[FoCHAT] CHATNews: HUD OIG Audit Begins; CHAT is looking for additional examples

[mehrlich8 at yahoo.com]

 Dear Friend of CHAT,
 
Thank you so much to those of you who sent letters about the HUD OIG complaint or who have otherwise helped us or sent us your important information in the past! From a comment during a HUD phone call today, I am sure that our campaign for fairness is helping.
 
I just got a call from the local HUD Office of the Inspector General (HUD OIG) about their meeting with me in June and a confirmatory email setting the date and time. I am very encouraged by the answers that I received over the phone about the procedures for this audit. First an audit is done and then, if there is evidence that the OIG thinks warrants it, an investigation is done.
 

The person I spoke to from the local HUD OIG office told me that they would like specific examples of applicants whose application processing illustrates points that we make in our official complaint, which you can read at our website: 
  
http://chatushome.com/ 
 
We have many examples but I welcome you to update your situation as described below if your would like us to consider your example for presenting among many examples to the HUD OIG.
  
I was told this morning by the OIG office that it is fine for me to ask through our internet networks for applicants to offer their application to me to consider as additional examples to highlight. 
  
Here is my request. 
  
o       We need applicants who do not mind sharing documents with the HUD OIG or having the HUD OIG look at their file. 
  
o      You either have an ongoing RH problem or have gotten less money than you were entitled to if you had had a fair appeal (given the $150,000 maximum and including elevation incentive RH $30,000 grants). 
  
o  You should not have received additional insurance benefits for structural damage that were not reported to RH. 
  
o You have been truthful  in  the answers and documents  you provided to RH, which we are sure is the case for the overwhelming majority of applicants.  
  
o You understand the basic rules of RH.  
  
   
If you would allow us to consider your case as an example to give to the HUD OIG, please take or retake our survey within the next week if you are in any of the categories below. 
  
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=hdEchbm8Vl_2bWFDmxi7E_2f7w_3d_3d  (or get the link from near the top of our website; http://chatushome.com/ ) 
 
1. When you fill out the survey, for the first question please check:
 No, you can send my survey with my identifying information 
(to officials; this would include the HUD OIG, but we will keep all your data confidential, of course, to others except for a few CHAT members who help us organize the data and who pledge to keep it confidential).
 
2. In the final open box of the survey (question 49, ignore the reference to elevation grants), please summarize in 15 sentences or less which of these problems (there may have been more than one) you experienced.  
Please be as specific as you can in the survey about RH problems with respect to RH rules but brief. (We will follow up with you for more information if we need it). 
 

being left in limbo in dispute resolution, appeals, or the PAL mediation for more than 4 months; 

tried or trying to appeal an RH mistake but not being allowed to; 

having to appeal without important documents being accepted or considered by RH looked that would show a mistake in your grant; 

having an appeal denied but RH has not given a specific reason;
you were told or read the state's decision was final so you did not consider talking to an attorney about a lawsuit or you read in the closing papers that the state's decision was final and that if you sued and lost you would have to pay the state's attorneys fees;
you were discouraged from appealing because of something an ICF or RH person told you;
your application was made inactive with no notice to you when this was done or with no explanation to you;
your application was put in dispute resolution even though you did not dispute the amount;
you found out that RH or ICF did additional determinations of your pre-storm value or determinations of your estimated cost of damage after notifying you of your award amount without you asking them to do so and later your grant amount decreased;

you had to appeal without a copy of your file and lost the appeal, you think, at least partly as a result of this; 

you were denied written information about the amount of your grant or why your appeal or dispute was denied; 

you were forced to give up your appeal to get an elevation grant and you would have gotten additional money beyond the elevation grant if you had won your appeal (remember, you can’t get more than a total of $150,000 from RH grants, RH elevation incentive grant, and RH additional compensation grant); 

you were told that you  qualified for an additional compensation grant for low-income applicants and later told that you did not qualify even though you had given accurate information to RH; 

RH or ICF decreased your grant amount from what was written and sent to you or told just when you went to closing or just before closing of a decrease without an adequate explanation;

you were denied a full copy of your file; 

you were told your letters or papers were lost or you were asked to resend information or documents you already sent to them (preferably by certified mail or fax and have the receipt to prove it) because they changed contractors or because they can’t find the documents; 

you have proof of a mistake that you have documentation for in the determination of :
o       your estimated cost of damage (according to their CAD report that you have read), 
o       the subtraction of insurance or FEMA benefits that you can prove were subtracted when they were not for structural damage, 
o       your pre-storm value that you were not able to appeal; 

RH currently has not given you a specific answer for more than 6 months:
o        about denial of a grant that you can prove you should get according their rules, 
o        about still waiting for an elevation grant that you can prove you should get    according their rules, 
o        promised funds won on appeal, 
o       about a mistake that they made in their calculation of your grant.  
  
 Best wishes,
 
Melanie Ehrlich
Co-Chairman, Citizens' Road Home Action Team (CHAT)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://chatushome.com/pipermail/fochat/attachments/20090602/b9893644/attachment-0001.html>