ILNews

Settlement funds to be used for utility bill assistance

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller announced Wednesday that funds from a multi-million dollar mortgage lending settlement will benefit low-income homeowners who need help with utility bills.  

House Bill 1141, signed by Gov. Mitch Daniels March 14, creates a fund for deposit of $28.8 million arising from a multistate settlement with five major mortgage lending banks. The banks – Ally, Bank of America, Citi, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo – were found to have engaged in unacceptable mortgage-servicing practices and foreclosure abuses.

“Low-income homeowners who were most at-risk to be foreclosed upon are also the most likely to have difficulty paying electric and gas bills and face disconnection,” Zoeller said. “The mortgage lending institutions that preyed upon borrowers and engaged in illegal practices are paying millions of dollars in settlement money to Indiana, and the Legislature wisely channeled this flow of dollars into a fund where at-risk homeowners can be helped.”

Eligible homeowners already qualify for the federal Low Income Home Energy Assistance Block Grant program or LIHEAP. The program is operated through community action agencies with outreach offices in every county. In 2011, Indiana’s LIHEAP provided 197,809 households with an average benefit of $420 each for assistance with utilities

Under the compromise version of HB 1141 that passed, the amount of state energy assistance created through the settlement will match the amount of 7 percent sales tax that LIHEAP recipients pay on their energy bills through that federal program. The dollars the state provides will offset the taxable amount, boosting funds available for low-income homeowners. That means more homeowners will be eligible for energy assistance, and those who qualify might qualify for larger amounts than they would have previously. Zoeller said the Indiana Housing and Community Development Authority, administered by the Lieutenant Governor’s Office, will determine how the settlement funds will be distributed to help recipients.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. vagueness cannot challenged, so let's write all laws vaguely and throw the constitution out the window.Even if the court is operating under a particular law, if they don't it they will change it to their liking. What a joke!!!

  2. Two convictions becomes one conviction with exactly the same sentence, only it is not clear wheter or not that sentence will be 18 months, 120 months or 138 months. Actually if the guns were in a home, whether or not they were his, he is protected under the 2nd amendment. Jurors need to learn the law and the constitution before judging others. The cour5ts need to do this as well.

  3. With all due respect, Rick, I think you probably would be making a mistake by going to law school. The job market for attorneys is so saturated, you may well find yourself unemployed and with a lot of debt. You mention law would be a good supplement to your skills. True. But employers unfortunately don't value that. You will find that a law degree may well pigeonhole you into an attorney slot and limit career options. If you have a good job now I would hold onto that. As an attorney, you may well end up making less with the aforementioned debt.

  4. Jack, I was only responding to bill's comment of tying everybody in government together. I agree with you though, it takes one bad apple to ruin the bunch.. As in any profession. What's truly unfair is when somebody violates someone's trust and takes complete advantage of someone

  5. John’s comment is unfair. The majority of attorneys can be trusted. Unfortunately, all it takes is one greedy, unscrupulous, immoral attorney to jade the public.

ADVERTISEMENT