501(c)(4) HOA to Pay Over $2M to Resolve FCA Allegations in Connection with PPP Loan
Client Alert | 1 min read | 01.05.24
The San Diego Union-Tribune reports that a homeowners association (HOA) in California has reached an agreement with the Department of Justice (DOJ) to resolve allegations that the HOA obtained approximately $1.5 million in loans through the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) that the HOA was not entitled to receive due to its status as a 501(c)(4) organization. The HOA reportedly will pay $2,037,451 to resolve the allegations. Of that amount, $244,494 will go to Wade Riner—the relator who initiated the action by filing a complaint under seal pursuant to the qui tam provisions of the False Claims Act (FCA). According to the Tribune’s reporting, Riner has filed dozens of similar FCA suits across the country.
Indeed, this settlement appears to be just the tip of the iceberg. In the past few months, three other FCA complaints filed by Riner have come out from under seal, naming some 75 different 501(c)(4) organizations as defendants. In one of the cases, the DOJ elected to intervene as to four of the named defendants although the settlement amount is not yet public.
In prior alerts (see here and here), we have discussed how serial relators have been a defining feature of qui tam enforcement in cases alleging COVID-19 relief fraud. These frequent filers have brought complaints based upon publicly available information about PPP loan recipients. Prior complaints by serial relators have focused on recipients that received duplicate PPP loans or recipients that failed to comply with some of the more technical requirements associated with the second round of PPP funding. In light of the recently unsealed complaints, it is clear that 501(c)(4) entities—such as private clubs and HOAs—are among the loan recipients now squarely in the crosshairs of serial relators.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 08.26.26
D.C. Circuit Upholds Designation of PFOA and PFOS as CERCLA Hazardous Substances
In a significant and unanimous ruling, the D.C. Circuit upheld the Environmental Protection Agency’s (“EPA”) final rule designating perfluorooctanoic acid (“PFOA”) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (“PFOS”) as “hazardous substances” under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), denying the petitions of seven industry groups seeking to overturn that designation.[1] CERCLA, also known as the “Superfund Statute,” allows EPA to require potentially responsible parties to fund cleanup of hazardous substances.
Client Alert | 5 min read | 08.26.26
Client Alert | 6 min read | 08.26.26
The Risky Fifth: A Long Hot Summer in Congressional Jurisprudence
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.25.26
DOJ Signals Increased Antitrust Scrutiny of Algorithmic Pricing in Willow Bridge Decision



