Housing Voucher Fraud Prosecutions
1. Overview
Housing voucher fraud involves illegal schemes that misuse government-funded housing assistance programs, such as the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program in the U.S., which helps low-income families afford housing. Fraud may be committed by tenants, landlords, or third parties who provide false information, overcharge rent, or submit fraudulent claims to government agencies.
Common types of housing voucher fraud include:
Falsifying income or household composition to qualify for vouchers,
Landlords charging more than the approved rent or collecting illegal fees,
Collusion between tenants and landlords to share fraudulently obtained benefits,
Submitting false documents or rental agreements.
Housing voucher fraud is prosecuted under federal statutes such as:
18 U.S.C. § 1001 (False statements),
18 U.S.C. § 1010 (False statements in connection with housing),
18 U.S.C. § 666 (Theft or bribery concerning programs receiving federal funds),
Mail and wire fraud statutes.
2. Legal Elements
To prosecute housing voucher fraud, the government must prove:
The defendant knowingly made false or misleading statements or omissions,
The defendant intended to deceive or defraud the housing authority,
The defendant obtained or attempted to obtain housing benefits or payments fraudulently.
3. Key Case Law Examples
Case 1: United States v. Gladys Quintero (2016)
Facts:
Gladys Quintero was a landlord who submitted false documents to the Housing Authority, inflating rents and pocketing excess voucher payments.
Charges:
Mail fraud,
False statements,
Theft of government funds.
Outcome:
Convicted and sentenced to 24 months in prison and ordered to pay restitution.
Significance:
Demonstrates prosecution of landlords who exploit the voucher system by charging inflated rents.
Case 2: United States v. Derrick Washington (2018)
Facts:
Washington, a tenant, falsified income and household information to qualify for Section 8 housing benefits, while actually earning significantly more than reported.
Charges:
Making false statements,
Theft of government funds.
Outcome:
Convicted and sentenced to probation and financial penalties.
Significance:
Example of tenant fraud involving income misrepresentation.
Case 3: United States v. Lillian and Edward Rivera (2019)
Facts:
The Riveras were landlords who conspired with tenants to submit fake leases and inflated rent amounts, splitting the excess payments.
Charges:
Conspiracy to commit mail fraud,
False statements.
Outcome:
Both pleaded guilty; received prison sentences and ordered restitution.
Significance:
Highlights landlord-tenant collusion in voucher fraud schemes.
Case 4: United States v. Norma Lopez (2017)
Facts:
Lopez, a tenant, concealed household members and income to qualify for larger housing subsidies.
Charges:
False statements,
Theft of government funds.
Outcome:
Convicted; sentenced to 12 months probation and restitution.
Significance:
Shows how misrepresenting household composition affects subsidy amounts.
Case 5: United States v. Jamal Johnson (2020)
Facts:
Johnson, a property manager, submitted forged documents and false claims for non-existent tenants to receive voucher payments.
Charges:
Wire fraud,
False statements.
Outcome:
Convicted and sentenced to 30 months in prison.
Significance:
Illustrates fraud via fake tenants and forged documentation.
Case 6: United States v. Maria Torres (2015)
Facts:
Torres was a landlord who failed to disclose material defects in properties rented to voucher holders, violating program rules and inflating repair costs billed to the government.
Charges:
False statements,
Fraud.
Outcome:
Convicted; sentenced to probation and restitution.
Significance:
Example of fraud through misrepresenting property conditions.
4. Summary Table
| Case | Jurisdiction | Charges | Outcome | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| U.S. v. Gladys Quintero (2016) | Federal | Mail fraud, false statements | Convicted, prison, restitution | Landlord inflated rent fraud |
| U.S. v. Derrick Washington (2018) | Federal | False statements, theft | Convicted, probation | Tenant income misrepresentation |
| U.S. v. Lillian & Edward Rivera (2019) | Federal | Conspiracy, false statements | Guilty plea, prison | Landlord-tenant collusion for fraud |
| U.S. v. Norma Lopez (2017) | Federal | False statements, theft | Convicted, probation | Concealing household members |
| U.S. v. Jamal Johnson (2020) | Federal | Wire fraud, false statements | Convicted, prison | Fraudulent fake tenant claims |
| U.S. v. Maria Torres (2015) | Federal | False statements, fraud | Convicted, probation | Misrepresenting property conditions |
5. Legal Takeaways
Housing voucher fraud prosecutions target both tenants and landlords.
Misrepresentation of income, household size, or property conditions are common fraud methods.
Prosecutors use mail and wire fraud statutes alongside false statement charges.
Penalties can include imprisonment, fines, probation, and restitution to the government.
Agencies such as HUD and local housing authorities cooperate with law enforcement to detect and investigate fraud.
6. Conclusion
Housing voucher fraud undermines vital social safety nets and drains taxpayer funds. Courts take such offenses seriously, with numerous successful prosecutions illustrating a wide variety of fraudulent schemes involving tenants, landlords, and intermediaries. Rigorous enforcement helps protect the integrity of housing assistance programs and ensures aid reaches deserving recipients.
RELATED Blog
0 comments