCAPE PROPERTY. GREAT FLIP POTENTIAL TO UNSUSPECTING BUYER. For More Information contact HUD - Debbie Reid 202-402-2063, SRWMD - Clay Coarsey 386-362-1001, FBI - James Casey 904-721-1211, Dept. of Law Enforcement - Mark Warren 904-598-6613, Gov. Charlie Crist 850-488-7146, AG Bill McCollum 850-414-3300, SOLD by Douglas Realty 904-964-3073 in Starke. Stephen F. Smith & Edith Ellen Smith Developers.


Will result in the following conclusion:

"Upon review of the documentation, the department has determined that no action by this office is warranted. In conclusion, HUD does not intend to pursue your allegations futher and suggest you continue to seek the advice of an attorney."

IT'S TIME FOR THE PEOPLE TO STAND UP AND PUT A STOP TO THIS CORRUPTION!!!
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#5 Consumer Comment

Money Makes the World Go Around - The Law is an Illusion!

AUTHOR: Fl_landscam.victims - (U.S.A.)

HUD will NOT do anything to STOP even the most blatant rip-offs since any decisions are in the hands of a select few. When millions of dollars are stake, the Good Ol' Boys will grease each other's palms to play ball.

For example a 2-year investigation (???) for the following scam currently being marketed to the public: (not stated dishonestly)


Swampland/Jurisdictional Wetlands FOR SALE - $35,000.00+ (Hampton Lake) Bradford County Florida
Lots average 2 plus acres.

For more information see www.fllsv.com

Jurisdictional Wetlands/Swampland Lakefront Lots Edith Ellen Estates Unbuildable Non-Developable Home-Sites in Permitted Subdivision, Homeowner's Association, Paved Road, featured lot is actually a Drainage Easement in Flood Zone, 98% RESTRICTED. LOT CANNOT BE LEGALLY DEVELOPED, CANNOT STEP FOOT ON, CAMP, OR LANDSCAPE PROPERTY. GREAT FLIP POTENTIAL TO UNSUSPECTING BUYER. For More Information contact HUD - Debbie Reid 202-402-2063, SRWMD - Clay Coarsey 386-362-1001, FBI - James Casey 904-721-1211, Dept. of Law Enforcement - Mark Warren 904-598-6613, Gov. Charlie Crist 850-488-7146, AG Bill McCollum 850-414-3300, SOLD by Douglas Realty 904-964-3073 in Starke. Stephen F. Smith & Edith Ellen Smith Developers.


Will result in the following conclusion:

"Upon review of the documentation, the department has determined that no action by this office is warranted. In conclusion, HUD does not intend to pursue your allegations futher and suggest you continue to seek the advice of an attorney."

IT'S TIME FOR THE PEOPLE TO STAND UP AND PUT A STOP TO THIS CORRUPTION!!!
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#6 Consumer Comment

Out Come

AUTHOR: Lillian H - (U.S.A.)

I would like to know what was the out come with MortgageIT. I had probems with them to if you could right to me my email is I also have posted a complain the one from Newburgh NY.Thank you Lillian

CLICK here to see why Rip-off Report, as a matter of policy, deleted either a phone number, link or e-mail address from this Report.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#7 Consumer Comment

Out Come

AUTHOR: Lillian H - (U.S.A.)

I would like to know what was the out come with MortgageIT. I had probems with them to if you could right to me my email is I also have posted a complain the one from Newburgh NY.Thank you Lillian

CLICK here to see why Rip-off Report, as a matter of policy, deleted either a phone number, link or e-mail address from this Report.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#8 Consumer Comment

Out Come

AUTHOR: Lillian H - (U.S.A.)

I would like to know what was the out come with MortgageIT. I had probems with them to if you could right to me my email is I also have posted a complain the one from Newburgh NY.Thank you Lillian

CLICK here to see why Rip-off Report, as a matter of policy, deleted either a phone number, link or e-mail address from this Report.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#9 Consumer Comment

Out Come

AUTHOR: Lillian H - (U.S.A.)

I would like to know what was the out come with MortgageIT. I had probems with them to if you could right to me my email is I also have posted a complain the one from Newburgh NY.Thank you Lillian

CLICK here to see why Rip-off Report, as a matter of policy, deleted either a phone number, link or e-mail address from this Report.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#10 Consumer Suggestion

HUD does need to go! ..This agency is bloated, wasteful, corrupt, worthless and often harmful, and it needs to be abolished.

AUTHOR: Cindy - (U.S.A.)

Like many gov't buracracies, HUD no longer exists for the purpose it was created for, (if it ever did). The ideal consumer protection agency would be run for and by consumers, including a complete uncensored database of complaints on any companies the agency "regulated." The complaint database would perform most of the function to protect consumers simply by giving them the real opportunity to make INFORMED decisions. It is a total MYTH that most complaints are easily found by doing research, and even deep research is impractical or impossible without a computer and the internet. Most of our senior citizens are not online, and overall, only about half the population is online. HUD takes money from consumers in the way of mortgage insurance for starters...and provides almost nothing in return. What it does provide requires the consumer to be a veritable private detective to find out about and then a pit bull dog to enforce. This agency is bloated, wasteful, corrupt, worthless and often harmful, and it needs to be abolished.
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#11 Author of original report

The Fraud is Continuing - Mortgageit, Dallas, TX. / New York

AUTHOR: Billie - (U.S.A.)

Not only has Mortgageit been involved in a fraudulent appraisal of this house; a fraudulent final inspection of this house; paid for another "VC Appraisal" report (inspection) on 03/26/2002, (which proved the major deficiencies of the house...

(But Mortgageit refuses to do anything about this fraudulent case)...Mortgageit also sold this mortgage to Chase Manhattan Mortgage Co., without disclosures (even though Mortgageit, and the FHA underwriter, Dan Donnelly, were VERY aware of the facts of this case, and that we have been filing complaints since the house closed, Aug. 14, 2001. Mortgageit sold the mortgage approximately 3 months after closing, and without disclosure.

Chase has now made Mortgageit "buy back" the house, "due to the nature of the house, and our complaints".

(AS STATED IN THE DOCUMENTATION SENT BELOW, FROM LARRY LEWIS, CHIEF OF OPERATIONS OF MORTGAGEIT, MR. LEWIS STATED THE FOLLOWING, IN REGARDS TO THE LENDING COMPANY THEY THEN SOLD THE MORTGAGE TO, 3 WEEKS AFTER HAVING TO "BUY BACK" THE MORTGAGE:

---------------
"On the other matter you raised relating to disclosure, we have made full Disclosure of all known facts relating to the property and circumstances surrounding the assertion of your claims to RFC/Homecomings."
---------------
*** Mortgageit has lied AGAIN. I spoke to the new lending company today. They were given NO disclosures about this house, or our complaints. I will now be sending pictures, documentation, and proof...to their legal department.

Fraudulent property flipping has been PROVEN in our case.

The total mortgage amount, that we are having to pay, needs to be "restructured to reflect the KNOWN facts: that the house was overvalued (whether repairs had been done or not; the appraisal was quoted at an "already pre-determined amount, set by the lender"; the the appraisal report stated: "The appraisal amount is after repairs are done"; and that NO repairs were done before closing." (Even though, all parties "signed to false statements on legal documents", that all repairs had been done."

Even the mortgage underwriter, of Mortgageit - the person who did the underwriting of this house - Dan Donnelly - stated to us in written documentation that: "This house slipped through the loopholes. Everyone messed up on this thing. I have looked, and I can find no documentation in our files showing that any repairs were ever done before closing. We messed up on this thing, too, and if it was just us...we could do something about it, but everyone messed up on this thing."

(What does this have to do with refusing to restructure the total mortgage amount? EVERYONE messed up, so NOONE is going to do a damn thing about it?)
--------------------

I also found out today, that the new lending company was not told that "we have already paid our April and May mortgage payment, but Chase and Mortgageit, do not know which one of them even have our money." (Which is...according to Wilshire Credit Co...over $2200.)


----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Lewis"
To: "'Billie'"
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 7:19 AM
Subject: RE: Your mortgage payments


> Mr. and Mrs. Teague,
>
> I will have my staff resend a new "hello" letter to you regarding the
> servicing transfer. It seems that you also did not receive the Chase
> "goodbye" letter either so I will ask them to resend it to you as well.
>
> On the other matter you raised relating to disclosure, we have made full
> disclosure of all known facts relating to the property and circumstances
> surrounding the assertion of your claims to RFC/Homecomings. I have also had
> the opportunity to review the series of e-mails drafted by you to varying
> parties. Please be advised that at this point you will not be receiving
> responses from anyone at MortgageIT, Inc. or our d/b/a MIT Lending except
> for me or our counsel. No one else has the authority to speak on behalf of
> the company. I regret this action, however, it is my desire that we are able
> to respond to new e-mails and claims you may make in a timely manner and
> therefore they need to come to a single location.
------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: Billie [mailto:billiemichele@cableone.net]
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2003 7:40 PM
To: Mortgageit
Cc: Mr. Wilkirson; Vance Morris - Director of Single Familiy - HUD; Susan Finister-HUD; Ronald Bailey - HUD; Mary Vinson - O.A.G.; HUD Secr. Mel Martinez; Hotline@hudoig.gov
Subject: Wilshire Credit Corporation has NOW acquired the loan?


TO: Mortgageit/MIT Lending Co.
TO: Larry Lewis, Chief of Operations, Mortgageit/MIT Lending Co.
FROM: Hubert E. & Billie M. Teague
RE: Mortgageit/MIT Lending Co. - Loan # D02217, Teague, Hubert

"On April 29, 2003 MortgageIT, repurchased your loan from Chase Mortgage Company.
On May 23, 2003 your loan was resold again to RFC/HomeComings Financial.
On June 13, 2003 your loan was "assigned, sold or transferred from MortgageIT, Inc. to Wilshire Credit Corporation effective."

Did RFC/HomeComings Financial, in fact, ever acquire this mortgage from you, as made in your statements below?, or did Homecomings Financial back out of the deal, or what ????
How can Mortgageit/MIT Lending Co. give the loan to Wilshire Credit Corporation on June 13, 2003, when:
On May 23, 2003 Mortgageit sold the loan to to RFC/HomeComings Financial ???

We will be waiting for a "Hello" postal letter from Wilshire Credit Corporation.
(We never got any documentation from Homecomings Financial, as of yet.)
--------------
Mr. Lewis, the following was stated in an email from you to us, on May 28, 2003. (in answer to our many emails to MIT, inquiring about information.)

MortgageIT has also sent you a required "Hello" letter indicating that your June payment is to be made to: MortgageIT. (We never got this letter.)

On April 29, 2003 MortgageIT, repurchased your loan from Chase Mortgage Company.
On May 23, 2003 your loan was resold again to RFC/HomeComings Financial.

You will be receiving similar documentation again to transfer the servicing from MortgageIT for the July payment On the other matter you raised relating to disclosure, we have made full disclosure of all known facts relating to the property and circumstances surrounding the assertion of your claims to RFC/Homecomings.
----------------------
We received a postal letter from Mortgageit/MIT Lending Co., today (June 2). You dated your postal letter May 29, 2003.
You NOW state that this mortgage has be "assigned, sold or transferred" from MortgageIT, Inc. to Wilshire Credit Corporation effective June 13, 2003.
-------------------
Thank you,
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#12 Author of original report

Consumers are Losing Rights in Government & more on Fraud in FHA

AUTHOR: Billie - (U.S.A.)

Consumers better realize, they are losing their rights quickly, and they don't even know it.
They better stand up and do something about it, before it's too late.

I have included information here on many things that will amaze, and shock you:

------------------
INSIGHT MAGAZINE:

"Who Is Guarding The HUD Guards?"
Posted March 3, 2003

By Martin Edwin Andersen

Is HUD Secretary Mel Martinez unprotected by IGs Secret Service detail?

The question is as old as Ancient Rome: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Who will guard the guards?) It was a question raised yet again when media attention focused on pistol-packing Inspector General Janet Rehnquist at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and allegations of document shredding in her office, long considered a model by internal investigators at other agencies. But the epicenter of complaints of wrongdoing by those in charge of policing key government functions may be the Office of the Inspector General (IG) at the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

Insiders tell Insight that investigative-staff morale has plummeted at HUD in the face of growing allegations of wrongdoing involving senior officials in the internal-affairs office. According to an internal memorandum obtained by Insight, in just 21 months at least 56 agents, nearly 25 percent of the total investigative workforce, voluntarily have left the IG's employment, an attrition rate critics say is 10 times the average.

In place of senior and seasoned investigators, critics complain, a group of retired Secret Service officials, many unskilled in the kind of white-collar fraud investigations required at HUD, have been appointed to what one IG watcher complained is a growing "good-old-boy" network reflecting senior management's background in the presidential-protection service. While investigative talent has leached out of HUD, critics contend, management has compensated by lowering the bar on investigatory targets -- going after what one agent called "low-hanging fruit" -- and systematically giving Congress misleading information about the scope and success of those inquiries it conducts.

An Insight investigation into the inner workings of the HUD IG office has revealed a complex web of alleged abuses of investigative power. Waste and mismanagement of monies appropriated to crack down on the hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of fraud in federal housing programs is common, and allegations of disregard for civil-service hiring rules and a penchant for political cronyism appear to reach into the highest ranks of the investigations office. Scores of documents examined by this magazine, made available by congressional critics of HUD, suggest that within the very office meant to audit, investigate and evaluate the spending by HUD of billions in taxpayer dollars are senior officials who have engaged in chronic wrongdoing.

In a confidential letter prepared for delivery to Congress and obtained by Insight nearly one-dozen current and former IG officials, including winners of that office's highest awards, say current leadership at the HUD IG office "cannot be trusted to address the abuses of investigative power, waste of federal funds, mismanagement, political cronyism and disregard for merit principles within its own office." The IG managers, they charge, engage in cover-ups, "abuse their office to remain in power, ruthlessly crush all dissent and resist any external accountability."

For example, the former San Francisco-based Western regional director of HUD, Richard Mallory, was appointed by President George W. Bush and is a career housing expert. Last year Mallory used his post aggressively to advocate that strong monitoring and enforcement actions should be taken against that city's troubled federal housing programs. His concerns included the city of San Francisco's misuse of HUD community-development funds to sell a property to a convicted felon, a friend of Mayor Willie Brown, who deeded the property to the Nation of Islam for use as a religious institution.

In response, Mallory was warned by one of his superiors that HUD Deputy Secretary Alphonso Jackson, the country's No. 2 housing official, is a close friend of Brown and that Mallory should not anger either Brown or the San Francisco Housing Authority (SFHA). Mallory's predecessor in the post already had been demoted for complaining about long-standing corruption and mismanagement at SFHA, which also had been accused by the HUD IG office of widespread mismanagement.

On Feb. 20, 2002, Jackson fired Mallory without giving a reason. In a letter a week later former California governor Pete Wilson, a Republican and former U.S. senator, sent the White House a letter charging that Mallory had been fired at Brown's request after having exposed internal corruption at HUD. "As I mentioned in our conversation today," Wilson wrote to White House Counsel Al Gonzalez, "Mallory's firing was requested by the mayor in a phone call to the deputy secretary. Also [HUD manager] Lily Lee has arrived in [San Francisco] to be the acting regional director."

Wilson added: "Don't hesitate to call if I can be of any assistance. The president and [HUD] Secretary [Mel] Martinez deserve to be protected."

In response to his removal, Mallory contacted the former regional HUD IG, Daniel Pifer, requesting an investigation of his discharge, which he believed to be the result of retaliation. According to local press reports -- confirmed by the confidential letter prepared for Congress -- Jackson and Lee (who reportedly had been removed earlier under a cloud as head of the Santa Ana [Calif.] Homeownership Center) were close friends, and the SFHA was about to be forgiven some $1.8 million in debt it owed to HUD.

As Pifer prepared to investigate Mallory's charges, he was informed by HUD headquarters in Washington that the unfolding San Francisco situation was considered to be "a very big deal" and that then-IG-designate Kenneth Donohue had been briefed on the matter. A day later, sources say, an acting deputy IG for investigations placed Pifer on one week's administrative leave. When he returned, according to insiders, the assistant IG for investigations ordered him to "stand down on the Mallory issue" and to "initiate no action at this time." The matter was allowed to drop.

Sources at the HUD IG office complain that a climate of orchestrated witch-hunts and the creation of scapegoats pervades the current management structure, adding to the attrition rate and skills drain. They point to the case of Jeffrey Finn, a former special agent in charge of the IG's Denver-based Rocky Mountain district office. Finn did not contest his removal from federal employment in January 2001 after being the target of numerous accusations of misconduct and administrative violations. According to court documents and the testimony of current and former IG employees, however, IG efforts to "destroy" Finn with trumped-up criminal charges also were used to wreck the careers of a number of employees with whom he had a relationship.

An affidavit offered by a senior IG official claiming, under penalty of perjury, that case documents had been shredded in accordance with existing policy cited a policy that does not exist. A senior IG official appeared to perjure himself when he claimed that his decision to remove two employees from their posts could not have had anything to do with their testimony in support of Finn because he knew nothing about it -- yet throughout the court proceedings he had prepared e-mail updates to colleagues around the country. Negative information about two members of the IG team investigating Finn that cast doubt on their credibility never was disclosed to the defense as required.

In throwing out four of the charges against Finn, U.S. District Judge Walker D. Miller found that the HUD IG office not only had engaged in the illegal shredding of potentially exculpatory evidence but also had waged a campaign of "outrageous, improper intimidation" and coercion against Rocky Mountain district agents and administrative employees. Finn was found not guilty of having misused $200 in funds, and Miller has not yet ruled on the other charge -- that Finn ordered a subordinate to change the receipt for these funds from "fence damage" to "storage costs."

IG sources tell Insight that at least half-a-million dollars in federal funds were used to prosecute Finn. The IG investigation of the Rocky Mountain field office found only $18.80 in missing funds out of $1,450,177 in expenditures made by the office during a 33-month period.

Allegations of intimidation did not stop there, IG sources say. They extended to the Fort Worth, Texas, office where two highly regarded IG managers, special agent in charge (SAC) Larry Chapman and assistant SAC James Malloy, one of two American Indian agents in the IG office, were forced into retirement after refusing to support the credibility of the Denver investigation by taking punitive actions in Texas. At issue: their alleged failure to retaliate against former Denver employees who had testified in favor of Finn.

Angry IG staff also have complained that Donohue and Deputy IG Michael P. Stephens, both retired Secret Service agents, have converted the office into "an employment agency" for their retired Secret Service friends. "These retired Secret Service agents, largely white males, have inundated the Inspector General's office at high-graded GS 14/15 positions," according to one source. Retired Secret Service agents "who are now the favored elite" in the office, say insiders, include a deputy assistant IG for investigations, a senior Special Investigation Division (SID) agent, the special agent in charge for the Southeast/ Caribbean region and at least five SID senior agents.

One of the former Secret Service agents selected for a senior HUD IG post later was sued successfully by an IG special agent for sexual harassment; this after the man's estranged wife, saying she feared for her safety, had turned in his weapon to the Anaheim, Calif., police department after he allegedly assaulted her.

IG agents are preparing to take their concerns to a Republican senator who is the chair of a powerful committee. They say they will bypass referral of their complaints to the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency (PCIE) for investigation because, although the PCIE is within the Office of Management and Budget, "it is controlled by the IG community and therefore not independent. In the unlikely event that the council found cause to discipline one of its own, the result would be no more than a 'slap on the wrist,' given that the council has no statutory authority to take independent corrective action."

Martin Edwin Andersen is a reporter for Insight magazine.

------------------------------------------
HUD EMPLOYEES LAUGH AT RIPPED-OFF HOME BUYERS:

Fairhousing.com

Posted on Tue, Feb. 19, 2002

HUD's EXCUSES: A HOUSE OF CARDS
By Monica Yant Kinney
Inquirer Columnist

Last month's tale of a home buyer who got snookered after settlement drew a slew of responses from folks with similar tales of woe. And as the horror stories mounted, officials from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) once again came up with laughable explanations and excuses for the not-so-mysterious thefts and disappearances.

The saga began with Antoinette "Toni" Mann, who bought a charming 1950s-era Olney twin last fall only to discover after writing the $53,000 check that someone had stolen her furnace, nine antique sconces, and 11 glass doorknobs. She found skid marks on the basement floor where the heater had been dragged out, and live electrical wires hanging from the walls.

Mann, a University of Pennsylvania researcher, wouldn't stomach the $6,000 loss. She demanded reimbursement from HUD and Golden Feather Realty Services, which has a King of Prussia office and a $236 million contract to manage 9,500 HUD properties across the country - including 600 in Philadelphia.

After weeks of phone calls, e-mails and faxes, Mann finally received a check for $3,538.47 for the cost of the furnace. She cashed it and hired a lawyer, determined to fight for the full cost of her losses, including having to rewire her house.

"They must be out of their minds," Mann said. "I'm not giving up."

Repeat offenders
Two days after I wrote about Mann, I received a four-page, single-spaced e-mail from Colleen Yaremko, a Northeast High School computer graphics teacher who suffered the real estate equivalent of spamming by HUD.

Two years ago, Yaremko bought a Mount Airy house through HUD's "Teacher Next Door" program, which gave the educator half-off the $72,000 price. Before settlement, the heater was stolen. So were nine old hardwood and glass-paned doors.

The theft led one lender to dump her, and another to charge her a higher-risk rate. The missing heater evolved into a running dispute over how many BTUs the old one had. She, too, has a lawyer and plans to sue.

"I feel like I started out with an Audi and wound up with a Ford Pinto," Yaremko lamented.

And then there is William Siemion, a Port Richmond union ironworker with a nose for bad news.

Siemion was working nights at the Kimmel Center when he read the column about Toni Mann. One morning a few days later, he noticed three men enter a vacant HUD house a few doors down the block.

Soon, they were loading a truck with a furnace, antique radiators, window shades, curtains, screen doors, cabinets and light fixtures.

They even took the kitchen sink.

Real-time crime
When Siemion asked what the men were doing, he was told to mind his own bleeping business. So he called the cops, who came and left after the crew flashed identification.
Before the workers left with the loot, he said, they tacked up a Golden Feather sign on the house.

I asked officials at HUD and Golden Feather to talk about the thefts.

Golden Feather pushed me off on HUD. The brass at HUD thought so highly of the issue they had a spokeswoman answer via e-mail.

The spokeswoman acknowledged a "marked increase" in thievery, which she said HUD takes "very seriously." Incidentally, she added, HUD wants to "mitigate the neighborhood impact of 'eyesore' properties."

My e-mailer, Ileana Colon, wouldn't finger HUD contractors as the culprits. She said Golden Feather is paid based on HUD home sale prices, so it wouldn't be in the company's interest to steal furnaces and doors.

Colon is in public relations, not policing, but she did note that lots of people have access to these HUD houses, suggesting that real estate agents, potential buyers - even city workers - could be the real crooks.

Then she typed out my very first government directive:

"If The Philadelphia Inquirer becomes aware of any such incidents . . . HUD expects to be notified of these specific incidents in order to investigate and resolve them immediately."
--------------------------------------------
"Report to the Ranking Minority

Member, Subcommittee on Housing and

Transportation, Committee on Banking,

Housing, and Urban Affairs, U.S. Senate

United States General Accounting Office

GAO

October 2001

SINGLE-FAMILY

HOUSING

October 24, 2001

The Honorable Wayne Allard

Ranking Minority Member, Subcommittee

on Housing and Transportation

Committee on Banking, Housing,

and Urban Affairs

United States Senate

Dear Senator Allard:

The Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Federal Housing Administration (FHA) relies on more than 20 different information systems as it annually insures billions of dollars in home mortgage loans made by private lenders. FHA's mission is to expand homeownership in the United States by assuming 100 percent of the risk for mortgages it insures. To carry out its mission, FHA relies on private lenders to determine borrowers' creditworthiness and to make and fund loans. FHA also relies on contractors to help assess lenders' compliance with its requirements and to manage and sell the properties it acquires through foreclosure. Without careful oversight of these lenders and contractors, FHA is vulnerable to mismanagement and fraud. The information systems FHA uses to collect and analyze data on FHA-insured loans and foreclosed properties are crucial to its oversight activities.

However, the White House's fiscal year 2002 budget blueprint stated that inadequate information systems have weakened FHA's ability to monitor lenders. FHA's information and telephone systems are also essential to its efforts to provide customer service to lenders, borrowers, and the general public.

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, DC 20548"
-------------------------------------------------------

"GAO

United States General Accounting Office

Performance and Accountability Series

January 2001

Major Management

Challenges and

Program Risks

Department of Housing and

Urban Development

..."This analysis should help the new Congress and administration carry out their responsibilities and improve government for the benefit of the American people..."
----------------------------------------
"Fraudulent Property Flipping"

The usual scenerio consists of the following:

The flipper (seller) usually owns the house for a short length of time, before reselling it.

The flipper does not tell the buyer that the sales price of the house is much higher than the house is worth.

The flipper only does "cosmetic repairs", and does not disclose the major problems of the house.

The flipper arranges a mortgage loan to cover the inflated sales price, but the loan is based on a false appraisal of the property. (overvalued to "an already pre-determined amount, set by the lender" ; appraisal also does not use correct "comparatives"; appraiser also does not report major deficiencies.)

The final inspector "overlooks" the condtion of the house. - (Will either state all repairs have been done; &/OR, that the house does not need any repairs, to meet minimum living standards.)

The flipper walks away from the deal with all the loan money, but the buyer winds up with a house that is not worth the loan he or she owes. (and is usually majorly deficient)

The lender doesn't worry about a thing...because the lender is covered by FHA's full repayment of the loan, if the buyer forecloses.

(After consumers (homebuyers) then report these fraudulent activities to HUD (FHA), HUD does nothing...even though they have rules and guidelines in place (including the following), TO enforce against fraudulent property flipping, and other fraudulent activities.) :


-------------------------------------------------------------
(HUD DOES NOT ENFORCE):

"HUD's Policy on Lenders' Accountability for Appraisals
......"HUD issued mortgagee letters to lenders that reiterated its policy that lenders were equally responsible for the quality of appraisals. Also, HUD's Deputy Assistant Secretary for Single-Family Housing instructed HUD staff that in cases in which appraisers missed serious repair conditions or significantly overvalued properties, HUD should request that the lenders who selected the appraisers pay for the needed repairs or pay down the mortgages by the amounts the properties were overvalued. and...

The Deputy Assistant Secretary also indicated that the failure of a lender to voluntarily resolve the appraisal deficiencies raised by HUD would result in enforcement action against the lender, including probation and suspension."

------------------------------------

(HUD DOES NOT ENFORCE):

"HUD Handbook: "Correction of Structural Defects in New Homes"; "Correction of Structural Defects in Existing Homes":

According to HUD's own policies and guidelines, you may qualify for help for repairs (of your house that has an FHA loan) if:
Your home is covered by Mortgage Insurance Under Section 203, 221 or 235.
(My house is covered under 203 (b)

("Sections of the National Housing Act authorizes the Secretary of HUD to correct, or to reimburse owners for the correct of structural or other major defects in some homes if the mortgages were insured by HUD. ") -
"Subpart L --Correction of Structural Defects in Homes Covered by Mortgage Insurance Under Section 203, 221 or 235.
Authority: Sec. 518 (b) and (c)."

"Correction of such defects in your (existing) home may be eligible for assistance if all of the following requirements can be met:

-The dwelling must have been more than one year old at the time you purchased it.
-The dewelling must consist of not more than four living units.
-The defect must be one which so affects the use and livability of the property as to create a serious danger to life or safety.
-The defect must have existed at time of the original appraisal and be one which a proper inspection by the HUD appraiser would have normally revealed. The existence of a defect at this time does not necessarily mean that you have an eligible claim.
-The mortgage, financing the purchase of the dwelling, must have been insured under Section 235 of the National Housing Act.
-A claim must be filed with HUD not later than one year after the insurance of the morgage."

(Similar guidelines are also found in the section for NEW homes. Although of course, some of the guidelines may vary.)

*** I did file this claim with HUD, before the time allowed was up. HUD ignored me about it; told me my house is not covered under this; and I am sure they now have no record of me filing this claim. In fact, I do not think they have kept, or reported all facts of my case, as they are supposed to do.

(However, I have a record of it. I have a record of everything that has happened; everything that has been filed; everything that has been written, and stated by me - and to me - by any and all parties, since this house closed on Aug. 14, 2001. I also have copies of all of the lies that HUD employees have told me, and have written me.)

Copies of everything, have also been printed off, and are stored somewhere other than my home - In more than one, safe, protective place, and with more than one individual.
(In case anything ever happens to me - the proof will ALWAYS still be there.)
---------------------------------------------------
"FHA Buyers Get New Home After Finding 181 Code Violations"

(HUD is now paying the over $700 month mortgage payments for this couple, until their house is paid off.)

REALTY TIMES
Article by: Peter G. Miller - 02/27/2001

After being told that it's efforts to portray FHA appraisers as home inspectors were misleading, HUD is now beginning to pay the price.

According to The Detroit Free Press, Mike and Kim Powers are getting a new house, compliments of HUD. It seems they bought an $86,000 home through FHA but later discovered that the house had 181 building code violations.

"A Federal Housing Administration appraisal and city inspections had uncovered only minor problems," said the story. "The Inkster couple said they did not get a private inspection because a TV commercial they saw on the Learning Channel touted the effectiveness of an FHA appraisal in finding defects in a house."

The result? According to the Free Press, "the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the parent agency of the FHA, agreed to let the couple exchange the house in Inkster for a HUD home of their choice in the same price range." (See: HUD will help get new home; TV ad blamed, February 10, 2001)

It's hardly amazing that buyers in Detroit and elsewhere feel mislead. According to HUD, today's FHA appraisal is far more than a mere estimate of value.

The so-called Homebuyer Protection Plan which then-HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo announced in 1998, was supposed to assure FHA borrowers that they are not buying a lemon.

"For the first time," said HUD, it would "require that home defects found by appraisers be disclosed to potential buyers."

Under the HUD plan, appraisers are obligated to locate "problems with plumbing, walls, ceilings, roofs, foundations, basements, electrical systems, and heating and air-conditioning systems; soil contamination; the presence of wood-destroying insects; hazards and nuisances near homes (such as oil and gas wells); lead-based paint hazards; and other health and safety problems."

The program, said HUD, "requires the appraiser to complete a new three-page form describing the physical condition of a home in unprecedented detail. HUD will give appraisers a handbook explaining the new appraisal standards."

"Under the new initiative," HUD explained, "appraisers must note the exact deficiencies such as cracks in floors, cracks in walls and ceilings, evidence of water leakage, and evidence of damaged support structures."

Appraisers, however, are not home inspectors. They do not open electrical service boxes, climb roofs, or check furnaces. Appraisers are not licensed to perform home inspections, they are not trained for such work, and if you ask appraisers they will tell you that they are not professional home inspectors. And because the extra work and liability associated with the HUD program, many appraisers raised their fees to do FHA work while others refused to offer any more FHA valuations.

Appraisers provide independent property valuations so that lenders can be certain they are not lending too much for a given home, and thus not making loans which have needlessly-high levels of risk.

None of this is a criticism of appraisers. They have an important role in the home-buying process, but that role does not include performing home inspections.

HUD, under Cuomo, aired a series of television ads which suggested that buyers need not worry about the condition of a home when they bought with FHA financing because, after all, the FHA appraisal would protect them.

The HUD ad campaign, wrote Maine Senator Susan M. Collins in a letter to Cuomo last September and first reported by Realty Times columnist Lew Sichelman, "implies that the home buyer can blindly trust HUD to protect his or her interest, and that the appraisal process will disclose any and all problems with the house. Given that FHA deals overwhelmingly with persons who have no previous experience purchasing a home, I would hope that this inaccurate message troubles you as much as it troubles me.

The HUD promotions, added Collins, "border on deceptive advertising."

We now have a new Administration in Washington and HUD has a new secretary, Mel Martinez. No organization other than HUD requires appraisers to perform what are effectively home inspections. Thus the questions for HUD look like this:


Will HUD end efforts to have appraisers substitute for home inspectors?

Will HUD end it's HomeBuyer Protection Plan ads?

Will HUD end any appraisal requirement established during the past four years which has not been adopted by both the Veterans Administration and conventional lenders?
Here is a chance for the new Secretary to rein in an unwanted program, better serve consumers, and cut HUD costs. Such an action would draw instant support from Capitol Hill, appraisers, brokers, lenders, and consumers.

Alternatively, you can bet that trial lawyers with college tuition to pay will look at the situation in Detroit and say, "whoa, this gives me an idea...."

If you think that problems associated with the FHA home inspection program are over, they're not. Just consider two recent e-mails received by Realty Times:

"I just recently bought a home through FHA in San Pablo, CA," says one correspondent.

"We had both the FHA appraisal and home inspection completed. We have been there 2 weeks and we are finding so many problems, such as there are no doors to the bedrooms, or closets, all the windows are nailed shut, the 2 backdoors are nailed shut, one of the back doors does not have a door frame, also they left their appliances, which do not work, and finally out of maybe 16 electrical outlets only 5 actually work, and the windows leak, and other stuff."

Here's another:

"I was wondering if there is any protection when you purchase a home through FHA regarding the roof not passing certification.

"We live on the Texas Gulf Coast that requires roofs be certified for the Texas Windstorm Insurance. A few months after we purchased our home, the Texas Windstorm Insurance said that our roof was never certified. We had a engineer come out and inspect the house, so that we could get it certified. The engineer informed us that the roof could not pass certification for the Texas Windstorm Insurance. And no insurance companies carry their our windstorm coverage. Knowing what area we live in that requires us to have windstorm insurance with a loan, why didn't the FHA inspector notify the mortgage company and buyer of the problem that existed?"

There is, of course, no "FHA inspector," a misconception which needs to be corrected.
--------------------------------------------
Mortgage fraud: Real estate's white-collar epidemic

Part 1 of 5: Lenders duped out of millions while regulators stand by and watch
Monday, June 23, 2003

By Jessica Swesey
Inman News Features


Last year, Bree Duke, a real estate agent for Metro Brokers/GMAC Real Estate in Atlanta, was a rookie scrambling to close her first sale when a lender-appointed appraiser called and asked whether she was "cool."

"Cool" was code for Duke turning her head while the lender approved a $140,000 loan on a home she knew was worth only $100,000. The appraiser and mortgage broker were conspiring to commit mortgage fraud and planned to split the extra $40,000, but they presented it to the young sales agent as a creative lending technique that would help a buyer who had poor credit.

The multi-trillion-dollar mortgage industry is a goldmine for fraudsters, and like most white-collar crimes, mortgage fraud may not be obvious to an outsider or even to honest people in the industry. Regulators and many people in the mortgage industry know fraud is rampant, but no one has come up with a viable solution to curtail these crimes.

Mortgage fraud is increasing partly because the high volume of loan originations in the past few years makes it easier for mistakes to slip by unnoticed, according to Jim Croft, executive director of the Mortgage Asset Research Institute, a group that helps financial companies manage risk from third-party contractors.

"A substantial amount of fraud is getting by, and what was put on the books a year or two ago is just now being discovered as fraudulent," Croft said.

Mortgage fraud is a complex crime typically perpetrated by a ring of professionals who know the ins and outs of the real estate process. Attorneys, closing agents, mortgage brokers, appraisers, title insurers and real estate agents can be involved in it.

And mortgage fraud is growing nationally, leaving behind a trail of foreclosed homes, dilapidated neighborhoods, destroyed personal credit histories and unreliable comparative market values in areas where inflated appraisals have been recorded. Millions of dollars are bilked out of lenders who rarely recover their losses, and borrowers eventually end up footing the bill.

Experts say mortgage fraud is becoming more sophisticated through technology that enables perpetrators to produce bogus bank statements, tax records, closing documents, appraisals and proof of employment. Technology also enables criminals to steal identities, making it easier to obtain a home loan in an unsuspecting borrower's name.

Donna Eide, assistant U.S. attorney for the southern district of Indiana, this year helped prosecute an $8 million mortgage fraud conspiracy case in Indianapolis in which 15 conspirators were convicted.

The lead defendant, Paul Dailey, brokered more than 100 fraudulent mortgages between 1998 and 2001, according to a Department of Justice statement.

Dailey recruited several real estate appraisers who appraised properties at two or three times their true value and closing agents who prepared two sets of documents at closing. The closing agents gave the settlement papers with the true value of the home to the seller and sent the second set of closing papers with the bogus inflated value to the lender. The fraudsters then paid the seller the true value of the home and split the rest of the cash from the lender. The buyers who obtained the fraudulent loans in their names, known as "straw purchasers," were in on the scheme.

Mortgage fraud is epidemic in Indianapolis and surrounding areas, according to Eide. The southern district of Indiana launched a mortgage fraud task force comprised of the U.S. Attorney's office, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Internal Revenue Service, U.S. Secret Service, Postal Inspection Service and the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Housing and Urban Development to crack down on these crimes.

But the damage caused by mortgage fraud can't be reversed easily.

"It's been a blight on our neighborhoods here because now we have all these boarded up houses that were the used and abused properties in mortgage fraud schemes," Eide said.

She said properties used to obtain fraudulent loans always end up in foreclosure.

"Indiana has a really high foreclosure rate-the highest in the nation. I'm beginning to think fraud is at least a contributor to that," she said.

The mortgage fraud task force identified 14 groups of conspirators currently defrauding people in the Indianapolis area, according to Eide. One mortgage fraud ring takes years to investigate because there usually are dozens of properties involved and the complexity of the mortgage process is difficult to present to juries in a simple way that makes clear exactly how the fraudsters broke the law.

Desktop publishing and scanning technology make it easy for crooks to fabricate documents and remain one step ahead of investigators and victims.

Eide said another part of the problem is that it is too easy to become a mortgage broker.

Lenders rely on mortgage brokers to be the eyes and ears of the transaction; when the broker turns out to be unscrupulous, the whole transaction becomes corrupt.

Lenders lose millions of dollars to mortgage fraud, but there's little incentive to uncover or report fraudulent loans because lenders carry the loss on loans that have been sold to the secondary market, according to Croft. If fraud is discovered, the lender has to compensate the company that bought or insured the loan for its loss.

Croft said a lot of lenders don't go to great lengths to spot fraud in their loans, which makes it impossible to ballpark how much money is lost to mortgage fraud each year."

(Note: A huge amount of brokers/lenders ARE involved in the fraudulent activities, themselves.
In many cases, they are the "ringleader". Lenders get "incentives" from HUD, for closing the FHA loans.; They are also given the full amount of the loan, which is insured by FHA, if the sellers have to foreclose.
These lenders also usually "pressure" appraisers and inspectors to "overlook things" and to appraise these houses at "an already pre-determined amount, set by the lender", so that the loan will close, and close at a higher amount - than the house is actually worth.) Many times, "the appraiser and inspector also get a cut of the deal, and lines their pockets with money to do the job, and keep their mouth shut."

Some honest appraisers, and inspectors, have come forward and STATED to these facts...because they refused to do the illegal activities. In their statements, they also stressed just how MUCH the lender tries to pressure you, and threatens you with "the lack of work" if you DON'T do the illegal activities.)
-----------------------------------
(They are ALL "getting in on the take"):

ABC News

Tue, 24 Jun 2003 13:32 AEST

LAWYER STRUCK OFF OVER ROLE IN MORTGAGE LENDING SCHEMES

A Sunshine Coast lawyer has been removed from Queensland's solicitors' roll after a Solicitors Complaints Tribunal hearing.

Terry Boyce was found guilty of eight professional misconduct charges for his part in mortgage lending schemes found to be woefully managed and which cost investors more than $1 million.

The decision to remove Mr Boyce from the roll means he will never be able to practise as a solicitor in Queensland again.

Mr Boyce has vowed to appeal against his dismissal.

A spokesman for the Queensland Law Society says the decision is a salutory one for all lawyers about their conduct.
-------------------------------------------------
(HUD ALREADY has /had regulations and policies in effect, to deal with fraudulent entities. Every year, HUD keeps introducing a "new" bill or policy,...but this will be like all of the others (that are already in effect). This, too, will not be enforced. A regulation that is not enforced, is the same as having no regulations at all.)They didn't / don't even enforce the reulations they already have - including, but not limited to, the "Lender Accountability" for no repairs being done, or overvalued appraisals.)

All of this is just "media propaganda". It's a lie, like everything else they do. (Don't do.)They have been, and will continue, to deceive the general public, just like they have been doing for many, many years.:

"DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Part 203 [Doc. No. FR-4615-F-02] RIN 2502-AH57
Prohibition of Property Flipping in HUD's Single Family Mortgage Insurance Programs
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing Commissioner, HUD.
ACTION: Final rule.
DATES: Effective Date: June 2, 2003.

SUMMARY: This final rule addresses property ''flipping,'' the practice whereby a property recently acquired is resold for a considerable profit with an artificially inflated value, often abetted by a lender's collusion with the appraiser. Specifically, the final rule establishes certain new requirements regarding the eligibility of properties to be financed with Federal Housing Administration (FHA) mortgage insurance. The regulatory amendments will comply with Congressional mandates to maintain the FHA Insurance Fund in a sound actuarial manner. The new requirements will make flipped properties ineligible for FHA-insured mortgage financing, thus precluding FHA home purchasers from becoming victims of predatory flipping activity. The final rule follows publication of a September 5, 2001, proposed rule and takes into
consideration the public comments received on the proposed rule."
--------------------------------------------------
(Please be aware, before reading the following letter that:
The National Home Builders Association (N.A.H.B.) is one of the biggest money contributors, to political individuals and entities. Although some of these builders are honest, some of their members are questionable. For instance, Richard and David WEEKLEY ("Weekley Homes"), are members of the N.A.H.B.
You can find horror stories about these builders, on www.ripoffreport.com ; www.hadd.com; and other consumer complaint sites as well. You can also do an Internet search for them ("complaints on Weekley Homes", etc.) and find a tremendous amounts of complaints on individuals such as this team.

Richard Fuller ("Fuller Homes") used to be another member of the NAHB. (He was supposedly killed in a plane crash recently.)
"Fuller Homes" ALSO has many complaints filed against them - in OK, TX, and NM. Mr. Fuller also had a lawsuit going on against him, at the time of his death...and other lawsuits were in the process of being filed.

This is only two examples. Also, please be aware that David Weekley is the founder of the "Texans for Lawsuit Reform" - "Working to restore balance and justice to the Texas Civil Justice System". (Imagine that.) He is the SAME person who "knowingly" continues to build faulty homes. (Even leaving out materials, of these houses.)
------------------------------------------
http://www.toxichomes.org/news/news_05-15-02_lobby_watch.shtml

"Leaky Weekleys"
Moldy 'Lemon' Homes Denied Day In Court
Weekley Boys Privatize the 'Justice' System

("Texans for Public Justice")

A Texas House panel today will explore if consumers are being hurt by businesses' increasing reliance on binding arbitration. Consumers will decry the privatized justice system that binding arbitration has created, while business interests that give millions of dollars to Texas politicians will rush to the defense of this plaintiff-hostile system.
Texas' mushrooming toxic mold epidemic is a crash course in the perils of binding arbitration, clobbering consumers with a one-two punch. First, they learn that their new dream home is a moldy lemon. Then they discover that they unwittingly signed binding arbitration clauses that strip their constitutional right to a jury trial and force their claims before costly, secretive tribunals that favor the builders who create arbitration business and even serve as arbitrators in construction disputes1.

The model Residential Construction Contract promoted by the Texas Association of Builders contains binding arbitration clauses, which are used by virtually every major Texas homebuilder. Meanwhile, consumers are trying to find one example of an arbitrated construction case in which Texas homeowners have gained more than they spent on arbitration. Builders could not build a more favorable system.

A major developer of this privatized justice is David Weekley Homes, both in its own right and through brother Richard Weekley's Texans for Lawsuit Reform (TLR). Since 1997, TLR's huge PAC has spent $2.6 million on all three branches of Texas government (see table)2.

Two homebuilders that rank among TLR's top donors also give heavily to Texas politicians directly. The family of Bob Perry of Perry Homes contributed $2.2 million and the Weekleys doled out more than $300,000 (see table below). Meanwhile, Texas homebuilder PACs gave Texas politicians $1.8 million more since 1997.3

Texas Homebuilder-Related Political Spending (Since '97) Gubernatorial
Races Other
Statewide
Races Legislative
Races Appeals
Court
Races Totals
Weekley Family $51,253 $170,600 $83,368 $12,400 $317,621
Bob Perry Family $120,000 $1,137,500 $ 911,250 $72,000 $2,240,750
Texans for Lawsuit Reform $27,500 $181,650 $2,290,134 $88,460 $2,587,744
Totals: $198,753 $1,489,750 $3,284,752 $172,860 $5,146,115

Note: Contributions cover through the March 2002 primaries.
Unlike court records, arbitration records are not public so it is impossible to fully gauge Weekley Homes' financial stake in arbitration. Nonetheless, there is evidence that this homebuilder fends off a steady stream of disgruntled customers who seek compensation for lemon homes.4 Now, spreading mold problems are bringing such lemon homeowners out of the woodwork.

The Richardsons of Austin
Two days after the Richardson family moved into their new $300,000 home last year they discovered that a leaky air conditioning line had bred mold in their attic and spewed water down their walls and under their floors. Although they had ordered special home design features to accommodate Dawn Richardson's allergic sensitivities, the Richardsons say Weekley Homes fixed the leak but failed to dry or remove the wet building materials. Instead, they merely painted over the mold.

All four family members soon experienced a battery of health problems, including skin rashes, headaches, fatigue, nausea, bloody diarrhea, nose bleeds, dizziness and respiratory infections. The worst symptoms afflicted Dawn Richardson and one-year-old Erica (brain swelling, motor skill impairment and language-skills regression). Environmental health experts have diagnosed Dawn with permanent brain and neurological damage caused by exposure to molds and toxic chemicals.

These health problems drove the Richardsons out just five weeks after they moved into their new home. Construction defects resulted in elevated levels of toxic mold in all three bathrooms and other areas of the house. Indoor air tests detected high levels of volatile organic compounds and outgassing of toxic chemicals (including benzene, styrene, xylene and formaldehyde) from synthetic building materials. The Richardsons have filed suit in state district court in Austin to recover related damages from Weekley and some of its subcontractors and suppliers5.

Sitting as a visiting judge at a pretrial hearing on the case late last month, former Texas Supreme Court Justice Rose Spector ruled on Weekley's pretrial motion to force the case into arbitration. The plaintiffs countered thateven if they had understood the arbitration clausethey had little choice because virtually every major homebuilder in Central Texas uses these clauses.

At the hearing, Judge Spector (who took $5,000 from Richard Weekley's TLR while on the high court) said she considered recusing herself because she works as a paid arbitrator for the American Arbitration Association where Weekley sends all of its disputes. Opting against recusal, Judge Spector ruled about as favorably for the plaintiffs as possible under the pro-arbitration precedents of the U.S. and Texas Supreme Courts.6 Judge Spector sent claims involving the contract signatoriesWeekley and the adult Richardsonsto an arbitration panel. She kept the remaining claims (involving the Richardson children or Weekley's subcontractors and suppliers) in state court.

Other Texans who have yet to file suit over their moldy new homes are turning to the Richardsons to learn about how binding arbitration robs consumers of their day in court.

Aric Barto of Sugarland
Since sports stadium builder Aric Barto closed on a new $268,000 David Weekley home in December 2000 he has been plagued by troubles of almost biblical proportions. Barto keeps a two-inch thick binder of repair work that he says Weekley has not fixed. Workers damaged a tree on his lot that later fell on his house. Weekley Homes came out three times to try to realign a tilting portion of his slab foundation. Half of his roof had to be replaced. Chronic leaks have caused repeated blooms of toxic Strachybotrysatra mold on the ceiling of his garage and study and on his bedroom, closet and bathroom walls. The mold then migrated through air ducts to his kitchen, dining room and living room.

Barto says his girlfriend contracted a leg rash, he has had allergic reactions and both of them have experienced chronic fatigue. He says he hired an attorney after Weekley Homes stopped paying for his temporary housing last month. Barto says his insurer is suing Weekley for mold remediation costs and he is suing the company to buy back his lemon home at a reasonable price.

The DeShazos of Missouri City
After the DeShazo family paid more than $300,000 for a new Weekley Home in 2001, the builder came out three times to reseal the joint where the shower in their master bath meets the floor. When they later heard that Weekley discontinued that bathroom design, Dawn DeShazo called to ask if it was defective. In what she now suspects was a lie, Weekley Homes said it simply phased out the design; there was no defect.

Dawn called the builder again last December after a family with bathroom plumbing problems around the corner suddenly moved out. Weekley Homes assured her that it was an isolated leak problem unrelated to any design defect. In the Sienna Plantation development outside Houston, Dawn says Weekley bought out one family's house under a confidential deal. It relocated another family for nine months during mold remediation. And it temporarily relocated yet another family into a vacant Weekley Homeonly to encounter yet another mold infestation.

When Weekley came for a one-year inspection of the DeShazo home in February, Dawn complained about bad odors coming from the drain of her master bath. The smell went away when she poured bleach down the drain, as the inspector suggested. A couple of weeks ago Dawn called the builder when the smell returned with a vengeance. This time Weekley sent a member of its Special Projects team, which Dawn says is a euphemism for Weekley's mold squad. The builder is negotiating over where to relocate the DeShazos during mold remediation but has not said who will pay their mortgage in the interim.

Meanwhile, Dawn wonders if mold caused recent health problems in herself and her youngest child. Suffering from insomnia, morning headaches and repeated voice loss throughout 2002, Dawn was diagnosed with walking pneumonia 10 days ago. On May 5th she rushed her three-year-old son to the emergency room with severe abdominal pains and a fever spike. The hospital had trouble getting his blood-oxygen level up and was unable to diagnose the problem, which passed after several days. Dawn says she is particularly concerned about this son because a premature birth left him susceptible to respiratory problems and because he has spent more time in her infected bedroom than her older children. Furious with Weekley for misleading her about a spate of mold problems in Sienna Plantation, Dawn is shopping for an attorney.

Across Texas, toxic mold is breeding colonies of angry homeowners. Thanks to the powerful grip that the Weekleys and other homebuilders have on all three branches of government, these Texans are first driven out of their homes and then driven out of the courts.

1For more on the hazards of binding arbitration, see: The Consumer Pitfalls of Binding Arbitration, Texas Watch Foundation, Austin, Texas, 2002; and The Costs of Arbitration, Public Citizen, Washington, D.C., April 2002.
2In a 2001 lobbying coup, TLR successfully urged Governor Rick Perry to veto a prompt pay bill that would have barred HMOs from imposing binding arbitration on doctors.
3The biggest share of this money ($856,400) came from the Texas Manufactured Housing Association, whose members aggressively promote binding arbitration.
4Slab O' Trouble, Houston Press, June 27, 1996.
5Richardson v. Weekley Homes, Case No. GN200790, 53rd District Court of Travis County.
6Cone Memorial Hosp. v. Mercury Const., 460 U.S. 1, 42 (1983); Capital Income Properties v. Blackmon, 843 S.W.2d 22, 23 (Tex. 1992).
# # #

Texans for Public Justice is a non-partisan, non-profit policy & research organization which tracks the influence of money in politics.

http://www.tpj.org/Lobby_Watch/arbitrationhomes.pdf
------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------
The N.A.H.B. has been trying to get laws passed (in all states) that says a home buyer will HAVE to agree to "binding arbitration". (This means, you will have NO rights, to take a case to court.) What they DON'T tell you is:
In "binding arbitration", it is NOT done by an "unbiased third-party", as they want you to believe. In fact, that "unbiased third-party" almost always finds for the company. (Crooked builder, etc.) The buyer also walks out with NO money at all, for repairs to the deficient house (which was built, or sold, or has been involved in...fraudulent activities.) They also hit you up for the crooked builder's attorney fees.
(In one case, that just finished, the home buyer ended up with no money for repairs, (even though she could PROVE her house was deficient, and fraudulently built) AND she now has to also pay the $100,000, for the crooked builder's attorney (& other) fees.
- not to mention, what she had to pay for her own part of the arbitration fees. Most of the time, these "binding arbitrations" also hook on a "gag order". (Just like in a court of law.) In this way, the home buyer cannot discuss the case with other consumers, or anyone else. (THIS is why you do not here about all of these cases.)

Up until recently, FHA would not allow "binding arbitration".
They only allowed "an option to arbitration, if the home buyer choose to do so."

I then recently read that the N.A.H.B. was also trying to get FHA to agree that EVERY contract had to state that the home buyer HAD to agree to "binding arbitration", if any problems arose later.

Well...guess what...read the following, that just came in to existence. It states nothing now, about the homebuyer has that "option".

See the HUD regulation as it is now, and how the NAHB wants it to read:

Here is the way the OLD regulation read when I printed it in August 2001:

In the event of any dispute regarding a homeowner complaint or structural defect claim, Plans must, unless prohibited by applicable law, provide for binding arbitration proceedings arranged through a nationally recognized dispute settlement organization. The sharing of arbitration charges shall be determined by the Plan. A Plan must contain pre-arbitration conciliation provisions at no cost to the homeowner, and provision for judicial resolution of disputes, but arbitration, which must be available to a homeowner during the entire term of the coverage contract, must be an assured recourse for a dissatisfied homeowner.

The NEW regulation, that the NAHB wants HUD to agree to, does not give an option for the home buyer to take their case to the judicial system.

(This will protect the "crooked home builders" from having to be involved in lawsuits, for their fraudulent activities, which is exactly what they are aiming for.)
--------------------------------------------------
The N.A.H.B. are now "telling" HUD what to do, and how to act.
Big bucks are involved in the whole housing industry.
The same way the NAHB is getting things changed in law, through fraudulent entities within our own government.
---------------------------------
(This is a letter from the President of the NAHB, trying to sway the Governor of New Jersey):

"April 1, 2003



The Honorable James E. McGreevey
Governor of New Jersey
The State House
Trenton, NJ 08625


Dear Governor McGreevey:


On behalf of the 205,000 members of the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), I write to express my disappointment with the anti-growth agenda that your Administration has embraced. The program you put forward in your recent state of the state address will have the effect of stopping most residential growth in New Jersey by institutionalizing NIMBY-ism throughout the state. It is the worst sort of no-growth rhetoric masquerading as smart growth.

NAHB is a strong advocate of smart growth. Across the country, there is an emerging consensus about what smart growth means. Smart growth balances the interests of the economy, the environment and social needs, including housing. Every major player in this debate, from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to the National Association of Realtors to the Sierra Club, acknowledges the importance of providing a range of housing opportunities and choices for people of all income levels. Your proposals give priority to the environment over many social needs, and they fail to recognize the importance of housing to the quality of life of New Jersey's residents.

Your plan ignores the fact that New Jersey's population is growing. From 1990 to 2002, New Jersey's population grew by more than 840,000 an increase of 11 percent. But during this period, New Jersey added just four housing units for every five new households. Your proposed anti-growth policies will only worsen a growing affordability problem.

You talk of encouraging development in urban centers and older suburbs by redeveloping brownfields and steering infrastructure spending. Homebuilders fully support infill development, urban reinvestment and brownfields redevelopment. However, your moratoria proposal and the unprecedented power you propose to grant local municipalities to act on NIMBY impulses guarantees that your infill strategy will fail.

The preservation map you have outlined is further evidence of a plan that fails to account for the current and future needs of the citizens of New Jersey. The map is quite clear in delineating where growth will be prohibited, but it fails to provide adequate land to accommodate the state's growing population.

You speak often of shaping a New Jersey for your children and grandchildren. For the affluent, that's a simple proposition. But for hundreds of thousands of New Jersey families, the plan you've put forth does not include housing they can afford. For their children and grandchildren, New Jersey will be nothing more than a place their families once called home.

For the sake of the hundreds of thousands of working families who will be hurt by your current proposals, I strongly encourage you to take a more balanced approach to dealing with growth issues in New Jersey. It is possible to preserve natural resources while preserving housing affordability and choice for the people of New Jersey. It is the harder course, but as a public leader, you have an obligation to the citizens of New Jersey to find that balance. I hope you will rise to the challenge.


Best regards,


C. Kent Conine
2003 President
----------------------------------------------------
The NAHB are not thinking of the "working families, the children, and the grandchildren"...the NAHB are thinking of future plans of "putting more money into their own individual pockets.", and in ways that cannot be done...if the Governor of new Jersey does what he wants to do.

The NAHB have become "GOD", within the housing industry.
And if do not realize that there are fraudulent activities involved, then you better start doing the research, the investigation, and see just what IS going on.

I cannot begin to explain to you (& show you, and prove to you) just what this organization has become.
---------------------------------------------------
(The NAHB telling Congress what to do):

HUNDREDS OF BUILDERS BLITZ CAPITOL HILL TO PUSH FOR ECONOMIC, HOUSING AND HEALTH CARE LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES


WASHINGTON, May 7 - As part of its annual Legislative Conference and in conjunction with its Spring Board of Directors meeting, the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) has hundreds of builders from across the country in the nation's capital today to seek support from Capitol Hill lawmakers for economic stimulus, homeownership tax credit and association
health plan (AHP) legislation that would increase the availability of affordable housing.

"If housing is to continue to lead the economy forward, the economy must produce new jobs so that more people can afford to buy or rent a home.
President Bush's economic growth package clearly offers the best means to provide badly needed near term stimulus to consumer spending and job growth, including more housing consumption and production. NAHB is therefore urging that Congress pass, to the greatest extent possible, a plan that reflects the President's economic stimulus plan," said Jerry Howard, executive vice
president and CEO of NAHB.

Builders are also urging their lawmakers to cosponsor Senate bill S. 198 and House bill H.R. 839, legislation that mirrors a proposal in the Bush Administration's Fiscal Year 2004 budget that would create a homeownership tax credit. Modeled after the successful Low Income Housing Tax Credit, the program is designed to help bridge the gap between the cost of developing
affordable housing and the price that buyers can afford to pay for a home in many lower-income neighborhoods.

Available through a competitive allocation program administered by state agencies, the homeownership tax credit would provide investors with a credit of up to 50 percent of project costs for eligible home rehabilitation or construction. It is intended to encourage new construction and substantial rehabilitation of homes for sale to low- and moderate-income families in conomically distressed areas.

"The homeownership tax credit is good public policy and good for the economy. The program would make it economically viable for development to go forward in inner cities, struggling suburbs and isolated rural areas.
Furthermore, it would provide a great stimulative effect, producing 50,000 homes a year and resulting in 120,000 new jobs on an annual basis. The Treasury Department estimates its cost at $2.4 billion over five years, which would provide an excellent bang for the buck," said Howard.

Another national concern confronting builders and millions of small businesses is soaring health care costs, which has forced more and more small business employers to drop coverage for their employees in recent years. To address this critical issue, builders are urging members of Congress to support House bill H.R. 660 and companion Senate bill S. 545.

The legislation calls for the enactment of association health plans, which recent studies indicate could help small businesses reduce their health insurance costs by 15 percent to 30 percent annually.

"As the owner of my own firm, I know first-hand how skyrocketing health insurance costs can harm workers and small businesses alike by making it difficult to provide quality health insurance at an affordable price.

H.R. 660 and S. 545 provide the right remedy by allowing small businesses to band together through associations to purchase quality health care at a lower cost," said NAHB President Kent Conine, a home and apartment builder from Dallas.

To help spur the production of more affordable rental housing, builders are urging their federally elected officials to enact legislation that would correct four IRS technical advice memorandums (TAMs) that limit the use of low income housing tax credits. This would restore the amount of equity financing available under the Low Income Housing Tax Credit, thereby
creating an incentive for builders to build more apartments and increase the supply of affordable housing.

ABOUT NAHB: The National Association of Home Builders is a
Washington-based trade association representing more than 205,000 members involved in home building, remodeling, multifamily construction, property management, subcontracting, design, housing finance, building product manufacturing
and other aspects of residential and light commercial construction.

Known as "the voice of the housing industry," NAHB is affiliated with more than 800 state and local home builders associations around the country. NAHB's builder members will construct about 80 percent of the more than 1.6 million new housing units projected for 2003, making housing one of the largest engines of economic growth in the country.

#####

NS2003-080
------------------------------------
NOTE: What he DOESN'T say is...how many "crooked builders" are members of this organization.

(Look at the member roster...you can figure out for yourself, because you will see some of those same builders' names, involved in lawsuits due to their fraudulent activities.) - This can be proven.

------------------------------------

(Sent to me by an "acquaintance"):

"The housing industry, through trade organizations and builders associations, contributes millions every year to political campaigns, public relations to put a spin on what they're really doing, and on lobbying to erode consumer protection on new homes. Home buyers do not have access to most complaints filed on builders because many are hidden in the non-public records of confidential binding arbitration, which often comes with a gag order for the home owner. Also, many state agencies that are set up for consumer protection or regulation of builders or other corporations don't make the complaints public. Most BBB's use a rating system and don't make actual complaints public, and the system can take years to reflect a poor record of customer satisfaction. I got our state's attorney general, and our area's BBB, to put this in writing, that complaints are confidential, because no one believed me.

Increasingly, new homes are built with code violations, missing material, and shoddy construction, even dangerously unsound defects. The warranty i
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#13 Author of original report

Consumers are Losing Rights in Government & more on Fraud in FHA

AUTHOR: Billie - (U.S.A.)

Consumers better realize, they are losing their rights quickly, and they don't even know it.
They better stand up and do something about it, before it's too late.

I have included information here on many things that will amaze, and shock you:

------------------
INSIGHT MAGAZINE:

"Who Is Guarding The HUD Guards?"
Posted March 3, 2003

By Martin Edwin Andersen

Is HUD Secretary Mel Martinez unprotected by IGs Secret Service detail?

The question is as old as Ancient Rome: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Who will guard the guards?) It was a question raised yet again when media attention focused on pistol-packing Inspector General Janet Rehnquist at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and allegations of document shredding in her office, long considered a model by internal investigators at other agencies. But the epicenter of complaints of wrongdoing by those in charge of policing key government functions may be the Office of the Inspector General (IG) at the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

Insiders tell Insight that investigative-staff morale has plummeted at HUD in the face of growing allegations of wrongdoing involving senior officials in the internal-affairs office. According to an internal memorandum obtained by Insight, in just 21 months at least 56 agents, nearly 25 percent of the total investigative workforce, voluntarily have left the IG's employment, an attrition rate critics say is 10 times the average.

In place of senior and seasoned investigators, critics complain, a group of retired Secret Service officials, many unskilled in the kind of white-collar fraud investigations required at HUD, have been appointed to what one IG watcher complained is a growing "good-old-boy" network reflecting senior management's background in the presidential-protection service. While investigative talent has leached out of HUD, critics contend, management has compensated by lowering the bar on investigatory targets -- going after what one agent called "low-hanging fruit" -- and systematically giving Congress misleading information about the scope and success of those inquiries it conducts.

An Insight investigation into the inner workings of the HUD IG office has revealed a complex web of alleged abuses of investigative power. Waste and mismanagement of monies appropriated to crack down on the hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of fraud in federal housing programs is common, and allegations of disregard for civil-service hiring rules and a penchant for political cronyism appear to reach into the highest ranks of the investigations office. Scores of documents examined by this magazine, made available by congressional critics of HUD, suggest that within the very office meant to audit, investigate and evaluate the spending by HUD of billions in taxpayer dollars are senior officials who have engaged in chronic wrongdoing.

In a confidential letter prepared for delivery to Congress and obtained by Insight nearly one-dozen current and former IG officials, including winners of that office's highest awards, say current leadership at the HUD IG office "cannot be trusted to address the abuses of investigative power, waste of federal funds, mismanagement, political cronyism and disregard for merit principles within its own office." The IG managers, they charge, engage in cover-ups, "abuse their office to remain in power, ruthlessly crush all dissent and resist any external accountability."

For example, the former San Francisco-based Western regional director of HUD, Richard Mallory, was appointed by President George W. Bush and is a career housing expert. Last year Mallory used his post aggressively to advocate that strong monitoring and enforcement actions should be taken against that city's troubled federal housing programs. His concerns included the city of San Francisco's misuse of HUD community-development funds to sell a property to a convicted felon, a friend of Mayor Willie Brown, who deeded the property to the Nation of Islam for use as a religious institution.

In response, Mallory was warned by one of his superiors that HUD Deputy Secretary Alphonso Jackson, the country's No. 2 housing official, is a close friend of Brown and that Mallory should not anger either Brown or the San Francisco Housing Authority (SFHA). Mallory's predecessor in the post already had been demoted for complaining about long-standing corruption and mismanagement at SFHA, which also had been accused by the HUD IG office of widespread mismanagement.

On Feb. 20, 2002, Jackson fired Mallory without giving a reason. In a letter a week later former California governor Pete Wilson, a Republican and former U.S. senator, sent the White House a letter charging that Mallory had been fired at Brown's request after having exposed internal corruption at HUD. "As I mentioned in our conversation today," Wilson wrote to White House Counsel Al Gonzalez, "Mallory's firing was requested by the mayor in a phone call to the deputy secretary. Also [HUD manager] Lily Lee has arrived in [San Francisco] to be the acting regional director."

Wilson added: "Don't hesitate to call if I can be of any assistance. The president and [HUD] Secretary [Mel] Martinez deserve to be protected."

In response to his removal, Mallory contacted the former regional HUD IG, Daniel Pifer, requesting an investigation of his discharge, which he believed to be the result of retaliation. According to local press reports -- confirmed by the confidential letter prepared for Congress -- Jackson and Lee (who reportedly had been removed earlier under a cloud as head of the Santa Ana [Calif.] Homeownership Center) were close friends, and the SFHA was about to be forgiven some $1.8 million in debt it owed to HUD.

As Pifer prepared to investigate Mallory's charges, he was informed by HUD headquarters in Washington that the unfolding San Francisco situation was considered to be "a very big deal" and that then-IG-designate Kenneth Donohue had been briefed on the matter. A day later, sources say, an acting deputy IG for investigations placed Pifer on one week's administrative leave. When he returned, according to insiders, the assistant IG for investigations ordered him to "stand down on the Mallory issue" and to "initiate no action at this time." The matter was allowed to drop.

Sources at the HUD IG office complain that a climate of orchestrated witch-hunts and the creation of scapegoats pervades the current management structure, adding to the attrition rate and skills drain. They point to the case of Jeffrey Finn, a former special agent in charge of the IG's Denver-based Rocky Mountain district office. Finn did not contest his removal from federal employment in January 2001 after being the target of numerous accusations of misconduct and administrative violations. According to court documents and the testimony of current and former IG employees, however, IG efforts to "destroy" Finn with trumped-up criminal charges also were used to wreck the careers of a number of employees with whom he had a relationship.

An affidavit offered by a senior IG official claiming, under penalty of perjury, that case documents had been shredded in accordance with existing policy cited a policy that does not exist. A senior IG official appeared to perjure himself when he claimed that his decision to remove two employees from their posts could not have had anything to do with their testimony in support of Finn because he knew nothing about it -- yet throughout the court proceedings he had prepared e-mail updates to colleagues around the country. Negative information about two members of the IG team investigating Finn that cast doubt on their credibility never was disclosed to the defense as required.

In throwing out four of the charges against Finn, U.S. District Judge Walker D. Miller found that the HUD IG office not only had engaged in the illegal shredding of potentially exculpatory evidence but also had waged a campaign of "outrageous, improper intimidation" and coercion against Rocky Mountain district agents and administrative employees. Finn was found not guilty of having misused $200 in funds, and Miller has not yet ruled on the other charge -- that Finn ordered a subordinate to change the receipt for these funds from "fence damage" to "storage costs."

IG sources tell Insight that at least half-a-million dollars in federal funds were used to prosecute Finn. The IG investigation of the Rocky Mountain field office found only $18.80 in missing funds out of $1,450,177 in expenditures made by the office during a 33-month period.

Allegations of intimidation did not stop there, IG sources say. They extended to the Fort Worth, Texas, office where two highly regarded IG managers, special agent in charge (SAC) Larry Chapman and assistant SAC James Malloy, one of two American Indian agents in the IG office, were forced into retirement after refusing to support the credibility of the Denver investigation by taking punitive actions in Texas. At issue: their alleged failure to retaliate against former Denver employees who had testified in favor of Finn.

Angry IG staff also have complained that Donohue and Deputy IG Michael P. Stephens, both retired Secret Service agents, have converted the office into "an employment agency" for their retired Secret Service friends. "These retired Secret Service agents, largely white males, have inundated the Inspector General's office at high-graded GS 14/15 positions," according to one source. Retired Secret Service agents "who are now the favored elite" in the office, say insiders, include a deputy assistant IG for investigations, a senior Special Investigation Division (SID) agent, the special agent in charge for the Southeast/ Caribbean region and at least five SID senior agents.

One of the former Secret Service agents selected for a senior HUD IG post later was sued successfully by an IG special agent for sexual harassment; this after the man's estranged wife, saying she feared for her safety, had turned in his weapon to the Anaheim, Calif., police department after he allegedly assaulted her.

IG agents are preparing to take their concerns to a Republican senator who is the chair of a powerful committee. They say they will bypass referral of their complaints to the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency (PCIE) for investigation because, although the PCIE is within the Office of Management and Budget, "it is controlled by the IG community and therefore not independent. In the unlikely event that the council found cause to discipline one of its own, the result would be no more than a 'slap on the wrist,' given that the council has no statutory authority to take independent corrective action."

Martin Edwin Andersen is a reporter for Insight magazine.

------------------------------------------
HUD EMPLOYEES LAUGH AT RIPPED-OFF HOME BUYERS:

Fairhousing.com

Posted on Tue, Feb. 19, 2002

HUD's EXCUSES: A HOUSE OF CARDS
By Monica Yant Kinney
Inquirer Columnist

Last month's tale of a home buyer who got snookered after settlement drew a slew of responses from folks with similar tales of woe. And as the horror stories mounted, officials from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) once again came up with laughable explanations and excuses for the not-so-mysterious thefts and disappearances.

The saga began with Antoinette "Toni" Mann, who bought a charming 1950s-era Olney twin last fall only to discover after writing the $53,000 check that someone had stolen her furnace, nine antique sconces, and 11 glass doorknobs. She found skid marks on the basement floor where the heater had been dragged out, and live electrical wires hanging from the walls.

Mann, a University of Pennsylvania researcher, wouldn't stomach the $6,000 loss. She demanded reimbursement from HUD and Golden Feather Realty Services, which has a King of Prussia office and a $236 million contract to manage 9,500 HUD properties across the country - including 600 in Philadelphia.

After weeks of phone calls, e-mails and faxes, Mann finally received a check for $3,538.47 for the cost of the furnace. She cashed it and hired a lawyer, determined to fight for the full cost of her losses, including having to rewire her house.

"They must be out of their minds," Mann said. "I'm not giving up."

Repeat offenders
Two days after I wrote about Mann, I received a four-page, single-spaced e-mail from Colleen Yaremko, a Northeast High School computer graphics teacher who suffered the real estate equivalent of spamming by HUD.

Two years ago, Yaremko bought a Mount Airy house through HUD's "Teacher Next Door" program, which gave the educator half-off the $72,000 price. Before settlement, the heater was stolen. So were nine old hardwood and glass-paned doors.

The theft led one lender to dump her, and another to charge her a higher-risk rate. The missing heater evolved into a running dispute over how many BTUs the old one had. She, too, has a lawyer and plans to sue.

"I feel like I started out with an Audi and wound up with a Ford Pinto," Yaremko lamented.

And then there is William Siemion, a Port Richmond union ironworker with a nose for bad news.

Siemion was working nights at the Kimmel Center when he read the column about Toni Mann. One morning a few days later, he noticed three men enter a vacant HUD house a few doors down the block.

Soon, they were loading a truck with a furnace, antique radiators, window shades, curtains, screen doors, cabinets and light fixtures.

They even took the kitchen sink.

Real-time crime
When Siemion asked what the men were doing, he was told to mind his own bleeping business. So he called the cops, who came and left after the crew flashed identification.
Before the workers left with the loot, he said, they tacked up a Golden Feather sign on the house.

I asked officials at HUD and Golden Feather to talk about the thefts.

Golden Feather pushed me off on HUD. The brass at HUD thought so highly of the issue they had a spokeswoman answer via e-mail.

The spokeswoman acknowledged a "marked increase" in thievery, which she said HUD takes "very seriously." Incidentally, she added, HUD wants to "mitigate the neighborhood impact of 'eyesore' properties."

My e-mailer, Ileana Colon, wouldn't finger HUD contractors as the culprits. She said Golden Feather is paid based on HUD home sale prices, so it wouldn't be in the company's interest to steal furnaces and doors.

Colon is in public relations, not policing, but she did note that lots of people have access to these HUD houses, suggesting that real estate agents, potential buyers - even city workers - could be the real crooks.

Then she typed out my very first government directive:

"If The Philadelphia Inquirer becomes aware of any such incidents . . . HUD expects to be notified of these specific incidents in order to investigate and resolve them immediately."
--------------------------------------------
"Report to the Ranking Minority

Member, Subcommittee on Housing and

Transportation, Committee on Banking,

Housing, and Urban Affairs, U.S. Senate

United States General Accounting Office

GAO

October 2001

SINGLE-FAMILY

HOUSING

October 24, 2001

The Honorable Wayne Allard

Ranking Minority Member, Subcommittee

on Housing and Transportation

Committee on Banking, Housing,

and Urban Affairs

United States Senate

Dear Senator Allard:

The Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Federal Housing Administration (FHA) relies on more than 20 different information systems as it annually insures billions of dollars in home mortgage loans made by private lenders. FHA's mission is to expand homeownership in the United States by assuming 100 percent of the risk for mortgages it insures. To carry out its mission, FHA relies on private lenders to determine borrowers' creditworthiness and to make and fund loans. FHA also relies on contractors to help assess lenders' compliance with its requirements and to manage and sell the properties it acquires through foreclosure. Without careful oversight of these lenders and contractors, FHA is vulnerable to mismanagement and fraud. The information systems FHA uses to collect and analyze data on FHA-insured loans and foreclosed properties are crucial to its oversight activities.

However, the White House's fiscal year 2002 budget blueprint stated that inadequate information systems have weakened FHA's ability to monitor lenders. FHA's information and telephone systems are also essential to its efforts to provide customer service to lenders, borrowers, and the general public.

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, DC 20548"
-------------------------------------------------------

"GAO

United States General Accounting Office

Performance and Accountability Series

January 2001

Major Management

Challenges and

Program Risks

Department of Housing and

Urban Development

..."This analysis should help the new Congress and administration carry out their responsibilities and improve government for the benefit of the American people..."
----------------------------------------
"Fraudulent Property Flipping"

The usual scenerio consists of the following:

The flipper (seller) usually owns the house for a short length of time, before reselling it.

The flipper does not tell the buyer that the sales price of the house is much higher than the house is worth.

The flipper only does "cosmetic repairs", and does not disclose the major problems of the house.

The flipper arranges a mortgage loan to cover the inflated sales price, but the loan is based on a false appraisal of the property. (overvalued to "an already pre-determined amount, set by the lender" ; appraisal also does not use correct "comparatives"; appraiser also does not report major deficiencies.)

The final inspector "overlooks" the condtion of the house. - (Will either state all repairs have been done; &/OR, that the house does not need any repairs, to meet minimum living standards.)

The flipper walks away from the deal with all the loan money, but the buyer winds up with a house that is not worth the loan he or she owes. (and is usually majorly deficient)

The lender doesn't worry about a thing...because the lender is covered by FHA's full repayment of the loan, if the buyer forecloses.

(After consumers (homebuyers) then report these fraudulent activities to HUD (FHA), HUD does nothing...even though they have rules and guidelines in place (including the following), TO enforce against fraudulent property flipping, and other fraudulent activities.) :


-------------------------------------------------------------
(HUD DOES NOT ENFORCE):

"HUD's Policy on Lenders' Accountability for Appraisals
......"HUD issued mortgagee letters to lenders that reiterated its policy that lenders were equally responsible for the quality of appraisals. Also, HUD's Deputy Assistant Secretary for Single-Family Housing instructed HUD staff that in cases in which appraisers missed serious repair conditions or significantly overvalued properties, HUD should request that the lenders who selected the appraisers pay for the needed repairs or pay down the mortgages by the amounts the properties were overvalued. and...

The Deputy Assistant Secretary also indicated that the failure of a lender to voluntarily resolve the appraisal deficiencies raised by HUD would result in enforcement action against the lender, including probation and suspension."

------------------------------------

(HUD DOES NOT ENFORCE):

"HUD Handbook: "Correction of Structural Defects in New Homes"; "Correction of Structural Defects in Existing Homes":

According to HUD's own policies and guidelines, you may qualify for help for repairs (of your house that has an FHA loan) if:
Your home is covered by Mortgage Insurance Under Section 203, 221 or 235.
(My house is covered under 203 (b)

("Sections of the National Housing Act authorizes the Secretary of HUD to correct, or to reimburse owners for the correct of structural or other major defects in some homes if the mortgages were insured by HUD. ") -
"Subpart L --Correction of Structural Defects in Homes Covered by Mortgage Insurance Under Section 203, 221 or 235.
Authority: Sec. 518 (b) and (c)."

"Correction of such defects in your (existing) home may be eligible for assistance if all of the following requirements can be met:

-The dwelling must have been more than one year old at the time you purchased it.
-The dewelling must consist of not more than four living units.
-The defect must be one which so affects the use and livability of the property as to create a serious danger to life or safety.
-The defect must have existed at time of the original appraisal and be one which a proper inspection by the HUD appraiser would have normally revealed. The existence of a defect at this time does not necessarily mean that you have an eligible claim.
-The mortgage, financing the purchase of the dwelling, must have been insured under Section 235 of the National Housing Act.
-A claim must be filed with HUD not later than one year after the insurance of the morgage."

(Similar guidelines are also found in the section for NEW homes. Although of course, some of the guidelines may vary.)

*** I did file this claim with HUD, before the time allowed was up. HUD ignored me about it; told me my house is not covered under this; and I am sure they now have no record of me filing this claim. In fact, I do not think they have kept, or reported all facts of my case, as they are supposed to do.

(However, I have a record of it. I have a record of everything that has happened; everything that has been filed; everything that has been written, and stated by me - and to me - by any and all parties, since this house closed on Aug. 14, 2001. I also have copies of all of the lies that HUD employees have told me, and have written me.)

Copies of everything, have also been printed off, and are stored somewhere other than my home - In more than one, safe, protective place, and with more than one individual.
(In case anything ever happens to me - the proof will ALWAYS still be there.)
---------------------------------------------------
"FHA Buyers Get New Home After Finding 181 Code Violations"

(HUD is now paying the over $700 month mortgage payments for this couple, until their house is paid off.)

REALTY TIMES
Article by: Peter G. Miller - 02/27/2001

After being told that it's efforts to portray FHA appraisers as home inspectors were misleading, HUD is now beginning to pay the price.

According to The Detroit Free Press, Mike and Kim Powers are getting a new house, compliments of HUD. It seems they bought an $86,000 home through FHA but later discovered that the house had 181 building code violations.

"A Federal Housing Administration appraisal and city inspections had uncovered only minor problems," said the story. "The Inkster couple said they did not get a private inspection because a TV commercial they saw on the Learning Channel touted the effectiveness of an FHA appraisal in finding defects in a house."

The result? According to the Free Press, "the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the parent agency of the FHA, agreed to let the couple exchange the house in Inkster for a HUD home of their choice in the same price range." (See: HUD will help get new home; TV ad blamed, February 10, 2001)

It's hardly amazing that buyers in Detroit and elsewhere feel mislead. According to HUD, today's FHA appraisal is far more than a mere estimate of value.

The so-called Homebuyer Protection Plan which then-HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo announced in 1998, was supposed to assure FHA borrowers that they are not buying a lemon.

"For the first time," said HUD, it would "require that home defects found by appraisers be disclosed to potential buyers."

Under the HUD plan, appraisers are obligated to locate "problems with plumbing, walls, ceilings, roofs, foundations, basements, electrical systems, and heating and air-conditioning systems; soil contamination; the presence of wood-destroying insects; hazards and nuisances near homes (such as oil and gas wells); lead-based paint hazards; and other health and safety problems."

The program, said HUD, "requires the appraiser to complete a new three-page form describing the physical condition of a home in unprecedented detail. HUD will give appraisers a handbook explaining the new appraisal standards."

"Under the new initiative," HUD explained, "appraisers must note the exact deficiencies such as cracks in floors, cracks in walls and ceilings, evidence of water leakage, and evidence of damaged support structures."

Appraisers, however, are not home inspectors. They do not open electrical service boxes, climb roofs, or check furnaces. Appraisers are not licensed to perform home inspections, they are not trained for such work, and if you ask appraisers they will tell you that they are not professional home inspectors. And because the extra work and liability associated with the HUD program, many appraisers raised their fees to do FHA work while others refused to offer any more FHA valuations.

Appraisers provide independent property valuations so that lenders can be certain they are not lending too much for a given home, and thus not making loans which have needlessly-high levels of risk.

None of this is a criticism of appraisers. They have an important role in the home-buying process, but that role does not include performing home inspections.

HUD, under Cuomo, aired a series of television ads which suggested that buyers need not worry about the condition of a home when they bought with FHA financing because, after all, the FHA appraisal would protect them.

The HUD ad campaign, wrote Maine Senator Susan M. Collins in a letter to Cuomo last September and first reported by Realty Times columnist Lew Sichelman, "implies that the home buyer can blindly trust HUD to protect his or her interest, and that the appraisal process will disclose any and all problems with the house. Given that FHA deals overwhelmingly with persons who have no previous experience purchasing a home, I would hope that this inaccurate message troubles you as much as it troubles me.

The HUD promotions, added Collins, "border on deceptive advertising."

We now have a new Administration in Washington and HUD has a new secretary, Mel Martinez. No organization other than HUD requires appraisers to perform what are effectively home inspections. Thus the questions for HUD look like this:


Will HUD end efforts to have appraisers substitute for home inspectors?

Will HUD end it's HomeBuyer Protection Plan ads?

Will HUD end any appraisal requirement established during the past four years which has not been adopted by both the Veterans Administration and conventional lenders?
Here is a chance for the new Secretary to rein in an unwanted program, better serve consumers, and cut HUD costs. Such an action would draw instant support from Capitol Hill, appraisers, brokers, lenders, and consumers.

Alternatively, you can bet that trial lawyers with college tuition to pay will look at the situation in Detroit and say, "whoa, this gives me an idea...."

If you think that problems associated with the FHA home inspection program are over, they're not. Just consider two recent e-mails received by Realty Times:

"I just recently bought a home through FHA in San Pablo, CA," says one correspondent.

"We had both the FHA appraisal and home inspection completed. We have been there 2 weeks and we are finding so many problems, such as there are no doors to the bedrooms, or closets, all the windows are nailed shut, the 2 backdoors are nailed shut, one of the back doors does not have a door frame, also they left their appliances, which do not work, and finally out of maybe 16 electrical outlets only 5 actually work, and the windows leak, and other stuff."

Here's another:

"I was wondering if there is any protection when you purchase a home through FHA regarding the roof not passing certification.

"We live on the Texas Gulf Coast that requires roofs be certified for the Texas Windstorm Insurance. A few months after we purchased our home, the Texas Windstorm Insurance said that our roof was never certified. We had a engineer come out and inspect the house, so that we could get it certified. The engineer informed us that the roof could not pass certification for the Texas Windstorm Insurance. And no insurance companies carry their our windstorm coverage. Knowing what area we live in that requires us to have windstorm insurance with a loan, why didn't the FHA inspector notify the mortgage company and buyer of the problem that existed?"

There is, of course, no "FHA inspector," a misconception which needs to be corrected.
--------------------------------------------
Mortgage fraud: Real estate's white-collar epidemic

Part 1 of 5: Lenders duped out of millions while regulators stand by and watch
Monday, June 23, 2003

By Jessica Swesey
Inman News Features


Last year, Bree Duke, a real estate agent for Metro Brokers/GMAC Real Estate in Atlanta, was a rookie scrambling to close her first sale when a lender-appointed appraiser called and asked whether she was "cool."

"Cool" was code for Duke turning her head while the lender approved a $140,000 loan on a home she knew was worth only $100,000. The appraiser and mortgage broker were conspiring to commit mortgage fraud and planned to split the extra $40,000, but they presented it to the young sales agent as a creative lending technique that would help a buyer who had poor credit.

The multi-trillion-dollar mortgage industry is a goldmine for fraudsters, and like most white-collar crimes, mortgage fraud may not be obvious to an outsider or even to honest people in the industry. Regulators and many people in the mortgage industry know fraud is rampant, but no one has come up with a viable solution to curtail these crimes.

Mortgage fraud is increasing partly because the high volume of loan originations in the past few years makes it easier for mistakes to slip by unnoticed, according to Jim Croft, executive director of the Mortgage Asset Research Institute, a group that helps financial companies manage risk from third-party contractors.

"A substantial amount of fraud is getting by, and what was put on the books a year or two ago is just now being discovered as fraudulent," Croft said.

Mortgage fraud is a complex crime typically perpetrated by a ring of professionals who know the ins and outs of the real estate process. Attorneys, closing agents, mortgage brokers, appraisers, title insurers and real estate agents can be involved in it.

And mortgage fraud is growing nationally, leaving behind a trail of foreclosed homes, dilapidated neighborhoods, destroyed personal credit histories and unreliable comparative market values in areas where inflated appraisals have been recorded. Millions of dollars are bilked out of lenders who rarely recover their losses, and borrowers eventually end up footing the bill.

Experts say mortgage fraud is becoming more sophisticated through technology that enables perpetrators to produce bogus bank statements, tax records, closing documents, appraisals and proof of employment. Technology also enables criminals to steal identities, making it easier to obtain a home loan in an unsuspecting borrower's name.

Donna Eide, assistant U.S. attorney for the southern district of Indiana, this year helped prosecute an $8 million mortgage fraud conspiracy case in Indianapolis in which 15 conspirators were convicted.

The lead defendant, Paul Dailey, brokered more than 100 fraudulent mortgages between 1998 and 2001, according to a Department of Justice statement.

Dailey recruited several real estate appraisers who appraised properties at two or three times their true value and closing agents who prepared two sets of documents at closing. The closing agents gave the settlement papers with the true value of the home to the seller and sent the second set of closing papers with the bogus inflated value to the lender. The fraudsters then paid the seller the true value of the home and split the rest of the cash from the lender. The buyers who obtained the fraudulent loans in their names, known as "straw purchasers," were in on the scheme.

Mortgage fraud is epidemic in Indianapolis and surrounding areas, according to Eide. The southern district of Indiana launched a mortgage fraud task force comprised of the U.S. Attorney's office, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Internal Revenue Service, U.S. Secret Service, Postal Inspection Service and the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Housing and Urban Development to crack down on these crimes.

But the damage caused by mortgage fraud can't be reversed easily.

"It's been a blight on our neighborhoods here because now we have all these boarded up houses that were the used and abused properties in mortgage fraud schemes," Eide said.

She said properties used to obtain fraudulent loans always end up in foreclosure.

"Indiana has a really high foreclosure rate-the highest in the nation. I'm beginning to think fraud is at least a contributor to that," she said.

The mortgage fraud task force identified 14 groups of conspirators currently defrauding people in the Indianapolis area, according to Eide. One mortgage fraud ring takes years to investigate because there usually are dozens of properties involved and the complexity of the mortgage process is difficult to present to juries in a simple way that makes clear exactly how the fraudsters broke the law.

Desktop publishing and scanning technology make it easy for crooks to fabricate documents and remain one step ahead of investigators and victims.

Eide said another part of the problem is that it is too easy to become a mortgage broker.

Lenders rely on mortgage brokers to be the eyes and ears of the transaction; when the broker turns out to be unscrupulous, the whole transaction becomes corrupt.

Lenders lose millions of dollars to mortgage fraud, but there's little incentive to uncover or report fraudulent loans because lenders carry the loss on loans that have been sold to the secondary market, according to Croft. If fraud is discovered, the lender has to compensate the company that bought or insured the loan for its loss.

Croft said a lot of lenders don't go to great lengths to spot fraud in their loans, which makes it impossible to ballpark how much money is lost to mortgage fraud each year."

(Note: A huge amount of brokers/lenders ARE involved in the fraudulent activities, themselves.
In many cases, they are the "ringleader". Lenders get "incentives" from HUD, for closing the FHA loans.; They are also given the full amount of the loan, which is insured by FHA, if the sellers have to foreclose.
These lenders also usually "pressure" appraisers and inspectors to "overlook things" and to appraise these houses at "an already pre-determined amount, set by the lender", so that the loan will close, and close at a higher amount - than the house is actually worth.) Many times, "the appraiser and inspector also get a cut of the deal, and lines their pockets with money to do the job, and keep their mouth shut."

Some honest appraisers, and inspectors, have come forward and STATED to these facts...because they refused to do the illegal activities. In their statements, they also stressed just how MUCH the lender tries to pressure you, and threatens you with "the lack of work" if you DON'T do the illegal activities.)
-----------------------------------
(They are ALL "getting in on the take"):

ABC News

Tue, 24 Jun 2003 13:32 AEST

LAWYER STRUCK OFF OVER ROLE IN MORTGAGE LENDING SCHEMES

A Sunshine Coast lawyer has been removed from Queensland's solicitors' roll after a Solicitors Complaints Tribunal hearing.

Terry Boyce was found guilty of eight professional misconduct charges for his part in mortgage lending schemes found to be woefully managed and which cost investors more than $1 million.

The decision to remove Mr Boyce from the roll means he will never be able to practise as a solicitor in Queensland again.

Mr Boyce has vowed to appeal against his dismissal.

A spokesman for the Queensland Law Society says the decision is a salutory one for all lawyers about their conduct.
-------------------------------------------------
(HUD ALREADY has /had regulations and policies in effect, to deal with fraudulent entities. Every year, HUD keeps introducing a "new" bill or policy,...but this will be like all of the others (that are already in effect). This, too, will not be enforced. A regulation that is not enforced, is the same as having no regulations at all.)They didn't / don't even enforce the reulations they already have - including, but not limited to, the "Lender Accountability" for no repairs being done, or overvalued appraisals.)

All of this is just "media propaganda". It's a lie, like everything else they do. (Don't do.)They have been, and will continue, to deceive the general public, just like they have been doing for many, many years.:

"DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Part 203 [Doc. No. FR-4615-F-02] RIN 2502-AH57
Prohibition of Property Flipping in HUD's Single Family Mortgage Insurance Programs
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing Commissioner, HUD.
ACTION: Final rule.
DATES: Effective Date: June 2, 2003.

SUMMARY: This final rule addresses property ''flipping,'' the practice whereby a property recently acquired is resold for a considerable profit with an artificially inflated value, often abetted by a lender's collusion with the appraiser. Specifically, the final rule establishes certain new requirements regarding the eligibility of properties to be financed with Federal Housing Administration (FHA) mortgage insurance. The regulatory amendments will comply with Congressional mandates to maintain the FHA Insurance Fund in a sound actuarial manner. The new requirements will make flipped properties ineligible for FHA-insured mortgage financing, thus precluding FHA home purchasers from becoming victims of predatory flipping activity. The final rule follows publication of a September 5, 2001, proposed rule and takes into
consideration the public comments received on the proposed rule."
--------------------------------------------------
(Please be aware, before reading the following letter that:
The National Home Builders Association (N.A.H.B.) is one of the biggest money contributors, to political individuals and entities. Although some of these builders are honest, some of their members are questionable. For instance, Richard and David WEEKLEY ("Weekley Homes"), are members of the N.A.H.B.
You can find horror stories about these builders, on www.ripoffreport.com ; www.hadd.com; and other consumer complaint sites as well. You can also do an Internet search for them ("complaints on Weekley Homes", etc.) and find a tremendous amounts of complaints on individuals such as this team.

Richard Fuller ("Fuller Homes") used to be another member of the NAHB. (He was supposedly killed in a plane crash recently.)
"Fuller Homes" ALSO has many complaints filed against them - in OK, TX, and NM. Mr. Fuller also had a lawsuit going on against him, at the time of his death...and other lawsuits were in the process of being filed.

This is only two examples. Also, please be aware that David Weekley is the founder of the "Texans for Lawsuit Reform" - "Working to restore balance and justice to the Texas Civil Justice System". (Imagine that.) He is the SAME person who "knowingly" continues to build faulty homes. (Even leaving out materials, of these houses.)
------------------------------------------
http://www.toxichomes.org/news/news_05-15-02_lobby_watch.shtml

"Leaky Weekleys"
Moldy 'Lemon' Homes Denied Day In Court
Weekley Boys Privatize the 'Justice' System

("Texans for Public Justice")

A Texas House panel today will explore if consumers are being hurt by businesses' increasing reliance on binding arbitration. Consumers will decry the privatized justice system that binding arbitration has created, while business interests that give millions of dollars to Texas politicians will rush to the defense of this plaintiff-hostile system.
Texas' mushrooming toxic mold epidemic is a crash course in the perils of binding arbitration, clobbering consumers with a one-two punch. First, they learn that their new dream home is a moldy lemon. Then they discover that they unwittingly signed binding arbitration clauses that strip their constitutional right to a jury trial and force their claims before costly, secretive tribunals that favor the builders who create arbitration business and even serve as arbitrators in construction disputes1.

The model Residential Construction Contract promoted by the Texas Association of Builders contains binding arbitration clauses, which are used by virtually every major Texas homebuilder. Meanwhile, consumers are trying to find one example of an arbitrated construction case in which Texas homeowners have gained more than they spent on arbitration. Builders could not build a more favorable system.

A major developer of this privatized justice is David Weekley Homes, both in its own right and through brother Richard Weekley's Texans for Lawsuit Reform (TLR). Since 1997, TLR's huge PAC has spent $2.6 million on all three branches of Texas government (see table)2.

Two homebuilders that rank among TLR's top donors also give heavily to Texas politicians directly. The family of Bob Perry of Perry Homes contributed $2.2 million and the Weekleys doled out more than $300,000 (see table below). Meanwhile, Texas homebuilder PACs gave Texas politicians $1.8 million more since 1997.3

Texas Homebuilder-Related Political Spending (Since '97) Gubernatorial
Races Other
Statewide
Races Legislative
Races Appeals
Court
Races Totals
Weekley Family $51,253 $170,600 $83,368 $12,400 $317,621
Bob Perry Family $120,000 $1,137,500 $ 911,250 $72,000 $2,240,750
Texans for Lawsuit Reform $27,500 $181,650 $2,290,134 $88,460 $2,587,744
Totals: $198,753 $1,489,750 $3,284,752 $172,860 $5,146,115

Note: Contributions cover through the March 2002 primaries.
Unlike court records, arbitration records are not public so it is impossible to fully gauge Weekley Homes' financial stake in arbitration. Nonetheless, there is evidence that this homebuilder fends off a steady stream of disgruntled customers who seek compensation for lemon homes.4 Now, spreading mold problems are bringing such lemon homeowners out of the woodwork.

The Richardsons of Austin
Two days after the Richardson family moved into their new $300,000 home last year they discovered that a leaky air conditioning line had bred mold in their attic and spewed water down their walls and under their floors. Although they had ordered special home design features to accommodate Dawn Richardson's allergic sensitivities, the Richardsons say Weekley Homes fixed the leak but failed to dry or remove the wet building materials. Instead, they merely painted over the mold.

All four family members soon experienced a battery of health problems, including skin rashes, headaches, fatigue, nausea, bloody diarrhea, nose bleeds, dizziness and respiratory infections. The worst symptoms afflicted Dawn Richardson and one-year-old Erica (brain swelling, motor skill impairment and language-skills regression). Environmental health experts have diagnosed Dawn with permanent brain and neurological damage caused by exposure to molds and toxic chemicals.

These health problems drove the Richardsons out just five weeks after they moved into their new home. Construction defects resulted in elevated levels of toxic mold in all three bathrooms and other areas of the house. Indoor air tests detected high levels of volatile organic compounds and outgassing of toxic chemicals (including benzene, styrene, xylene and formaldehyde) from synthetic building materials. The Richardsons have filed suit in state district court in Austin to recover related damages from Weekley and some of its subcontractors and suppliers5.

Sitting as a visiting judge at a pretrial hearing on the case late last month, former Texas Supreme Court Justice Rose Spector ruled on Weekley's pretrial motion to force the case into arbitration. The plaintiffs countered thateven if they had understood the arbitration clausethey had little choice because virtually every major homebuilder in Central Texas uses these clauses.

At the hearing, Judge Spector (who took $5,000 from Richard Weekley's TLR while on the high court) said she considered recusing herself because she works as a paid arbitrator for the American Arbitration Association where Weekley sends all of its disputes. Opting against recusal, Judge Spector ruled about as favorably for the plaintiffs as possible under the pro-arbitration precedents of the U.S. and Texas Supreme Courts.6 Judge Spector sent claims involving the contract signatoriesWeekley and the adult Richardsonsto an arbitration panel. She kept the remaining claims (involving the Richardson children or Weekley's subcontractors and suppliers) in state court.

Other Texans who have yet to file suit over their moldy new homes are turning to the Richardsons to learn about how binding arbitration robs consumers of their day in court.

Aric Barto of Sugarland
Since sports stadium builder Aric Barto closed on a new $268,000 David Weekley home in December 2000 he has been plagued by troubles of almost biblical proportions. Barto keeps a two-inch thick binder of repair work that he says Weekley has not fixed. Workers damaged a tree on his lot that later fell on his house. Weekley Homes came out three times to try to realign a tilting portion of his slab foundation. Half of his roof had to be replaced. Chronic leaks have caused repeated blooms of toxic Strachybotrysatra mold on the ceiling of his garage and study and on his bedroom, closet and bathroom walls. The mold then migrated through air ducts to his kitchen, dining room and living room.

Barto says his girlfriend contracted a leg rash, he has had allergic reactions and both of them have experienced chronic fatigue. He says he hired an attorney after Weekley Homes stopped paying for his temporary housing last month. Barto says his insurer is suing Weekley for mold remediation costs and he is suing the company to buy back his lemon home at a reasonable price.

The DeShazos of Missouri City
After the DeShazo family paid more than $300,000 for a new Weekley Home in 2001, the builder came out three times to reseal the joint where the shower in their master bath meets the floor. When they later heard that Weekley discontinued that bathroom design, Dawn DeShazo called to ask if it was defective. In what she now suspects was a lie, Weekley Homes said it simply phased out the design; there was no defect.

Dawn called the builder again last December after a family with bathroom plumbing problems around the corner suddenly moved out. Weekley Homes assured her that it was an isolated leak problem unrelated to any design defect. In the Sienna Plantation development outside Houston, Dawn says Weekley bought out one family's house under a confidential deal. It relocated another family for nine months during mold remediation. And it temporarily relocated yet another family into a vacant Weekley Homeonly to encounter yet another mold infestation.

When Weekley came for a one-year inspection of the DeShazo home in February, Dawn complained about bad odors coming from the drain of her master bath. The smell went away when she poured bleach down the drain, as the inspector suggested. A couple of weeks ago Dawn called the builder when the smell returned with a vengeance. This time Weekley sent a member of its Special Projects team, which Dawn says is a euphemism for Weekley's mold squad. The builder is negotiating over where to relocate the DeShazos during mold remediation but has not said who will pay their mortgage in the interim.

Meanwhile, Dawn wonders if mold caused recent health problems in herself and her youngest child. Suffering from insomnia, morning headaches and repeated voice loss throughout 2002, Dawn was diagnosed with walking pneumonia 10 days ago. On May 5th she rushed her three-year-old son to the emergency room with severe abdominal pains and a fever spike. The hospital had trouble getting his blood-oxygen level up and was unable to diagnose the problem, which passed after several days. Dawn says she is particularly concerned about this son because a premature birth left him susceptible to respiratory problems and because he has spent more time in her infected bedroom than her older children. Furious with Weekley for misleading her about a spate of mold problems in Sienna Plantation, Dawn is shopping for an attorney.

Across Texas, toxic mold is breeding colonies of angry homeowners. Thanks to the powerful grip that the Weekleys and other homebuilders have on all three branches of government, these Texans are first driven out of their homes and then driven out of the courts.

1For more on the hazards of binding arbitration, see: The Consumer Pitfalls of Binding Arbitration, Texas Watch Foundation, Austin, Texas, 2002; and The Costs of Arbitration, Public Citizen, Washington, D.C., April 2002.
2In a 2001 lobbying coup, TLR successfully urged Governor Rick Perry to veto a prompt pay bill that would have barred HMOs from imposing binding arbitration on doctors.
3The biggest share of this money ($856,400) came from the Texas Manufactured Housing Association, whose members aggressively promote binding arbitration.
4Slab O' Trouble, Houston Press, June 27, 1996.
5Richardson v. Weekley Homes, Case No. GN200790, 53rd District Court of Travis County.
6Cone Memorial Hosp. v. Mercury Const., 460 U.S. 1, 42 (1983); Capital Income Properties v. Blackmon, 843 S.W.2d 22, 23 (Tex. 1992).
# # #

Texans for Public Justice is a non-partisan, non-profit policy & research organization which tracks the influence of money in politics.

http://www.tpj.org/Lobby_Watch/arbitrationhomes.pdf
------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------
The N.A.H.B. has been trying to get laws passed (in all states) that says a home buyer will HAVE to agree to "binding arbitration". (This means, you will have NO rights, to take a case to court.) What they DON'T tell you is:
In "binding arbitration", it is NOT done by an "unbiased third-party", as they want you to believe. In fact, that "unbiased third-party" almost always finds for the company. (Crooked builder, etc.) The buyer also walks out with NO money at all, for repairs to the deficient house (which was built, or sold, or has been involved in...fraudulent activities.) They also hit you up for the crooked builder's attorney fees.
(In one case, that just finished, the home buyer ended up with no money for repairs, (even though she could PROVE her house was deficient, and fraudulently built) AND she now has to also pay the $100,000, for the crooked builder's attorney (& other) fees.
- not to mention, what she had to pay for her own part of the arbitration fees. Most of the time, these "binding arbitrations" also hook on a "gag order". (Just like in a court of law.) In this way, the home buyer cannot discuss the case with other consumers, or anyone else. (THIS is why you do not here about all of these cases.)

Up until recently, FHA would not allow "binding arbitration".
They only allowed "an option to arbitration, if the home buyer choose to do so."

I then recently read that the N.A.H.B. was also trying to get FHA to agree that EVERY contract had to state that the home buyer HAD to agree to "binding arbitration", if any problems arose later.

Well...guess what...read the following, that just came in to existence. It states nothing now, about the homebuyer has that "option".

See the HUD regulation as it is now, and how the NAHB wants it to read:

Here is the way the OLD regulation read when I printed it in August 2001:

In the event of any dispute regarding a homeowner complaint or structural defect claim, Plans must, unless prohibited by applicable law, provide for binding arbitration proceedings arranged through a nationally recognized dispute settlement organization. The sharing of arbitration charges shall be determined by the Plan. A Plan must contain pre-arbitration conciliation provisions at no cost to the homeowner, and provision for judicial resolution of disputes, but arbitration, which must be available to a homeowner during the entire term of the coverage contract, must be an assured recourse for a dissatisfied homeowner.

The NEW regulation, that the NAHB wants HUD to agree to, does not give an option for the home buyer to take their case to the judicial system.

(This will protect the "crooked home builders" from having to be involved in lawsuits, for their fraudulent activities, which is exactly what they are aiming for.)
--------------------------------------------------
The N.A.H.B. are now "telling" HUD what to do, and how to act.
Big bucks are involved in the whole housing industry.
The same way the NAHB is getting things changed in law, through fraudulent entities within our own government.
---------------------------------
(This is a letter from the President of the NAHB, trying to sway the Governor of New Jersey):

"April 1, 2003



The Honorable James E. McGreevey
Governor of New Jersey
The State House
Trenton, NJ 08625


Dear Governor McGreevey:


On behalf of the 205,000 members of the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), I write to express my disappointment with the anti-growth agenda that your Administration has embraced. The program you put forward in your recent state of the state address will have the effect of stopping most residential growth in New Jersey by institutionalizing NIMBY-ism throughout the state. It is the worst sort of no-growth rhetoric masquerading as smart growth.

NAHB is a strong advocate of smart growth. Across the country, there is an emerging consensus about what smart growth means. Smart growth balances the interests of the economy, the environment and social needs, including housing. Every major player in this debate, from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to the National Association of Realtors to the Sierra Club, acknowledges the importance of providing a range of housing opportunities and choices for people of all income levels. Your proposals give priority to the environment over many social needs, and they fail to recognize the importance of housing to the quality of life of New Jersey's residents.

Your plan ignores the fact that New Jersey's population is growing. From 1990 to 2002, New Jersey's population grew by more than 840,000 an increase of 11 percent. But during this period, New Jersey added just four housing units for every five new households. Your proposed anti-growth policies will only worsen a growing affordability problem.

You talk of encouraging development in urban centers and older suburbs by redeveloping brownfields and steering infrastructure spending. Homebuilders fully support infill development, urban reinvestment and brownfields redevelopment. However, your moratoria proposal and the unprecedented power you propose to grant local municipalities to act on NIMBY impulses guarantees that your infill strategy will fail.

The preservation map you have outlined is further evidence of a plan that fails to account for the current and future needs of the citizens of New Jersey. The map is quite clear in delineating where growth will be prohibited, but it fails to provide adequate land to accommodate the state's growing population.

You speak often of shaping a New Jersey for your children and grandchildren. For the affluent, that's a simple proposition. But for hundreds of thousands of New Jersey families, the plan you've put forth does not include housing they can afford. For their children and grandchildren, New Jersey will be nothing more than a place their families once called home.

For the sake of the hundreds of thousands of working families who will be hurt by your current proposals, I strongly encourage you to take a more balanced approach to dealing with growth issues in New Jersey. It is possible to preserve natural resources while preserving housing affordability and choice for the people of New Jersey. It is the harder course, but as a public leader, you have an obligation to the citizens of New Jersey to find that balance. I hope you will rise to the challenge.


Best regards,


C. Kent Conine
2003 President
----------------------------------------------------
The NAHB are not thinking of the "working families, the children, and the grandchildren"...the NAHB are thinking of future plans of "putting more money into their own individual pockets.", and in ways that cannot be done...if the Governor of new Jersey does what he wants to do.

The NAHB have become "GOD", within the housing industry.
And if do not realize that there are fraudulent activities involved, then you better start doing the research, the investigation, and see just what IS going on.

I cannot begin to explain to you (& show you, and prove to you) just what this organization has become.
---------------------------------------------------
(The NAHB telling Congress what to do):

HUNDREDS OF BUILDERS BLITZ CAPITOL HILL TO PUSH FOR ECONOMIC, HOUSING AND HEALTH CARE LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES


WASHINGTON, May 7 - As part of its annual Legislative Conference and in conjunction with its Spring Board of Directors meeting, the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) has hundreds of builders from across the country in the nation's capital today to seek support from Capitol Hill lawmakers for economic stimulus, homeownership tax credit and association
health plan (AHP) legislation that would increase the availability of affordable housing.

"If housing is to continue to lead the economy forward, the economy must produce new jobs so that more people can afford to buy or rent a home.
President Bush's economic growth package clearly offers the best means to provide badly needed near term stimulus to consumer spending and job growth, including more housing consumption and production. NAHB is therefore urging that Congress pass, to the greatest extent possible, a plan that reflects the President's economic stimulus plan," said Jerry Howard, executive vice
president and CEO of NAHB.

Builders are also urging their lawmakers to cosponsor Senate bill S. 198 and House bill H.R. 839, legislation that mirrors a proposal in the Bush Administration's Fiscal Year 2004 budget that would create a homeownership tax credit. Modeled after the successful Low Income Housing Tax Credit, the program is designed to help bridge the gap between the cost of developing
affordable housing and the price that buyers can afford to pay for a home in many lower-income neighborhoods.

Available through a competitive allocation program administered by state agencies, the homeownership tax credit would provide investors with a credit of up to 50 percent of project costs for eligible home rehabilitation or construction. It is intended to encourage new construction and substantial rehabilitation of homes for sale to low- and moderate-income families in conomically distressed areas.

"The homeownership tax credit is good public policy and good for the economy. The program would make it economically viable for development to go forward in inner cities, struggling suburbs and isolated rural areas.
Furthermore, it would provide a great stimulative effect, producing 50,000 homes a year and resulting in 120,000 new jobs on an annual basis. The Treasury Department estimates its cost at $2.4 billion over five years, which would provide an excellent bang for the buck," said Howard.

Another national concern confronting builders and millions of small businesses is soaring health care costs, which has forced more and more small business employers to drop coverage for their employees in recent years. To address this critical issue, builders are urging members of Congress to support House bill H.R. 660 and companion Senate bill S. 545.

The legislation calls for the enactment of association health plans, which recent studies indicate could help small businesses reduce their health insurance costs by 15 percent to 30 percent annually.

"As the owner of my own firm, I know first-hand how skyrocketing health insurance costs can harm workers and small businesses alike by making it difficult to provide quality health insurance at an affordable price.

H.R. 660 and S. 545 provide the right remedy by allowing small businesses to band together through associations to purchase quality health care at a lower cost," said NAHB President Kent Conine, a home and apartment builder from Dallas.

To help spur the production of more affordable rental housing, builders are urging their federally elected officials to enact legislation that would correct four IRS technical advice memorandums (TAMs) that limit the use of low income housing tax credits. This would restore the amount of equity financing available under the Low Income Housing Tax Credit, thereby
creating an incentive for builders to build more apartments and increase the supply of affordable housing.

ABOUT NAHB: The National Association of Home Builders is a
Washington-based trade association representing more than 205,000 members involved in home building, remodeling, multifamily construction, property management, subcontracting, design, housing finance, building product manufacturing
and other aspects of residential and light commercial construction.

Known as "the voice of the housing industry," NAHB is affiliated with more than 800 state and local home builders associations around the country. NAHB's builder members will construct about 80 percent of the more than 1.6 million new housing units projected for 2003, making housing one of the largest engines of economic growth in the country.

#####

NS2003-080
------------------------------------
NOTE: What he DOESN'T say is...how many "crooked builders" are members of this organization.

(Look at the member roster...you can figure out for yourself, because you will see some of those same builders' names, involved in lawsuits due to their fraudulent activities.) - This can be proven.

------------------------------------

(Sent to me by an "acquaintance"):

"The housing industry, through trade organizations and builders associations, contributes millions every year to political campaigns, public relations to put a spin on what they're really doing, and on lobbying to erode consumer protection on new homes. Home buyers do not have access to most complaints filed on builders because many are hidden in the non-public records of confidential binding arbitration, which often comes with a gag order for the home owner. Also, many state agencies that are set up for consumer protection or regulation of builders or other corporations don't make the complaints public. Most BBB's use a rating system and don't make actual complaints public, and the system can take years to reflect a poor record of customer satisfaction. I got our state's attorney general, and our area's BBB, to put this in writing, that complaints are confidential, because no one believed me.

Increasingly, new homes are built with code violations, missing material, and shoddy construction, even dangerously unsound defects. The warranty i
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#14 Author of original report

Consumers are Losing Rights in Government & more on Fraud in FHA

AUTHOR: Billie - (U.S.A.)

Consumers better realize, they are losing their rights quickly, and they don't even know it.
They better stand up and do something about it, before it's too late.

I have included information here on many things that will amaze, and shock you:

------------------
INSIGHT MAGAZINE:

"Who Is Guarding The HUD Guards?"
Posted March 3, 2003

By Martin Edwin Andersen

Is HUD Secretary Mel Martinez unprotected by IGs Secret Service detail?

The question is as old as Ancient Rome: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Who will guard the guards?) It was a question raised yet again when media attention focused on pistol-packing Inspector General Janet Rehnquist at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and allegations of document shredding in her office, long considered a model by internal investigators at other agencies. But the epicenter of complaints of wrongdoing by those in charge of policing key government functions may be the Office of the Inspector General (IG) at the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).

Insiders tell Insight that investigative-staff morale has plummeted at HUD in the face of growing allegations of wrongdoing involving senior officials in the internal-affairs office. According to an internal memorandum obtained by Insight, in just 21 months at least 56 agents, nearly 25 percent of the total investigative workforce, voluntarily have left the IG's employment, an attrition rate critics say is 10 times the average.

In place of senior and seasoned investigators, critics complain, a group of retired Secret Service officials, many unskilled in the kind of white-collar fraud investigations required at HUD, have been appointed to what one IG watcher complained is a growing "good-old-boy" network reflecting senior management's background in the presidential-protection service. While investigative talent has leached out of HUD, critics contend, management has compensated by lowering the bar on investigatory targets -- going after what one agent called "low-hanging fruit" -- and systematically giving Congress misleading information about the scope and success of those inquiries it conducts.

An Insight investigation into the inner workings of the HUD IG office has revealed a complex web of alleged abuses of investigative power. Waste and mismanagement of monies appropriated to crack down on the hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of fraud in federal housing programs is common, and allegations of disregard for civil-service hiring rules and a penchant for political cronyism appear to reach into the highest ranks of the investigations office. Scores of documents examined by this magazine, made available by congressional critics of HUD, suggest that within the very office meant to audit, investigate and evaluate the spending by HUD of billions in taxpayer dollars are senior officials who have engaged in chronic wrongdoing.

In a confidential letter prepared for delivery to Congress and obtained by Insight nearly one-dozen current and former IG officials, including winners of that office's highest awards, say current leadership at the HUD IG office "cannot be trusted to address the abuses of investigative power, waste of federal funds, mismanagement, political cronyism and disregard for merit principles within its own office." The IG managers, they charge, engage in cover-ups, "abuse their office to remain in power, ruthlessly crush all dissent and resist any external accountability."

For example, the former San Francisco-based Western regional director of HUD, Richard Mallory, was appointed by President George W. Bush and is a career housing expert. Last year Mallory used his post aggressively to advocate that strong monitoring and enforcement actions should be taken against that city's troubled federal housing programs. His concerns included the city of San Francisco's misuse of HUD community-development funds to sell a property to a convicted felon, a friend of Mayor Willie Brown, who deeded the property to the Nation of Islam for use as a religious institution.

In response, Mallory was warned by one of his superiors that HUD Deputy Secretary Alphonso Jackson, the country's No. 2 housing official, is a close friend of Brown and that Mallory should not anger either Brown or the San Francisco Housing Authority (SFHA). Mallory's predecessor in the post already had been demoted for complaining about long-standing corruption and mismanagement at SFHA, which also had been accused by the HUD IG office of widespread mismanagement.

On Feb. 20, 2002, Jackson fired Mallory without giving a reason. In a letter a week later former California governor Pete Wilson, a Republican and former U.S. senator, sent the White House a letter charging that Mallory had been fired at Brown's request after having exposed internal corruption at HUD. "As I mentioned in our conversation today," Wilson wrote to White House Counsel Al Gonzalez, "Mallory's firing was requested by the mayor in a phone call to the deputy secretary. Also [HUD manager] Lily Lee has arrived in [San Francisco] to be the acting regional director."

Wilson added: "Don't hesitate to call if I can be of any assistance. The president and [HUD] Secretary [Mel] Martinez deserve to be protected."

In response to his removal, Mallory contacted the former regional HUD IG, Daniel Pifer, requesting an investigation of his discharge, which he believed to be the result of retaliation. According to local press reports -- confirmed by the confidential letter prepared for Congress -- Jackson and Lee (who reportedly had been removed earlier under a cloud as head of the Santa Ana [Calif.] Homeownership Center) were close friends, and the SFHA was about to be forgiven some $1.8 million in debt it owed to HUD.

As Pifer prepared to investigate Mallory's charges, he was informed by HUD headquarters in Washington that the unfolding San Francisco situation was considered to be "a very big deal" and that then-IG-designate Kenneth Donohue had been briefed on the matter. A day later, sources say, an acting deputy IG for investigations placed Pifer on one week's administrative leave. When he returned, according to insiders, the assistant IG for investigations ordered him to "stand down on the Mallory issue" and to "initiate no action at this time." The matter was allowed to drop.

Sources at the HUD IG office complain that a climate of orchestrated witch-hunts and the creation of scapegoats pervades the current management structure, adding to the attrition rate and skills drain. They point to the case of Jeffrey Finn, a former special agent in charge of the IG's Denver-based Rocky Mountain district office. Finn did not contest his removal from federal employment in January 2001 after being the target of numerous accusations of misconduct and administrative violations. According to court documents and the testimony of current and former IG employees, however, IG efforts to "destroy" Finn with trumped-up criminal charges also were used to wreck the careers of a number of employees with whom he had a relationship.

An affidavit offered by a senior IG official claiming, under penalty of perjury, that case documents had been shredded in accordance with existing policy cited a policy that does not exist. A senior IG official appeared to perjure himself when he claimed that his decision to remove two employees from their posts could not have had anything to do with their testimony in support of Finn because he knew nothing about it -- yet throughout the court proceedings he had prepared e-mail updates to colleagues around the country. Negative information about two members of the IG team investigating Finn that cast doubt on their credibility never was disclosed to the defense as required.

In throwing out four of the charges against Finn, U.S. District Judge Walker D. Miller found that the HUD IG office not only had engaged in the illegal shredding of potentially exculpatory evidence but also had waged a campaign of "outrageous, improper intimidation" and coercion against Rocky Mountain district agents and administrative employees. Finn was found not guilty of having misused $200 in funds, and Miller has not yet ruled on the other charge -- that Finn ordered a subordinate to change the receipt for these funds from "fence damage" to "storage costs."

IG sources tell Insight that at least half-a-million dollars in federal funds were used to prosecute Finn. The IG investigation of the Rocky Mountain field office found only $18.80 in missing funds out of $1,450,177 in expenditures made by the office during a 33-month period.

Allegations of intimidation did not stop there, IG sources say. They extended to the Fort Worth, Texas, office where two highly regarded IG managers, special agent in charge (SAC) Larry Chapman and assistant SAC James Malloy, one of two American Indian agents in the IG office, were forced into retirement after refusing to support the credibility of the Denver investigation by taking punitive actions in Texas. At issue: their alleged failure to retaliate against former Denver employees who had testified in favor of Finn.

Angry IG staff also have complained that Donohue and Deputy IG Michael P. Stephens, both retired Secret Service agents, have converted the office into "an employment agency" for their retired Secret Service friends. "These retired Secret Service agents, largely white males, have inundated the Inspector General's office at high-graded GS 14/15 positions," according to one source. Retired Secret Service agents "who are now the favored elite" in the office, say insiders, include a deputy assistant IG for investigations, a senior Special Investigation Division (SID) agent, the special agent in charge for the Southeast/ Caribbean region and at least five SID senior agents.

One of the former Secret Service agents selected for a senior HUD IG post later was sued successfully by an IG special agent for sexual harassment; this after the man's estranged wife, saying she feared for her safety, had turned in his weapon to the Anaheim, Calif., police department after he allegedly assaulted her.

IG agents are preparing to take their concerns to a Republican senator who is the chair of a powerful committee. They say they will bypass referral of their complaints to the President's Council on Integrity and Efficiency (PCIE) for investigation because, although the PCIE is within the Office of Management and Budget, "it is controlled by the IG community and therefore not independent. In the unlikely event that the council found cause to discipline one of its own, the result would be no more than a 'slap on the wrist,' given that the council has no statutory authority to take independent corrective action."

Martin Edwin Andersen is a reporter for Insight magazine.

------------------------------------------
HUD EMPLOYEES LAUGH AT RIPPED-OFF HOME BUYERS:

Fairhousing.com

Posted on Tue, Feb. 19, 2002

HUD's EXCUSES: A HOUSE OF CARDS
By Monica Yant Kinney
Inquirer Columnist

Last month's tale of a home buyer who got snookered after settlement drew a slew of responses from folks with similar tales of woe. And as the horror stories mounted, officials from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) once again came up with laughable explanations and excuses for the not-so-mysterious thefts and disappearances.

The saga began with Antoinette "Toni" Mann, who bought a charming 1950s-era Olney twin last fall only to discover after writing the $53,000 check that someone had stolen her furnace, nine antique sconces, and 11 glass doorknobs. She found skid marks on the basement floor where the heater had been dragged out, and live electrical wires hanging from the walls.

Mann, a University of Pennsylvania researcher, wouldn't stomach the $6,000 loss. She demanded reimbursement from HUD and Golden Feather Realty Services, which has a King of Prussia office and a $236 million contract to manage 9,500 HUD properties across the country - including 600 in Philadelphia.

After weeks of phone calls, e-mails and faxes, Mann finally received a check for $3,538.47 for the cost of the furnace. She cashed it and hired a lawyer, determined to fight for the full cost of her losses, including having to rewire her house.

"They must be out of their minds," Mann said. "I'm not giving up."

Repeat offenders
Two days after I wrote about Mann, I received a four-page, single-spaced e-mail from Colleen Yaremko, a Northeast High School computer graphics teacher who suffered the real estate equivalent of spamming by HUD.

Two years ago, Yaremko bought a Mount Airy house through HUD's "Teacher Next Door" program, which gave the educator half-off the $72,000 price. Before settlement, the heater was stolen. So were nine old hardwood and glass-paned doors.

The theft led one lender to dump her, and another to charge her a higher-risk rate. The missing heater evolved into a running dispute over how many BTUs the old one had. She, too, has a lawyer and plans to sue.

"I feel like I started out with an Audi and wound up with a Ford Pinto," Yaremko lamented.

And then there is William Siemion, a Port Richmond union ironworker with a nose for bad news.

Siemion was working nights at the Kimmel Center when he read the column about Toni Mann. One morning a few days later, he noticed three men enter a vacant HUD house a few doors down the block.

Soon, they were loading a truck with a furnace, antique radiators, window shades, curtains, screen doors, cabinets and light fixtures.

They even took the kitchen sink.

Real-time crime
When Siemion asked what the men were doing, he was told to mind his own bleeping business. So he called the cops, who came and left after the crew flashed identification.
Before the workers left with the loot, he said, they tacked up a Golden Feather sign on the house.

I asked officials at HUD and Golden Feather to talk about the thefts.

Golden Feather pushed me off on HUD. The brass at HUD thought so highly of the issue they had a spokeswoman answer via e-mail.

The spokeswoman acknowledged a "marked increase" in thievery, which she said HUD takes "very seriously." Incidentally, she added, HUD wants to "mitigate the neighborhood impact of 'eyesore' properties."

My e-mailer, Ileana Colon, wouldn't finger HUD contractors as the culprits. She said Golden Feather is paid based on HUD home sale prices, so it wouldn't be in the company's interest to steal furnaces and doors.

Colon is in public relations, not policing, but she did note that lots of people have access to these HUD houses, suggesting that real estate agents, potential buyers - even city workers - could be the real crooks.

Then she typed out my very first government directive:

"If The Philadelphia Inquirer becomes aware of any such incidents . . . HUD expects to be notified of these specific incidents in order to investigate and resolve them immediately."
--------------------------------------------
"Report to the Ranking Minority

Member, Subcommittee on Housing and

Transportation, Committee on Banking,

Housing, and Urban Affairs, U.S. Senate

United States General Accounting Office

GAO

October 2001

SINGLE-FAMILY

HOUSING

October 24, 2001

The Honorable Wayne Allard

Ranking Minority Member, Subcommittee

on Housing and Transportation

Committee on Banking, Housing,

and Urban Affairs

United States Senate

Dear Senator Allard:

The Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Federal Housing Administration (FHA) relies on more than 20 different information systems as it annually insures billions of dollars in home mortgage loans made by private lenders. FHA's mission is to expand homeownership in the United States by assuming 100 percent of the risk for mortgages it insures. To carry out its mission, FHA relies on private lenders to determine borrowers' creditworthiness and to make and fund loans. FHA also relies on contractors to help assess lenders' compliance with its requirements and to manage and sell the properties it acquires through foreclosure. Without careful oversight of these lenders and contractors, FHA is vulnerable to mismanagement and fraud. The information systems FHA uses to collect and analyze data on FHA-insured loans and foreclosed properties are crucial to its oversight activities.

However, the White House's fiscal year 2002 budget blueprint stated that inadequate information systems have weakened FHA's ability to monitor lenders. FHA's information and telephone systems are also essential to its efforts to provide customer service to lenders, borrowers, and the general public.

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, DC 20548"
-------------------------------------------------------

"GAO

United States General Accounting Office

Performance and Accountability Series

January 2001

Major Management

Challenges and

Program Risks

Department of Housing and

Urban Development

..."This analysis should help the new Congress and administration carry out their responsibilities and improve government for the benefit of the American people..."
----------------------------------------
"Fraudulent Property Flipping"

The usual scenerio consists of the following:

The flipper (seller) usually owns the house for a short length of time, before reselling it.

The flipper does not tell the buyer that the sales price of the house is much higher than the house is worth.

The flipper only does "cosmetic repairs", and does not disclose the major problems of the house.

The flipper arranges a mortgage loan to cover the inflated sales price, but the loan is based on a false appraisal of the property. (overvalued to "an already pre-determined amount, set by the lender" ; appraisal also does not use correct "comparatives"; appraiser also does not report major deficiencies.)

The final inspector "overlooks" the condtion of the house. - (Will either state all repairs have been done; &/OR, that the house does not need any repairs, to meet minimum living standards.)

The flipper walks away from the deal with all the loan money, but the buyer winds up with a house that is not worth the loan he or she owes. (and is usually majorly deficient)

The lender doesn't worry about a thing...because the lender is covered by FHA's full repayment of the loan, if the buyer forecloses.

(After consumers (homebuyers) then report these fraudulent activities to HUD (FHA), HUD does nothing...even though they have rules and guidelines in place (including the following), TO enforce against fraudulent property flipping, and other fraudulent activities.) :


-------------------------------------------------------------
(HUD DOES NOT ENFORCE):

"HUD's Policy on Lenders' Accountability for Appraisals
......"HUD issued mortgagee letters to lenders that reiterated its policy that lenders were equally responsible for the quality of appraisals. Also, HUD's Deputy Assistant Secretary for Single-Family Housing instructed HUD staff that in cases in which appraisers missed serious repair conditions or significantly overvalued properties, HUD should request that the lenders who selected the appraisers pay for the needed repairs or pay down the mortgages by the amounts the properties were overvalued. and...

The Deputy Assistant Secretary also indicated that the failure of a lender to voluntarily resolve the appraisal deficiencies raised by HUD would result in enforcement action against the lender, including probation and suspension."

------------------------------------

(HUD DOES NOT ENFORCE):

"HUD Handbook: "Correction of Structural Defects in New Homes"; "Correction of Structural Defects in Existing Homes":

According to HUD's own policies and guidelines, you may qualify for help for repairs (of your house that has an FHA loan) if:
Your home is covered by Mortgage Insurance Under Section 203, 221 or 235.
(My house is covered under 203 (b)

("Sections of the National Housing Act authorizes the Secretary of HUD to correct, or to reimburse owners for the correct of structural or other major defects in some homes if the mortgages were insured by HUD. ") -
"Subpart L --Correction of Structural Defects in Homes Covered by Mortgage Insurance Under Section 203, 221 or 235.
Authority: Sec. 518 (b) and (c)."

"Correction of such defects in your (existing) home may be eligible for assistance if all of the following requirements can be met:

-The dwelling must have been more than one year old at the time you purchased it.
-The dewelling must consist of not more than four living units.
-The defect must be one which so affects the use and livability of the property as to create a serious danger to life or safety.
-The defect must have existed at time of the original appraisal and be one which a proper inspection by the HUD appraiser would have normally revealed. The existence of a defect at this time does not necessarily mean that you have an eligible claim.
-The mortgage, financing the purchase of the dwelling, must have been insured under Section 235 of the National Housing Act.
-A claim must be filed with HUD not later than one year after the insurance of the morgage."

(Similar guidelines are also found in the section for NEW homes. Although of course, some of the guidelines may vary.)

*** I did file this claim with HUD, before the time allowed was up. HUD ignored me about it; told me my house is not covered under this; and I am sure they now have no record of me filing this claim. In fact, I do not think they have kept, or reported all facts of my case, as they are supposed to do.

(However, I have a record of it. I have a record of everything that has happened; everything that has been filed; everything that has been written, and stated by me - and to me - by any and all parties, since this house closed on Aug. 14, 2001. I also have copies of all of the lies that HUD employees have told me, and have written me.)

Copies of everything, have also been printed off, and are stored somewhere other than my home - In more than one, safe, protective place, and with more than one individual.
(In case anything ever happens to me - the proof will ALWAYS still be there.)
---------------------------------------------------
"FHA Buyers Get New Home After Finding 181 Code Violations"

(HUD is now paying the over $700 month mortgage payments for this couple, until their house is paid off.)

REALTY TIMES
Article by: Peter G. Miller - 02/27/2001

After being told that it's efforts to portray FHA appraisers as home inspectors were misleading, HUD is now beginning to pay the price.

According to The Detroit Free Press, Mike and Kim Powers are getting a new house, compliments of HUD. It seems they bought an $86,000 home through FHA but later discovered that the house had 181 building code violations.

"A Federal Housing Administration appraisal and city inspections had uncovered only minor problems," said the story. "The Inkster couple said they did not get a private inspection because a TV commercial they saw on the Learning Channel touted the effectiveness of an FHA appraisal in finding defects in a house."

The result? According to the Free Press, "the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the parent agency of the FHA, agreed to let the couple exchange the house in Inkster for a HUD home of their choice in the same price range." (See: HUD will help get new home; TV ad blamed, February 10, 2001)

It's hardly amazing that buyers in Detroit and elsewhere feel mislead. According to HUD, today's FHA appraisal is far more than a mere estimate of value.

The so-called Homebuyer Protection Plan which then-HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo announced in 1998, was supposed to assure FHA borrowers that they are not buying a lemon.

"For the first time," said HUD, it would "require that home defects found by appraisers be disclosed to potential buyers."

Under the HUD plan, appraisers are obligated to locate "problems with plumbing, walls, ceilings, roofs, foundations, basements, electrical systems, and heating and air-conditioning systems; soil contamination; the presence of wood-destroying insects; hazards and nuisances near homes (such as oil and gas wells); lead-based paint hazards; and other health and safety problems."

The program, said HUD, "requires the appraiser to complete a new three-page form describing the physical condition of a home in unprecedented detail. HUD will give appraisers a handbook explaining the new appraisal standards."

"Under the new initiative," HUD explained, "appraisers must note the exact deficiencies such as cracks in floors, cracks in walls and ceilings, evidence of water leakage, and evidence of damaged support structures."

Appraisers, however, are not home inspectors. They do not open electrical service boxes, climb roofs, or check furnaces. Appraisers are not licensed to perform home inspections, they are not trained for such work, and if you ask appraisers they will tell you that they are not professional home inspectors. And because the extra work and liability associated with the HUD program, many appraisers raised their fees to do FHA work while others refused to offer any more FHA valuations.

Appraisers provide independent property valuations so that lenders can be certain they are not lending too much for a given home, and thus not making loans which have needlessly-high levels of risk.

None of this is a criticism of appraisers. They have an important role in the home-buying process, but that role does not include performing home inspections.

HUD, under Cuomo, aired a series of television ads which suggested that buyers need not worry about the condition of a home when they bought with FHA financing because, after all, the FHA appraisal would protect them.

The HUD ad campaign, wrote Maine Senator Susan M. Collins in a letter to Cuomo last September and first reported by Realty Times columnist Lew Sichelman, "implies that the home buyer can blindly trust HUD to protect his or her interest, and that the appraisal process will disclose any and all problems with the house. Given that FHA deals overwhelmingly with persons who have no previous experience purchasing a home, I would hope that this inaccurate message troubles you as much as it troubles me.

The HUD promotions, added Collins, "border on deceptive advertising."

We now have a new Administration in Washington and HUD has a new secretary, Mel Martinez. No organization other than HUD requires appraisers to perform what are effectively home inspections. Thus the questions for HUD look like this:


Will HUD end efforts to have appraisers substitute for home inspectors?

Will HUD end it's HomeBuyer Protection Plan ads?

Will HUD end any appraisal requirement established during the past four years which has not been adopted by both the Veterans Administration and conventional lenders?
Here is a chance for the new Secretary to rein in an unwanted program, better serve consumers, and cut HUD costs. Such an action would draw instant support from Capitol Hill, appraisers, brokers, lenders, and consumers.

Alternatively, you can bet that trial lawyers with college tuition to pay will look at the situation in Detroit and say, "whoa, this gives me an idea...."

If you think that problems associated with the FHA home inspection program are over, they're not. Just consider two recent e-mails received by Realty Times:

"I just recently bought a home through FHA in San Pablo, CA," says one correspondent.

"We had both the FHA appraisal and home inspection completed. We have been there 2 weeks and we are finding so many problems, such as there are no doors to the bedrooms, or closets, all the windows are nailed shut, the 2 backdoors are nailed shut, one of the back doors does not have a door frame, also they left their appliances, which do not work, and finally out of maybe 16 electrical outlets only 5 actually work, and the windows leak, and other stuff."

Here's another:

"I was wondering if there is any protection when you purchase a home through FHA regarding the roof not passing certification.

"We live on the Texas Gulf Coast that requires roofs be certified for the Texas Windstorm Insurance. A few months after we purchased our home, the Texas Windstorm Insurance said that our roof was never certified. We had a engineer come out and inspect the house, so that we could get it certified. The engineer informed us that the roof could not pass certification for the Texas Windstorm Insurance. And no insurance companies carry their our windstorm coverage. Knowing what area we live in that requires us to have windstorm insurance with a loan, why didn't the FHA inspector notify the mortgage company and buyer of the problem that existed?"

There is, of course, no "FHA inspector," a misconception which needs to be corrected.
--------------------------------------------
Mortgage fraud: Real estate's white-collar epidemic

Part 1 of 5: Lenders duped out of millions while regulators stand by and watch
Monday, June 23, 2003

By Jessica Swesey
Inman News Features


Last year, Bree Duke, a real estate agent for Metro Brokers/GMAC Real Estate in Atlanta, was a rookie scrambling to close her first sale when a lender-appointed appraiser called and asked whether she was "cool."

"Cool" was code for Duke turning her head while the lender approved a $140,000 loan on a home she knew was worth only $100,000. The appraiser and mortgage broker were conspiring to commit mortgage fraud and planned to split the extra $40,000, but they presented it to the young sales agent as a creative lending technique that would help a buyer who had poor credit.

The multi-trillion-dollar mortgage industry is a goldmine for fraudsters, and like most white-collar crimes, mortgage fraud may not be obvious to an outsider or even to honest people in the industry. Regulators and many people in the mortgage industry know fraud is rampant, but no one has come up with a viable solution to curtail these crimes.

Mortgage fraud is increasing partly because the high volume of loan originations in the past few years makes it easier for mistakes to slip by unnoticed, according to Jim Croft, executive director of the Mortgage Asset Research Institute, a group that helps financial companies manage risk from third-party contractors.

"A substantial amount of fraud is getting by, and what was put on the books a year or two ago is just now being discovered as fraudulent," Croft said.

Mortgage fraud is a complex crime typically perpetrated by a ring of professionals who know the ins and outs of the real estate process. Attorneys, closing agents, mortgage brokers, appraisers, title insurers and real estate agents can be involved in it.

And mortgage fraud is growing nationally, leaving behind a trail of foreclosed homes, dilapidated neighborhoods, destroyed personal credit histories and unreliable comparative market values in areas where inflated appraisals have been recorded. Millions of dollars are bilked out of lenders who rarely recover their losses, and borrowers eventually end up footing the bill.

Experts say mortgage fraud is becoming more sophisticated through technology that enables perpetrators to produce bogus bank statements, tax records, closing documents, appraisals and proof of employment. Technology also enables criminals to steal identities, making it easier to obtain a home loan in an unsuspecting borrower's name.

Donna Eide, assistant U.S. attorney for the southern district of Indiana, this year helped prosecute an $8 million mortgage fraud conspiracy case in Indianapolis in which 15 conspirators were convicted.

The lead defendant, Paul Dailey, brokered more than 100 fraudulent mortgages between 1998 and 2001, according to a Department of Justice statement.

Dailey recruited several real estate appraisers who appraised properties at two or three times their true value and closing agents who prepared two sets of documents at closing. The closing agents gave the settlement papers with the true value of the home to the seller and sent the second set of closing papers with the bogus inflated value to the lender. The fraudsters then paid the seller the true value of the home and split the rest of the cash from the lender. The buyers who obtained the fraudulent loans in their names, known as "straw purchasers," were in on the scheme.

Mortgage fraud is epidemic in Indianapolis and surrounding areas, according to Eide. The southern district of Indiana launched a mortgage fraud task force comprised of the U.S. Attorney's office, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Internal Revenue Service, U.S. Secret Service, Postal Inspection Service and the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Housing and Urban Development to crack down on these crimes.

But the damage caused by mortgage fraud can't be reversed easily.

"It's been a blight on our neighborhoods here because now we have all these boarded up houses that were the used and abused properties in mortgage fraud schemes," Eide said.

She said properties used to obtain fraudulent loans always end up in foreclosure.

"Indiana has a really high foreclosure rate-the highest in the nation. I'm beginning to think fraud is at least a contributor to that," she said.

The mortgage fraud task force identified 14 groups of conspirators currently defrauding people in the Indianapolis area, according to Eide. One mortgage fraud ring takes years to investigate because there usually are dozens of properties involved and the complexity of the mortgage process is difficult to present to juries in a simple way that makes clear exactly how the fraudsters broke the law.

Desktop publishing and scanning technology make it easy for crooks to fabricate documents and remain one step ahead of investigators and victims.

Eide said another part of the problem is that it is too easy to become a mortgage broker.

Lenders rely on mortgage brokers to be the eyes and ears of the transaction; when the broker turns out to be unscrupulous, the whole transaction becomes corrupt.

Lenders lose millions of dollars to mortgage fraud, but there's little incentive to uncover or report fraudulent loans because lenders carry the loss on loans that have been sold to the secondary market, according to Croft. If fraud is discovered, the lender has to compensate the company that bought or insured the loan for its loss.

Croft said a lot of lenders don't go to great lengths to spot fraud in their loans, which makes it impossible to ballpark how much money is lost to mortgage fraud each year."

(Note: A huge amount of brokers/lenders ARE involved in the fraudulent activities, themselves.
In many cases, they are the "ringleader". Lenders get "incentives" from HUD, for closing the FHA loans.; They are also given the full amount of the loan, which is insured by FHA, if the sellers have to foreclose.
These lenders also usually "pressure" appraisers and inspectors to "overlook things" and to appraise these houses at "an already pre-determined amount, set by the lender", so that the loan will close, and close at a higher amount - than the house is actually worth.) Many times, "the appraiser and inspector also get a cut of the deal, and lines their pockets with money to do the job, and keep their mouth shut."

Some honest appraisers, and inspectors, have come forward and STATED to these facts...because they refused to do the illegal activities. In their statements, they also stressed just how MUCH the lender tries to pressure you, and threatens you with "the lack of work" if you DON'T do the illegal activities.)
-----------------------------------
(They are ALL "getting in on the take"):

ABC News

Tue, 24 Jun 2003 13:32 AEST

LAWYER STRUCK OFF OVER ROLE IN MORTGAGE LENDING SCHEMES

A Sunshine Coast lawyer has been removed from Queensland's solicitors' roll after a Solicitors Complaints Tribunal hearing.

Terry Boyce was found guilty of eight professional misconduct charges for his part in mortgage lending schemes found to be woefully managed and which cost investors more than $1 million.

The decision to remove Mr Boyce from the roll means he will never be able to practise as a solicitor in Queensland again.

Mr Boyce has vowed to appeal against his dismissal.

A spokesman for the Queensland Law Society says the decision is a salutory one for all lawyers about their conduct.
-------------------------------------------------
(HUD ALREADY has /had regulations and policies in effect, to deal with fraudulent entities. Every year, HUD keeps introducing a "new" bill or policy,...but this will be like all of the others (that are already in effect). This, too, will not be enforced. A regulation that is not enforced, is the same as having no regulations at all.)They didn't / don't even enforce the reulations they already have - including, but not limited to, the "Lender Accountability" for no repairs being done, or overvalued appraisals.)

All of this is just "media propaganda". It's a lie, like everything else they do. (Don't do.)They have been, and will continue, to deceive the general public, just like they have been doing for many, many years.:

"DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
24 CFR Part 203 [Doc. No. FR-4615-F-02] RIN 2502-AH57
Prohibition of Property Flipping in HUD's Single Family Mortgage Insurance Programs
AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Housing-Federal Housing Commissioner, HUD.
ACTION: Final rule.
DATES: Effective Date: June 2, 2003.

SUMMARY: This final rule addresses property ''flipping,'' the practice whereby a property recently acquired is resold for a considerable profit with an artificially inflated value, often abetted by a lender's collusion with the appraiser. Specifically, the final rule establishes certain new requirements regarding the eligibility of properties to be financed with Federal Housing Administration (FHA) mortgage insurance. The regulatory amendments will comply with Congressional mandates to maintain the FHA Insurance Fund in a sound actuarial manner. The new requirements will make flipped properties ineligible for FHA-insured mortgage financing, thus precluding FHA home purchasers from becoming victims of predatory flipping activity. The final rule follows publication of a September 5, 2001, proposed rule and takes into
consideration the public comments received on the proposed rule."
--------------------------------------------------
(Please be aware, before reading the following letter that:
The National Home Builders Association (N.A.H.B.) is one of the biggest money contributors, to political individuals and entities. Although some of these builders are honest, some of their members are questionable. For instance, Richard and David WEEKLEY ("Weekley Homes"), are members of the N.A.H.B.
You can find horror stories about these builders, on www.ripoffreport.com ; www.hadd.com; and other consumer complaint sites as well. You can also do an Internet search for them ("complaints on Weekley Homes", etc.) and find a tremendous amounts of complaints on individuals such as this team.

Richard Fuller ("Fuller Homes") used to be another member of the NAHB. (He was supposedly killed in a plane crash recently.)
"Fuller Homes" ALSO has many complaints filed against them - in OK, TX, and NM. Mr. Fuller also had a lawsuit going on against him, at the time of his death...and other lawsuits were in the process of being filed.

This is only two examples. Also, please be aware that David Weekley is the founder of the "Texans for Lawsuit Reform" - "Working to restore balance and justice to the Texas Civil Justice System". (Imagine that.) He is the SAME person who "knowingly" continues to build faulty homes. (Even leaving out materials, of these houses.)
------------------------------------------
http://www.toxichomes.org/news/news_05-15-02_lobby_watch.shtml

"Leaky Weekleys"
Moldy 'Lemon' Homes Denied Day In Court
Weekley Boys Privatize the 'Justice' System

("Texans for Public Justice")

A Texas House panel today will explore if consumers are being hurt by businesses' increasing reliance on binding arbitration. Consumers will decry the privatized justice system that binding arbitration has created, while business interests that give millions of dollars to Texas politicians will rush to the defense of this plaintiff-hostile system.
Texas' mushrooming toxic mold epidemic is a crash course in the perils of binding arbitration, clobbering consumers with a one-two punch. First, they learn that their new dream home is a moldy lemon. Then they discover that they unwittingly signed binding arbitration clauses that strip their constitutional right to a jury trial and force their claims before costly, secretive tribunals that favor the builders who create arbitration business and even serve as arbitrators in construction disputes1.

The model Residential Construction Contract promoted by the Texas Association of Builders contains binding arbitration clauses, which are used by virtually every major Texas homebuilder. Meanwhile, consumers are trying to find one example of an arbitrated construction case in which Texas homeowners have gained more than they spent on arbitration. Builders could not build a more favorable system.

A major developer of this privatized justice is David Weekley Homes, both in its own right and through brother Richard Weekley's Texans for Lawsuit Reform (TLR). Since 1997, TLR's huge PAC has spent $2.6 million on all three branches of Texas government (see table)2.

Two homebuilders that rank among TLR's top donors also give heavily to Texas politicians directly. The family of Bob Perry of Perry Homes contributed $2.2 million and the Weekleys doled out more than $300,000 (see table below). Meanwhile, Texas homebuilder PACs gave Texas politicians $1.8 million more since 1997.3

Texas Homebuilder-Related Political Spending (Since '97) Gubernatorial
Races Other
Statewide
Races Legislative
Races Appeals
Court
Races Totals
Weekley Family $51,253 $170,600 $83,368 $12,400 $317,621
Bob Perry Family $120,000 $1,137,500 $ 911,250 $72,000 $2,240,750
Texans for Lawsuit Reform $27,500 $181,650 $2,290,134 $88,460 $2,587,744
Totals: $198,753 $1,489,750 $3,284,752 $172,860 $5,146,115

Note: Contributions cover through the March 2002 primaries.
Unlike court records, arbitration records are not public so it is impossible to fully gauge Weekley Homes' financial stake in arbitration. Nonetheless, there is evidence that this homebuilder fends off a steady stream of disgruntled customers who seek compensation for lemon homes.4 Now, spreading mold problems are bringing such lemon homeowners out of the woodwork.

The Richardsons of Austin
Two days after the Richardson family moved into their new $300,000 home last year they discovered that a leaky air conditioning line had bred mold in their attic and spewed water down their walls and under their floors. Although they had ordered special home design features to accommodate Dawn Richardson's allergic sensitivities, the Richardsons say Weekley Homes fixed the leak but failed to dry or remove the wet building materials. Instead, they merely painted over the mold.

All four family members soon experienced a battery of health problems, including skin rashes, headaches, fatigue, nausea, bloody diarrhea, nose bleeds, dizziness and respiratory infections. The worst symptoms afflicted Dawn Richardson and one-year-old Erica (brain swelling, motor skill impairment and language-skills regression). Environmental health experts have diagnosed Dawn with permanent brain and neurological damage caused by exposure to molds and toxic chemicals.

These health problems drove the Richardsons out just five weeks after they moved into their new home. Construction defects resulted in elevated levels of toxic mold in all three bathrooms and other areas of the house. Indoor air tests detected high levels of volatile organic compounds and outgassing of toxic chemicals (including benzene, styrene, xylene and formaldehyde) from synthetic building materials. The Richardsons have filed suit in state district court in Austin to recover related damages from Weekley and some of its subcontractors and suppliers5.

Sitting as a visiting judge at a pretrial hearing on the case late last month, former Texas Supreme Court Justice Rose Spector ruled on Weekley's pretrial motion to force the case into arbitration. The plaintiffs countered thateven if they had understood the arbitration clausethey had little choice because virtually every major homebuilder in Central Texas uses these clauses.

At the hearing, Judge Spector (who took $5,000 from Richard Weekley's TLR while on the high court) said she considered recusing herself because she works as a paid arbitrator for the American Arbitration Association where Weekley sends all of its disputes. Opting against recusal, Judge Spector ruled about as favorably for the plaintiffs as possible under the pro-arbitration precedents of the U.S. and Texas Supreme Courts.6 Judge Spector sent claims involving the contract signatoriesWeekley and the adult Richardsonsto an arbitration panel. She kept the remaining claims (involving the Richardson children or Weekley's subcontractors and suppliers) in state court.

Other Texans who have yet to file suit over their moldy new homes are turning to the Richardsons to learn about how binding arbitration robs consumers of their day in court.

Aric Barto of Sugarland
Since sports stadium builder Aric Barto closed on a new $268,000 David Weekley home in December 2000 he has been plagued by troubles of almost biblical proportions. Barto keeps a two-inch thick binder of repair work that he says Weekley has not fixed. Workers damaged a tree on his lot that later fell on his house. Weekley Homes came out three times to try to realign a tilting portion of his slab foundation. Half of his roof had to be replaced. Chronic leaks have caused repeated blooms of toxic Strachybotrysatra mold on the ceiling of his garage and study and on his bedroom, closet and bathroom walls. The mold then migrated through air ducts to his kitchen, dining room and living room.

Barto says his girlfriend contracted a leg rash, he has had allergic reactions and both of them have experienced chronic fatigue. He says he hired an attorney after Weekley Homes stopped paying for his temporary housing last month. Barto says his insurer is suing Weekley for mold remediation costs and he is suing the company to buy back his lemon home at a reasonable price.

The DeShazos of Missouri City
After the DeShazo family paid more than $300,000 for a new Weekley Home in 2001, the builder came out three times to reseal the joint where the shower in their master bath meets the floor. When they later heard that Weekley discontinued that bathroom design, Dawn DeShazo called to ask if it was defective. In what she now suspects was a lie, Weekley Homes said it simply phased out the design; there was no defect.

Dawn called the builder again last December after a family with bathroom plumbing problems around the corner suddenly moved out. Weekley Homes assured her that it was an isolated leak problem unrelated to any design defect. In the Sienna Plantation development outside Houston, Dawn says Weekley bought out one family's house under a confidential deal. It relocated another family for nine months during mold remediation. And it temporarily relocated yet another family into a vacant Weekley Homeonly to encounter yet another mold infestation.

When Weekley came for a one-year inspection of the DeShazo home in February, Dawn complained about bad odors coming from the drain of her master bath. The smell went away when she poured bleach down the drain, as the inspector suggested. A couple of weeks ago Dawn called the builder when the smell returned with a vengeance. This time Weekley sent a member of its Special Projects team, which Dawn says is a euphemism for Weekley's mold squad. The builder is negotiating over where to relocate the DeShazos during mold remediation but has not said who will pay their mortgage in the interim.

Meanwhile, Dawn wonders if mold caused recent health problems in herself and her youngest child. Suffering from insomnia, morning headaches and repeated voice loss throughout 2002, Dawn was diagnosed with walking pneumonia 10 days ago. On May 5th she rushed her three-year-old son to the emergency room with severe abdominal pains and a fever spike. The hospital had trouble getting his blood-oxygen level up and was unable to diagnose the problem, which passed after several days. Dawn says she is particularly concerned about this son because a premature birth left him susceptible to respiratory problems and because he has spent more time in her infected bedroom than her older children. Furious with Weekley for misleading her about a spate of mold problems in Sienna Plantation, Dawn is shopping for an attorney.

Across Texas, toxic mold is breeding colonies of angry homeowners. Thanks to the powerful grip that the Weekleys and other homebuilders have on all three branches of government, these Texans are first driven out of their homes and then driven out of the courts.

1For more on the hazards of binding arbitration, see: The Consumer Pitfalls of Binding Arbitration, Texas Watch Foundation, Austin, Texas, 2002; and The Costs of Arbitration, Public Citizen, Washington, D.C., April 2002.
2In a 2001 lobbying coup, TLR successfully urged Governor Rick Perry to veto a prompt pay bill that would have barred HMOs from imposing binding arbitration on doctors.
3The biggest share of this money ($856,400) came from the Texas Manufactured Housing Association, whose members aggressively promote binding arbitration.
4Slab O' Trouble, Houston Press, June 27, 1996.
5Richardson v. Weekley Homes, Case No. GN200790, 53rd District Court of Travis County.
6Cone Memorial Hosp. v. Mercury Const., 460 U.S. 1, 42 (1983); Capital Income Properties v. Blackmon, 843 S.W.2d 22, 23 (Tex. 1992).
# # #

Texans for Public Justice is a non-partisan, non-profit policy & research organization which tracks the influence of money in politics.

http://www.tpj.org/Lobby_Watch/arbitrationhomes.pdf
------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------
The N.A.H.B. has been trying to get laws passed (in all states) that says a home buyer will HAVE to agree to "binding arbitration". (This means, you will have NO rights, to take a case to court.) What they DON'T tell you is:
In "binding arbitration", it is NOT done by an "unbiased third-party", as they want you to believe. In fact, that "unbiased third-party" almost always finds for the company. (Crooked builder, etc.) The buyer also walks out with NO money at all, for repairs to the deficient house (which was built, or sold, or has been involved in...fraudulent activities.) They also hit you up for the crooked builder's attorney fees.
(In one case, that just finished, the home buyer ended up with no money for repairs, (even though she could PROVE her house was deficient, and fraudulently built) AND she now has to also pay the $100,000, for the crooked builder's attorney (& other) fees.
- not to mention, what she had to pay for her own part of the arbitration fees. Most of the time, these "binding arbitrations" also hook on a "gag order". (Just like in a court of law.) In this way, the home buyer cannot discuss the case with other consumers, or anyone else. (THIS is why you do not here about all of these cases.)

Up until recently, FHA would not allow "binding arbitration".
They only allowed "an option to arbitration, if the home buyer choose to do so."

I then recently read that the N.A.H.B. was also trying to get FHA to agree that EVERY contract had to state that the home buyer HAD to agree to "binding arbitration", if any problems arose later.

Well...guess what...read the following, that just came in to existence. It states nothing now, about the homebuyer has that "option".

See the HUD regulation as it is now, and how the NAHB wants it to read:

Here is the way the OLD regulation read when I printed it in August 2001:

In the event of any dispute regarding a homeowner complaint or structural defect claim, Plans must, unless prohibited by applicable law, provide for binding arbitration proceedings arranged through a nationally recognized dispute settlement organization. The sharing of arbitration charges shall be determined by the Plan. A Plan must contain pre-arbitration conciliation provisions at no cost to the homeowner, and provision for judicial resolution of disputes, but arbitration, which must be available to a homeowner during the entire term of the coverage contract, must be an assured recourse for a dissatisfied homeowner.

The NEW regulation, that the NAHB wants HUD to agree to, does not give an option for the home buyer to take their case to the judicial system.

(This will protect the "crooked home builders" from having to be involved in lawsuits, for their fraudulent activities, which is exactly what they are aiming for.)
--------------------------------------------------
The N.A.H.B. are now "telling" HUD what to do, and how to act.
Big bucks are involved in the whole housing industry.
The same way the NAHB is getting things changed in law, through fraudulent entities within our own government.
---------------------------------
(This is a letter from the President of the NAHB, trying to sway the Governor of New Jersey):

"April 1, 2003



The Honorable James E. McGreevey
Governor of New Jersey
The State House
Trenton, NJ 08625


Dear Governor McGreevey:


On behalf of the 205,000 members of the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB), I write to express my disappointment with the anti-growth agenda that your Administration has embraced. The program you put forward in your recent state of the state address will have the effect of stopping most residential growth in New Jersey by institutionalizing NIMBY-ism throughout the state. It is the worst sort of no-growth rhetoric masquerading as smart growth.

NAHB is a strong advocate of smart growth. Across the country, there is an emerging consensus about what smart growth means. Smart growth balances the interests of the economy, the environment and social needs, including housing. Every major player in this debate, from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to the National Association of Realtors to the Sierra Club, acknowledges the importance of providing a range of housing opportunities and choices for people of all income levels. Your proposals give priority to the environment over many social needs, and they fail to recognize the importance of housing to the quality of life of New Jersey's residents.

Your plan ignores the fact that New Jersey's population is growing. From 1990 to 2002, New Jersey's population grew by more than 840,000 an increase of 11 percent. But during this period, New Jersey added just four housing units for every five new households. Your proposed anti-growth policies will only worsen a growing affordability problem.

You talk of encouraging development in urban centers and older suburbs by redeveloping brownfields and steering infrastructure spending. Homebuilders fully support infill development, urban reinvestment and brownfields redevelopment. However, your moratoria proposal and the unprecedented power you propose to grant local municipalities to act on NIMBY impulses guarantees that your infill strategy will fail.

The preservation map you have outlined is further evidence of a plan that fails to account for the current and future needs of the citizens of New Jersey. The map is quite clear in delineating where growth will be prohibited, but it fails to provide adequate land to accommodate the state's growing population.

You speak often of shaping a New Jersey for your children and grandchildren. For the affluent, that's a simple proposition. But for hundreds of thousands of New Jersey families, the plan you've put forth does not include housing they can afford. For their children and grandchildren, New Jersey will be nothing more than a place their families once called home.

For the sake of the hundreds of thousands of working families who will be hurt by your current proposals, I strongly encourage you to take a more balanced approach to dealing with growth issues in New Jersey. It is possible to preserve natural resources while preserving housing affordability and choice for the people of New Jersey. It is the harder course, but as a public leader, you have an obligation to the citizens of New Jersey to find that balance. I hope you will rise to the challenge.


Best regards,


C. Kent Conine
2003 President
----------------------------------------------------
The NAHB are not thinking of the "working families, the children, and the grandchildren"...the NAHB are thinking of future plans of "putting more money into their own individual pockets.", and in ways that cannot be done...if the Governor of new Jersey does what he wants to do.

The NAHB have become "GOD", within the housing industry.
And if do not realize that there are fraudulent activities involved, then you better start doing the research, the investigation, and see just what IS going on.

I cannot begin to explain to you (& show you, and prove to you) just what this organization has become.
---------------------------------------------------
(The NAHB telling Congress what to do):

HUNDREDS OF BUILDERS BLITZ CAPITOL HILL TO PUSH FOR ECONOMIC, HOUSING AND HEALTH CARE LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES


WASHINGTON, May 7 - As part of its annual Legislative Conference and in conjunction with its Spring Board of Directors meeting, the National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) has hundreds of builders from across the country in the nation's capital today to seek support from Capitol Hill lawmakers for economic stimulus, homeownership tax credit and association
health plan (AHP) legislation that would increase the availability of affordable housing.

"If housing is to continue to lead the economy forward, the economy must produce new jobs so that more people can afford to buy or rent a home.
President Bush's economic growth package clearly offers the best means to provide badly needed near term stimulus to consumer spending and job growth, including more housing consumption and production. NAHB is therefore urging that Congress pass, to the greatest extent possible, a plan that reflects the President's economic stimulus plan," said Jerry Howard, executive vice
president and CEO of NAHB.

Builders are also urging their lawmakers to cosponsor Senate bill S. 198 and House bill H.R. 839, legislation that mirrors a proposal in the Bush Administration's Fiscal Year 2004 budget that would create a homeownership tax credit. Modeled after the successful Low Income Housing Tax Credit, the program is designed to help bridge the gap between the cost of developing
affordable housing and the price that buyers can afford to pay for a home in many lower-income neighborhoods.

Available through a competitive allocation program administered by state agencies, the homeownership tax credit would provide investors with a credit of up to 50 percent of project costs for eligible home rehabilitation or construction. It is intended to encourage new construction and substantial rehabilitation of homes for sale to low- and moderate-income families in conomically distressed areas.

"The homeownership tax credit is good public policy and good for the economy. The program would make it economically viable for development to go forward in inner cities, struggling suburbs and isolated rural areas.
Furthermore, it would provide a great stimulative effect, producing 50,000 homes a year and resulting in 120,000 new jobs on an annual basis. The Treasury Department estimates its cost at $2.4 billion over five years, which would provide an excellent bang for the buck," said Howard.

Another national concern confronting builders and millions of small businesses is soaring health care costs, which has forced more and more small business employers to drop coverage for their employees in recent years. To address this critical issue, builders are urging members of Congress to support House bill H.R. 660 and companion Senate bill S. 545.

The legislation calls for the enactment of association health plans, which recent studies indicate could help small businesses reduce their health insurance costs by 15 percent to 30 percent annually.

"As the owner of my own firm, I know first-hand how skyrocketing health insurance costs can harm workers and small businesses alike by making it difficult to provide quality health insurance at an affordable price.

H.R. 660 and S. 545 provide the right remedy by allowing small businesses to band together through associations to purchase quality health care at a lower cost," said NAHB President Kent Conine, a home and apartment builder from Dallas.

To help spur the production of more affordable rental housing, builders are urging their federally elected officials to enact legislation that would correct four IRS technical advice memorandums (TAMs) that limit the use of low income housing tax credits. This would restore the amount of equity financing available under the Low Income Housing Tax Credit, thereby
creating an incentive for builders to build more apartments and increase the supply of affordable housing.

ABOUT NAHB: The National Association of Home Builders is a
Washington-based trade association representing more than 205,000 members involved in home building, remodeling, multifamily construction, property management, subcontracting, design, housing finance, building product manufacturing
and other aspects of residential and light commercial construction.

Known as "the voice of the housing industry," NAHB is affiliated with more than 800 state and local home builders associations around the country. NAHB's builder members will construct about 80 percent of the more than 1.6 million new housing units projected for 2003, making housing one of the largest engines of economic growth in the country.

#####

NS2003-080
------------------------------------
NOTE: What he DOESN'T say is...how many "crooked builders" are members of this organization.

(Look at the member roster...you can figure out for yourself, because you will see some of those same builders' names, involved in lawsuits due to their fraudulent activities.) - This can be proven.

------------------------------------

(Sent to me by an "acquaintance"):

"The housing industry, through trade organizations and builders associations, contributes millions every year to political campaigns, public relations to put a spin on what they're really doing, and on lobbying to erode consumer protection on new homes. Home buyers do not have access to most complaints filed on builders because many are hidden in the non-public records of confidential binding arbitration, which often comes with a gag order for the home owner. Also, many state agencies that are set up for consumer protection or regulation of builders or other corporations don't make the complaints public. Most BBB's use a rating system and don't make actual complaints public, and the system can take years to reflect a poor record of customer satisfaction. I got our state's attorney general, and our area's BBB, to put this in writing, that complaints are confidential, because no one believed me.

Increasingly, new homes are built with code violations, missing material, and shoddy construction, even dangerously unsound defects. The warranty i
Respond to this report!
What's this?

#15 Author of original report

HUD FHA Fraud - They Do Not Enforce This:

AUTHOR: Billie - (U.S.A.)

HUD's "POLICY ON LENDERS' ACCOUNTABILITY for APPRAISALS"

......"HUD issued mortgagee letters to lenders that reiterated its policy that lenders were equally responsible for the quality of appraisals. Also, HUD's Deputy Assistant Secretary for Single-Family Housing instructed HUD staff that in cases in which appraisers missed serious repair conditions or significantly overvalued properties, HUD should request that the lenders who selected the appraisers pay for the needed repairs or pay down the mortgages by the amounts the properties were overvalued. and...

The Deputy Assistant Secretary also indicated that the failure of a lender to voluntarily resolve the appraisal deficiencies raised by HUD would result in enforcement action against the lender, including probation and suspension."
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?

Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.



Ripoff Report Legal Directory