REAC/Physical Inspection Appeals

If you were dissappointed over the results from your most recent Physical Inspection, be proactive and don't take it sitting down!

First of all, you have only so much time to file an appeal and you have nothing to lose!	For a class description to the REAC webinar, Click on the page below Click here for the
Then, you need to figure out what the deficiency notations actually mean.
Determine which findings you want to challenge.
Understand exactly what type of appeal (there are two types) you need to file, and
Assemble the third party documentation needed to win your appeal.
Once you have pulled all of the components together, you now need to send it off to the right place, this way we will know what you’re options are, depending on the response you get. This information is what we believe may be a big help to you in this process: Current Timeframe for Appealing Physical Inspections - Under recently aligned policies, appeals related to any type of contested multifamily physical inspection deficiency must be filed with the Real Estate Assessment Center (REAC) no later than the 30th calendar day after either physical receipt or online posting of your physical inspection summary report, whichever is earlier. Beginning October 25, 2007, HUD gave notice that housing providers seeking a technical review of physical inspection results must be submitted in writing to REAC and must be received by REAC no later than the 30th calendar day following submission of the physical inspection report to the owner.

If there are any system problems, and you can’t access your inspection summary report online within the usual 5 – 10 days following the inspectors visit, you can usually contact your local HUD office and/or the REAC technical assistance center for help. But keep track of the circumstances, in case you have to prove the actual starting date of the 30-day clock.

Should your inspection be involved in this or a similar online access situation, keep records of when you were first able to access your report or received it in hard copy subsequent to your request. The 30-day clock starts ticking at that point, not before.

Knowing what the deficiency definition is, and having evidence to support your appeal is critical. By accompanying the inspector, who is required to call out all deficiencies as they are being entered into their, hand-held, inspection data-collection device, we suggest that you take notes and photographs during the inspection of any elements you felt weren’t being treated right. To find out why the deficiency was noted in the first place, go to the REAC “dictionary of definitions” (located in the left hand margin) and to any supplementary guidance of the specific element.

It is easily searchable by key word. Just enter one main word, and pull up the definition within the same category as
noted in the summary report: site, bldg exterior, systems, common areas or units. It helps to use actual definition language in your appeal, don't hesitate to cut and paste the relevent phrase to capture the text directly.

Also, check to see if there was any subsequent guidance or explanation of how to evaluate that troubling building component. There have been a number of directives issues as technical assistance guides or physical inspection operational bulletins in the past few years. Just this year, REAC has finally pulled them all together into one
comprehensive document. The link to this bulletin is located right here in the left hand margin. So, check to see if there are any additional considerations.

After finding the corresponding definitions and/or clarifications, evaluate carefully if the inspector made an error in applying the guidance. Was s/he just mistaken in what they noted? Did they hit the wrong button? Does the same element appear in multiple places in the dictionary? Was it noted against the right part of the building?

NOTE: Deficiencies are to be rated only once, and presumed to be always noted within the appropriate inspection category. However, recent discussions with REAC leadership and their quality assurance/training team revealed some nconsistency in inspector selection of the appropriate component within the building. For example, is that non-functioning GFI related to the kitchen/common area, or part of building systems. It definitely makes a difference, and we hope to promote better consistency in future discussions with REAC staff.

Another consideration is the point impact. Are the total points lost on this deficiency actually significant? If restoration of the total number of points for the contested element or elements won’t move you up out of the danger zone of enforcement (60+ points, or worse 31+), or into a less frequent inspection cycle (it takes 80+ for inspections to happen ever 2 years; 90+ for every 3 years), it is usually not worth it to file the appeal, no matter how justified you may feel. As HUD puts it: “Owners should not attempt to address each and every deficiency (like the .1 to .8 impacts for small items in individual resident units); instead, appeals should focus on major items, high severity or criticality components, having a
substantial impact on the overall inspection that, if adjusted, will raise the score above the actionable thresholds of 31, 60, 80 or 90 points.”

Filing an Appeal - Assuming the point impact is significant, you will need to determine which type of appeal needs to be filed: a technical review, or a database adjustment. As crazy as it seems, the two types of reviews cannot be submitted in the same package. Requests for database adjustments must be submitted separately from requests for technical
reviews.

HUD has also recently developed a standard submission format – sort of a cover letter for the appeal. We recommend you use it to ensure that all required background information (inspection number, site data, etc) is included – and it can help guide the reviewer through any attachments or longer explanations you may feel are necessary.
The sample can be found at: the link in the left hand margin of this page.

Technical Review - According to the HUD website, a technical review may be requested when an objectively verifiable and/or material error(s) occurred in the inspection that, if corrected, will result in an improvement in the property's overall score. For example, a technical review should be submitted when: a) the wrong building is inspected or a portion of
property not a part of the subject project is inspected; b) the total number of units inspected is incorrect; or c) the inspection cites a deficiency that did not exist at the time of the inspection. Multifamily housing owners must submit a request for a technical review within 30 days following the inspection. (Some examples of "major items" might be inappropriate application of the definition for electrical boxes under "building systems," or mistaken citations against fire safety systems or extinguishers, where a current certification document is readily available, or "ponding" on a roof within 24 hours of rain, etc.)

All requests for technical review must include documentation to sufficiently support the request, such as written letters by objective sources, photos and/or video documentation. Many appeals have been rejected outright because the appeal
consisted of nothing more than outrage, shock or personal opinion of the manager/owner that there hadn’t been anything wrong like this found last time, and nothing had changed, so why should it be cited this time, etc. Instead, be sure to
include documentation from a qualified third party, such as an electrical engineer or fire safety specialist, who can explain why a certain element should not have been recorded as deficient in the first place, or how certain components are not part of the original design features.

Database Adjustments - As stated previously, requests for database adjustments must be submitted separately
from requests for technical reviews. They, too, must be submitted within 30 days of the initial inspection. Database adjustments may be inconsistencies between local code requirements and PIH-REAC physical inspection protocol; ownership issues like scoring of items the property owner or agent does not own and is not responsible for maintaining; adverse conditions such as damage from a natural disaster or third party just prior to the inspection; written waivers granted by local HUD Office to accommodate special needs of residents; as-built conditions that were approved; and property undergoing modernization work/construction. Keep in mind that scheduled or ongoing significant modernization/construction is also grounds for changing the date of a scheduled inspection; and such requests should be addressed to the local HUD office as soon as the inspection date is first proposed. The same kind of objective evidence is required for a database adjustment as for a technical review – and may include excerpts of local codes, or old documents on file clarifying certain design features or property lines.

What Can Be Expected in Response? - If the PIH-REAC evaluation determines that an objectively verifiable and material
error(s) has been reasonably documented by the POA/PHA and, if corrected, would result in a significant improvement in the property's overall score, the PIH-REAC shall take one or a combination of the following actions:

  •   Schedule a new inspection; or
  •   Correct the physical inspection report; and
  •   Issue a corrected physical condition score

Similarly for the database adjustment process. Review and approval of the submission of appropriate proof of the anomalous or inappropriate application, a re-inspection and/or re-scoring of the property will result. In both cases, a notification letter will be sent to the POA/PHA explaining what action is being taken, if any, and why the appeal was accepted or denied.

Additional REAC/Inspection Resources:

• A new memorandum to inspectors, issued January 2008, addresses standards of practice and treatment of several definitional element of priority interest to all REAC Users, including restored emphasis on functionality (not cord length)
for calls-for-aide; and on original design concerning covers on electrical panels (though panels in locked rooms has not been fully resolved). A link to the new REAC Compilation Bulletin, Revision 1 ,can be found on the left hand margin.

• HUD began public posting of national inspector score data in November. Data, available in both PDF and Excel, details property names, city/state, inspection date and most recent scores on the multifamily website. The reports are
available on the left hand margin.

• Because HUD rules and protocols may change without notice, it is also a good idea to check the REAC inspection appeals webpage before filing you appeal. The latest guidelines for completing a request for technical review or database adjustment, including a standardized submission format, can be found by going to the HUD website at: http://www.hud.gov/offices/reac/products/pass/pass_guideandrule.cfm.