[Link to
CIM-0107](http://www.hud.gov/offices/adm/hudclips/lops/CIM-0107LOPS.doc)

[Link to
CIM-0109](http://www.hud.gov/offices/adm/hudclips/lops/CIM-0109LOPS.doc)

Violations of Section 112 of HUD Reform Act

Legal Opinion: GHM-0013

Index: 3.300

Subject: Violations of Section 112 of HUD Reform Act

November 26, 1991

MEMORANDUM FOR: Carole Wilson, Associate General Counsel

Equal Opportunity and Adninistrative Law, GM

THROUGH: John J. Daly, Associate General Counsel

Insured Housing and Finance, GH

FROM: David R. Cooper, Assistant General Counsel

Multifamily Mortgage Division, GHM

SUBJECT: Additional Civil Penalties and Administrative Sanctions

for Violations of Section ll2 of the HUD Reform Act

This is in response to the memorandum of November l3, l99l,

from the General Counsel, requesting that we furnish you our

views on what civil remedies and administrative sanctions other

than the civil money penalties prescribed in Subsection l3(d) of

the Department of Housing and Urban Development Act as added by

Section ll2 of the HUD Reform Act of l989 may be imposed by the

Secretary on persons who violate the registration, record-keeping

or reporting requirements of Section l3.

The Multifamily Mortgage Division has jurisdiction over

legal matters involving FHA multifamily mortgage insurance,

questions arising before and after default, and interpretations

of statutes involving HUD\'s furnishing of various subsidies such

as flexible subsidy, Interest Reduction Payments (\"IRP\"), and

rental subsidies (Rent Supplement assistance-\"RS\"-and Rental

Assistance Payments-\"RAP\"). Section l3 may impact the operations

of FHA in many ways. The kinds of \"persons\" doing business with

FHA who may be affected are sponsors, mortgagors, lenders,

contractors, subcontractors, landowners, insurance companies,

lawyers, lobbyists, brokers and many others. Possible sanctions

available to the Department for use differ as to their focus and

will tend to give the Secretary stronger control over certain

classes of persons as defined in the statute rather than others.

These possible civil remedies and administrative sanctions may be

summarized as follows:

l\) The Regulatory Agreement: Although the Regulatory

Agreement does not specifically cover the keeping of records

pertaining to lobbying expenditures, if the person making the

expenditure to influence a decision of the Department is the

mortgagor or has otherwise executed the Regulatory Agreement, and

if the funds being paid to the consultant constitute project

2

assets then conceivably the Secretary might have an action

against the person making the expenditure for breach of the

Regulatory Agreement through a diversion of project assets or

misappropriation. Those who administer project revenues may only

utilize them to service the mortgage, pay legitimate operating

expenses, or for proper expenditures from project reserves and

escrows. Although our case would be weaker if the expenditure

were made from surplus cash, the \"owners\" of a project subject to

an insured or Secretary-held mortgage as defined in the

Regulatory Agreement remain contractually liable to HUD \"for

their own acts and deeds or acts and deeds of others which they

have authorized in violation of\" the provisions of that contract.

Similarly, the Secretary may have some right to enforce

provisions of a Management Contract between the owner and a

management agent by the terms of that contract or as a third

party beneficiary.

2\) Civil Money Penalties: Various statutes other than

section l3 impose civil money penalties on persons participating

in FHA projects in different capacities when they violate

statutes, regulations or HUD prescribed instruments. While we

do not purport to be setting forth an exhaustive list of the

relevant statutes, we do direct your attention to Sections l07

(lenders) and l08 (mortgagors) of the HUD Reform Act which

prescribe civil money penalties punishing various forms of

behavior by important participants in the transactions overseen

by our office.

3\) Debarment, Suspension, Limited Denial of Participation:

While we defer to the Associate General Counsel for Program

Enforcement in discussing matters arising under 24 CFR Part 24,

we see no reason why persons spending money to influence HUD

decision making and persons receiving money for that purpose

could not be sanctioned under that part. A contract to hire a

lawyer or consultant to influence HUD decisions would seem to be

a \"covered transaction\" within the meaning of 24 CFR 24.ll0.

4\) Coinsurance Probation, Suspension or Withdrawal of

Participation: If the entity making the expenditure to influence

a decision of the Department is the coinsuring lender, then the

Secretary may have an action against the entity making the

expenditure under 24 CFR Sections 251.104, 252.104 or 255.104.

These Sections give the Secretary the authority to suspend, put

on probation or withdraw from participation in the coinsurance

program any coinsuring lender who, among other things, submits

false, fraudulent, or incomplete reports to HUD or for any other

cause determined by the Commissioner or designee to be

appropriate.

5\) Criminal Penalties: While the incoming requests

information on civil remedies, we want to bring to your attention

that certain criminal statutes provide for the imposition of

3

monetary fines in connection with certain conduct against the

Department. If the entity or individual making the expenditure

to influence a decision of the Department, and then providing a

false report pursuant to Section 112 of the HUD Reform Act of

1989, can be viewed as an entity or individual attempting to

obtain any loan or advance of credit with the intent that such

loan or advance of credit be insured by the Department, the

Secretary may be able to seek remedies against such entity or

individual pursuant to 18 USC Section 1010. This Section

provides that anyone who \"makes, passes, utters, or publishes any

statement, knowing the same to be false, or alters, forges, or

counterfeits any instrument, paper, or document . . .knowing it

to have been altered . . . shall be fined not more than \$5,000 or

imprisoned not more than two years, or both.\"

If the entity or individual making the expenditure to

influence a decision of the Department defrauds or makes any

false entry in any book of the Department or makes any false

report or statement to the Department, the Secretary may seek to

have penalties imposed against such entity or individual pursuant

to 18 USC Section 1012. This Section provides that \" w hoever,

with intent to defraud, makes any false entry in any book of the

Department of Housing and Urban Development or makes any false

report or statement to or for such Department . . . s hall be

fined not more than \$1000 or imprisoned not more than one year,

or both.\"

Please address any questions you may have to Joel Robinson

on 708-4167.