Skip to main content

THE UNITED STATES FILES CIVIL COMPLAINT TO ENJOIN FRAUD IN GOVERNMENT INSURED MORTGAGE LOANS

Benton J. Campbell, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, and Kenneth Donohue, Inspector General for the Department of Housing and Urban Development, announced the filing of a civil complaint against Madison Home Equities, Inc., a mortgage lender located in Carle Place, Long Island, seeking a court-ordered injunction to prevent the company from making loans insured by the Federal Housing Administration (“FHA”). The complaint also seeks relief against Madison’s president, Nadine Malone. The case is pending before United States District Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis.

As alleged in the civil complaint, Madison participates in a federal program sponsored by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) which authorizes Madison to make mortgage loans that are insured by FHA in the event of default. As a condition of participation in the program, Madison must determine that all borrowers who receive FHA-insured mortgage loans meet HUD lending standards. The government’s civil complaint alleges that Madison and two of its officers falsely certified to HUD that borrowers receiving over $ 4 million in loans met HUD’s lending requirements when, in fact, the defendants knew they did not.

“Fraudulent lending practices that compromise the integrity of the FHA mortgage insurance program, and which contribute to the alarming increase in loan defaults and housing foreclosures, hurt all of us and can not be tolerated,” stated United States Attorney Campbell. “We will vigorously seek to use all means at our disposMadison Home Equities, Inc.,al to stop those who engage in such activity.” In May 2008, Mr. Campbell announced the formation of a task force comprised of federal, state, and local law enforcement agents and investigators to address the burgeoning problem of mortgage fraud.

HUD Inspector General Donohue stated, “In these difficult times, the HUD Office of Inspector General, working with U.S. Attorneys across the nation, will use all appropriate means to isolate and hold accountable mortgage companies like Madison Home Equities, and their principals, whose fraudulent conduct jeopardizes the integrity of HUD’s FHA mortgage insurance program.”

The United States’ case is being litigated by Assistant United States Attorneys Kevan Cleary, Edward K. Newman, and John Vagelatos.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

15 Gang Members Convicted on Conspiracy, Weapons Possession, Firearms Trafficking Charges Case Follows Recent Convictions of 137th Street Crew and East Harlem Narcotics Trafficking Organization

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus R. Vance, Jr., announced the results of the investigation and prosecution of one of Central Harlem’s most destructive criminal street gangs, referred to as “ONE TWENTY-NINE” or “GOODFELLAS/THE NEW DONS,” which terrorized the neighborhood surrounding West 129th Street between Lenox and Fifth Avenues. Thirteen members of the gang have previously pleaded guilty to importing, possessing, and using firearms over the course of the conspiracy.
Post a Comment
Read more

The Myth, The Matrix, and The Malpractice: Unpacking the Sophia Stewart Saga

The internet loves a good underdog story, especially one where a lone creator battles Hollywood giants. Few tales have captivated online forums and social media quite like that of Sophia Stewart, the woman who famously sued the creators of The Matrix and The Terminator, claiming they stole her work, "The Third Eye." Her story is a complex tapestry woven with claims of stolen genius, judicial conflicts, and attorney negligence. Let's untangle the legal facts from the compelling narrative and examine the heart of her claims. The Core Allegation: "The Third Eye" and the Blockbusters Sophia Stewart alleged that her copyrighted manuscript, "The Third Eye," conceived in 1981 and finalized in 1983, was the blueprint for two of the most iconic sci-fi franchises: The Terminator (first film 1984) and The Matrix (first film 1999). From her perspective, the similarities were undeniable. Stewart’s supporters often point to broad, impactful themes and ev...
3 comments
Read more

Charlie Kirk Was Right, and Charlie Kirk Was Wrong: The Enduring Legacy of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has argued that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unnecessary, contending that the 14th Amendment should have been sufficient to guarantee equal rights. There's a compelling argument to be made for both sides of this statement. Let's break down where Kirk was right and, more importantly, where historical context reveals he was profoundly wrong. Where Charlie Kirk Was "Right" (In Theory) Kirk's theoretical point hinges on the idea that fundamental constitutional principles, if interpreted and enforced correctly, should have negated the need for additional legislation. And, in a perfect world, he would be correct. The 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, explicitly states that "no State shall... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The intent was to ensure all citizens, particularly newly freed African Americans, were treated equally under the law. If this ...
Post a Comment
Read more