C.F.R. » Title 24 » CHAPTER II—OFFICE OF ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR HOUSING—FEDERAL HOUSING COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT › SUBCHAPTER B—MORTGAGE AND LOAN INSURANCE PROGRAMS UNDER NATIONAL HOUSING ACT AND OTHER AUTHORITIES › PART 203—SINGLE FAMILY MORTGAGE INSURANCE › Subpart C—Servicing Responsibilities

24 C.F.R. § 203.676

Request for continued occupancy

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

An occupant may request permission to continue to occupy the property following conveyance to the Secretary by notifying the HUD Field Office in writing, within 20 days after the date of the mortgagee's notice of pending acquisition. Verification of illness or injury as described in § 203.675(b)(4) shall be submitted within this time period if an occupant seeks to qualify for continued occupancy under the provisions of § 203.674(a). The HUD Field Office will notify the mortgagee in writing that an occupied conveyance has been requested.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 2502-0268) [53 FR 875, Jan. 14, 1988, and 53 FR 8626, Mar. 16, 1988, as amended at 58 FR 54246, Oct. 20, 1993]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1985–2024 · leading case: Rowe v. Pierce, 622 F. Supp. 1030 (D.D.C. 1985).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Rowe v. Pierce, 622 F. Supp. 1030 (D.D.C. 1985). “24 C.F.R. §§ 203.676 , 203.677, 203.678. However, the Secretary may accept occupied conveyance without notice to the occupants, as was done in this case.”
Perkins v. HUD-U.S. Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev. (E.D. Mich. 2024). “, see also 24 C.F.R. § 203.676 (“An occupant may request permission to continue to occupy the property following conveyance to the Secretary .”
Perkins v. HUD-U.S. Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev. (E.D. Mich. 2024). “, see also 24 C.F.R. § 203.676 (“An occupant may request permission to continue to occupy the property following conveyance to the Secretary .”
Elite Real Est. & Prof'l v. Rice Harris (E.D. Mich. 2024). “been terminated a year before the current eviction action, the mortgage lender had asked HUD to take title to the property, and HUD had taken ownership of the property under the SFPD Program—HUD did not have a legal obligation to review her eligibility for occupied conveyance…”
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.