1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32 | On 11/10/20 and 12/8/20, LPA interviewed S1 who stated R1's rent is $2,200/month and R1 receives a subsidy, coordinated by W2, from the Los Angeles Department of Housing Services in the amount of $1,130.63/month. This means R1's portion of the rent should be $1,069.37/month. S1 further stated that R1 was not able to pay $1,069.37/month, was short approximately $249.37/month, and could only pay $809/month, so W2 arranged an additional subsidy that would cover the $249.37/month shortfall and provide additional funds to cover R1's PNI money. S1 stated that R1 was charged $809/month and the facility obtained a credit card authorization in this amount, with the remainder of the rent to be paid from the additional subsidy. Financial records and a credit card authorization in the amount of $809/month corroborate this statement. However, S1 stated that W2 did not timely pay the facility the additional subsidy, so R1 began to accrue back-owed rent based on the $249.37/month shortfall and the facility was not able to provide R1 with PNI money. S1 stated that during this time, S1 and W2 were working to solve the issue and emails reviewed corroborate this statement. However, on 6/1/20 and 7/1/20, while the facility was waiting for W2 to pay the back-owed rent to the facility, S1 stated the facility charged the back-owed rent to R1 and began charging R1 $1,069.37/month, with the intention of refunding R1 all amounts over $809/month once the additional subsidy amounts were received from W2. However, S1 stated the facility did not obtain credit card authorizations for these charges and the documents produced by the facility did not include credit card authorizations for these charges, meaning the facility withdrew money from R1's account without authorization.
During the course of the investigation, the Department obtained sufficient evidence to substantiate the allegation mentioned above. The preponderance of evidence standard has been met; therefore, the above allegation is Substantiated. See LIC9099D for cited deficiencies per Title 22 Division 6 of the California Code of Regulations. An exit interview was conducted and a copy of this report and appeal rights was discussed with and provided to facility representative. |