C.F.R. » Title 24 » CHAPTER II—OFFICE OF ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR HOUSING—FEDERAL HOUSING COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT › SUBCHAPTER A—GENERAL › PART 200—INTRODUCTION TO FHA PROGRAMS › Subpart H—Participation and Compliance Requirements

24 C.F.R. § 200.218

Triggering Events

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Each of the following is a Triggering Event that may subject a Controlling Participant to Previous Participation review under § 200.220:

(1) An application for FHA mortgage insurance;

(2) An application for funds provided by HUD pursuant to a program administered by HUD's Office of Housing, such as but not limited to supplemental loans;

(3) A request to change any Controlling Participant for which HUD consent is required with respect to a Covered Project; or

(4) A request for consent to an assignment of a housing assistance payment contract under section 8 of the United States Housing Act of 1937 or of another contract pursuant to which a Controlling Participant will receive funds in connection with a Covered Project.

(b) The Commissioner may also require a review of a potential owner's Previous Participation in connection with a loan sale or other form of property disposition, including foreclosure sale. Notwithstanding anything contained in the regulations in this subpart to the contrary, any such review shall be in accordance with the terms, conditions, provisions and other requirements set forth by the Commissioner in connection with such loan sale or property disposition which may differ, in whole or in part, from the regulations in this subpart.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 1996–1996 · leading case: Keating v. Est. of Golding, 661 N.E.2d 541 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Keating v. Est. of Golding, 661 N.E.2d 541 (Ill. App. Ct. 1996). “In granting judgment on the pleadings, the trial judge ruled that (1) the plaintiff’s "activities [and] performance in preparation of the development of Deep Lake property were that of a principal”; (2) the plaintiff and the individual defendants entered the partnership for the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.