Browse
Search
1998 S Housing - Cooperative Agreement with US Department HUD
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Contracts and Agreements
>
General Contracts and Agreements
>
1990's
>
1998
>
1998 S Housing - Cooperative Agreement with US Department HUD
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/18/2013 11:15:13 AM
Creation date
7/1/2010 8:40:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
10/6/1998
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agreement
Agenda Item
8j
Document Relationships
Agenda - 10-06-1998 - 8j
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\BOCC Agendas\1990's\1998\Agenda - 10-06-1998
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
49
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
17 <br />(b) evidence that at least two telephone calls <br />were attempted, one during normal business <br />hours and one during non-business hours. <br />D. Lack of Jurisdiction - A lack of jurisdiction (LOJ) <br />must apply to both HUD and the Agency. Where only one <br />Agency has jurisdiction, the complaint must not be <br />dual-filed. <br />1. Requirements for Acceptance The LOJ must not have <br />been evident on the face of the complaint (i.e., <br />where the date of filing exceeds, the Agency's <br />filing period, the number of exemptions are less <br />than the Agency's law permits; a basis is not <br />covered; or special interim agreements or more <br />provisions are in effect which prohibit dual- <br />filing because of deficiencies in the Agency's <br />law.) <br />2. Documentation Required (To be mailed to HUD at <br />time of reporting the closure to HUD): <br />(a) a written explanation setting forth the <br />reason that the lack of jurisdiction could <br />not be determined at intake; and <br />(b) a written explanation for closing the <br />complaint for lack of jurisdiction. <br />VI. DISMISSALS <br />1. Bankruptcy is not an appropriate reason for dismissing a <br />complaint. <br />2. A respondent's defense and rebuttal of complainants' <br />allegations are not sufficient reasons for dismissing a case. <br />Only the investigation and facts discerned by the investigation <br />support dismissal. <br />3. Any withdrawal, with or without settlement, that <br />contains information or documentation by the complainant which <br />indicates that the complainant was not completely satisfied with <br />the terms of the withdrawal should not be dismissed by the Agency <br />before conferring with the GTR at HUD. Closure violative of this <br />paragraph may result in rejection of payment for such complaint. <br />VII. Customer Satisfaction Standards <br />The following performance standards should be incorporated <br />in the complaint process. The Agency's goal should be to provide <br />satisfaction to its customers. Therefore, the Agency should make <br />sure that the following standards are met. Keep the following <br />standards in mind when dealing with complaints: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.