Texas Federal District Court Allows Government’s FCA/FIRREA Mortgage Suit To Proceed


On September 10, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas denied a mortgage lender’s motion to dismiss the federal government’s claims that the lender and two of its executives knowingly made false statements in loan applications to HUD regarding the company’s compliance with FHA origination requirements. U.S. v. Americus Mortg. Corp., No. 12-2676, 2013 WL 4829271 (S.D. Tex. Sept. 10, 2013). The government claims the lender’s actions violated the False Claims Act (FCA) and the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA), and resulted in HUD incurring losses of over $150 million on loans that defaulted. The court held (i) that the government complaint sufficiently alleged that the lender, at the direction of the individual defendants, knowingly made false statements of fact to HUD while engaging in a fraudulent course of business that caused HUD to pay out money that it otherwise would not have paid, thereby sufficiently alleging a violation of the FCA, and (ii) that pleading proof of specific intent to defraud was unnecessary. The court also rejected the lender’s argument that allegations of materiality or scienter were vitiated because HUD was “on notice of, and conducting an investigation into” the conduct alleged to have violated the FCA, and allowed the lender to continue participating in the FHA-insurance program. Finally, the court held, among other things, that the three-year tolling period that applied to the FCA’s six-year statute of limitations resulted in the government’s complaint being timely. With respect to the FIRREA claim, the court rejected the lender’s argument that it was not an entity subject to FIRREA. The court reasoned that the plain language of Section 1006 in the FIRREA statute applies to “whoever” is connected to HUD, which included the lender. It further stated that the complaint established that the lender knowingly submitted false statements to influence HUD, in violation of FIRREA.

Written by:

Published In:


DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© BuckleySandler LLP | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›

* With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name.