It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
Nearly six years have passed since Hurricane Katrina drowned New Orleans in misery, but many residents haven't forgiven the Federal Emergency Management Agency for its sluggish response to the storm. Now another delayed reaction by FEMA — a stop-and-start push to recoup millions of dollars in disaster aid — is reminding storm victims why they often cursed the agency's name.
Paul Wegener, whose New Orleans home flooded up to the gutters after Katrina, felt short-changed when FEMA gave him a $30,000 grant for a house that wound up costing more than $566,000 to rebuild. He applied for mo
reply to post by sir_slide
While hundreds have been convicted of hurricane-related fraud, FEMA spokeswoman Rachel Racusen said many of the cases under review involve mistakes by agency employees or the recipients themselves. Some payments will be deemed proper, some could be referred for fraud investigations and the rest will get letters telling them to pay back improper payments caused by human error, according to Racusen.
FEMA says it is bound by law to try to collect improper payments, but lawmakers have sponsored legislation that would authorize the agency to waive debts if they resulted from an error by FEMA. A Senate committee approved the bill Thursday. No vote by the full Senate has been scheduled.
FEMA employees awarded money without interviewing applicants or inspecting property and made errors that ranged from recording incorrect banking information to failing to check whether insurance had already covered damage, according to congressional testimony.
While hundreds have been convicted of hurricane-related fraud, FEMA spokeswoman Rachel Racusen said many of the cases under review involve mistakes by agency employees or the recipients themselves. Some payments will be deemed proper, some could be referred for fraud investigations and the rest will get letters telling them to pay back improper payments caused by human error, according to Racusen.
Originally posted by GringoViejo
I would say one group of people should have to pay the money back, besides the people in the article that lied to get money they were not entitled to.
Those who decided to spend the money they got on going casinos and things like that. Those idiots deserve to have to pay the money back regardless.edit on 1-6-2011 by GringoViejo because: (no reason given)