FEMA Mistake Threatens to Put Disaster Survivors Underwater Again

[Donnachaidh]

http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/fema_mistake_threatens_to_put_disaster_survivors_underwater_again_20110511/

Thousands of Americans devastated by natural disasters in the last few years are being asked to return a total of more than $22 million in federal relief money accidentally given to them by FEMA. The organization is required by law to retrieve the funds, but many recipients are unable to pay.

This latest blunder is not good for the federal agency that single-handedly botched the response to Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans under the supervision of the Bush administration and then-director Michael D. Brown. It’s also fuel for the political fire into which congressional Republicans and conservative Democrats hope to toss Medicaid and other social welfare programs. —ARK

:snip:

The agency is asking Van Fleet and thousands of other Americans who were victims of natural disasters to return more than $22 million in government aid, acknowledging it mistakenly made payments to many people who were ineligible.

FEMA is required by law to recover improperly spent money, but most of the people who were helped say they used the cash years ago, and they don’t want to be financially punished because of the agency’s errors.

More at the link ---

As a personal aside, this tactic is nothing new. Our family had used Fema money to move out of SoCal when our home was red-tagged after the Northridge quake. A year and a half later, they tried to get us to pay back the money. This thoroughly pissed me off - AND I had documented EVERY phone call, every piece of paper and receipt - so we were able to get them to back off. But people who did not document everything are going to be screwed.

FEMA sucks big ones, they really do. :grr:

[niyad]

1. so, instead of going after the responsible bureaucrats (is that an oxymorn?), they are going after

the victims. how typical--and, as the OP pointed out, they seem to be engaged in getting back money that was correctly given.

[elleng]

2. No, 'responsible bureaucrats' is not an oxymoron.

I was one (not at FEMA) and worked with many others.

[MineralMan]

3. Mr. Johnson? I'm calling about your new Ford F150 pickup.

It seems the sales manager made an error and charged you $2000 less than he should have for your truck. We'll be sending you a bill in that amount. If you do not pay it within 30 days, we will be forced to repossess the vehicle. For your convenience, we will include a postage-paid envelope with the bill. Thanks for shopping at One-Way Ford!

[DURHAM D]

4. This article raises more questions than it answers:

Example: "... they would be unable to get flood insurance, a requirement of federal aid, after their community opted out of the National Flood Insurance Program."

How can a community opted out of the program? I thought it was based on elevation/flood zone assessments - not on the local city politicians. What is going on with the program requirements?

[Igel]

5. Yes, they do.

But I also remember at the time that FEMA was trounced in the press because they were hateful and mean-spirited enough to actually demand documentation before handing out money. That lasted a few days.

Then the public pressure to get help to the poor, suffering victims of governmental stupidity and natural calamity was so crushing that they changed policies. They'd hand out money quickly, they said--they couldn't change the law, they couldn't change the eligibility requirements for being due the money, etc., etc. So they handed out money and let the paperwork catch up. People said that there'd be accounting problems, that people would commit fraud, that in their haste the people working for FEMA would make mistakes.

This is the completely predictable--not just predictable, but both predicted and legally *required*--consequence of what the public, as evidenced by many politicians and the media, wanted. You'd think they'd be happy. They're not. They've also forgotten that FEMA's procedures probably would have minimized this particular problem (at the expense of others, of course).

[Fumesucker]

6. Ever been caught up in a natural disaster?

It's entirely possible to lose *everything*, up to and including the clothes on your back.

Makes it kind of hard to come up with proper documentation.