Housing Principal Secretary Charles Hinga is facing fresh scrutiny after his explanation of Sh2.56 billion recorded as refunds to contributors on the Boma Yangu platform opened up new questions over how billions collected through the Affordable Housing Programme have been recorded.
While the State Department insists that most of the amount was not money withdrawn by savers but deposits used to buy homes, the explanation has raised concerns over how the transactions were classified and whether official records have consistently reflected the movement of contributors' funds.
The questions follow Hinga's response to reports that Sh2.56 billion listed as refunds represented contributors leaving the housing programme.
He disputed that interpretation, saying only Sh803.3 million was actually paid to contributors who requested refunds, while the remaining Sh1.76 billion consisted of savings transferred into deposit accounts after buyers were allocated affordable housing units.
However, the explanation has brought new attention to transactions linked to the Park Road housing project, with officials at the National Housing Corporation (NHC) saying the estate has never operated under the Boma Yangu platform.
“The central figure of Sh2.56 billion in ‘refunds’ rests on a labelling convention in the platform’s records that does not mean what the article takes it to mean,” Hinga said.
The PS attributed the confusion to the platform's accounting system, explaining that transfers from contributors' savings wallets into deposit wallets were captured using the same description as cash refunds.
Even so, the clarification has created more questions over when those transactions took place, how they were reflected in earlier reports and whether the platform's records have consistently distinguished between money withdrawn by contributors and savings converted into home purchases.
The biggest concern centres on the Park Road housing project. Allocation of apartments at the Nairobi estate started in 2020, years before the current Affordable Housing Programme expanded, and the houses have long been occupied.
Officials at the National Housing Corporation, which developed and owns the estate, said Park Road does not operate under the Boma Yangu platform. Instead, buyers make payments directly to the corporation through Tenant Purchase Scheme agreements.
“Park Road is our estate and is not under the current Affordable Housing Programme; thus it does not trade under the Boma Yangu platform. It was, however, one of the models that introduced affordable houses in the country,” a senior NHC official said.
The official added that buyers make payments directly to the corporation.
“The houses have been under full occupancy for a long time. The payments we receive relate to customers under the Tenant Purchase Scheme who are already living in the houses,” the source said.
The official also dismissed claims that the corporation had received Sh1.62 billion through the Boma Yangu platform.
“As far as we are concerned, all payments towards Park Road are paid under the Tenant Purchase Scheme directly to the NHC. No payments are made through Boma Yangu,” the source said.
The differing accounts leave several questions unanswered. If Park Road has never operated through Boma Yangu, why does the State Department classify Sh1.62 billion recorded as refunds on the platform as deposits transferred to the National Housing Corporation for the project? The explanation also leaves uncertainty over when those deposits were made and why they now appear in figures explaining refunds processed up to June 2026.
Questions have also been raised over how transfers between savings and deposit wallets are recorded and whether contributors receive enough information to separate home purchase transactions from actual cash withdrawals.
Hinga maintained that the issue arises only from the wording used in the platform's transaction records. He explained that the Affordable Housing Programme operates a two-wallet system where contributors first save money before moving it into a deposit wallet after being allocated a house.
“A deposit applied to the purchase of a home is not a refund in any conventional sense. The saver has not exited the Programme. The saver has bought the house,” he said.
According to Hinga, most of the Sh2.56 billion recorded as refunds represented savings that were converted into home purchases instead of money withdrawn from the programme.
He said Sh1.62 billion, representing 63.2 per cent of the amount, related to deposits made by buyers of Park Road housing units and remitted to the National Housing Corporation.
Another Sh139.7 million, representing 5.5 per cent of the total, consisted of deposits made by buyers allocated houses in other affordable housing projects and transferred to the respective financiers, including the Affordable Housing Board.
The figures, however, appear difficult to reconcile with previous official records. By the end of May 2025, the State Department reported cumulative refunds of Sh788.2 million, a figure that is lower than the Sh1.62 billion it now says had already been applied as buyers' deposits for Park Road units alone.
Hinga also defended withdrawals from the savings scheme, saying they should not be viewed as evidence that contributors were abandoning the programme.
He cited Section 52(4) (a) of the Affordable Housing Act, which allows voluntary contributors to withdraw their savings after giving 90 days' notice.
“A withdrawal under this design is not a rejection of the Programme. It is the scheme keeping its promise,” he said.
The Principal Secretary argued that most of the money recorded on the platform reflected progress towards home ownership rather than contributors leaving the programme.
“Of the approximately Sh1.77 billion by which the recorded ‘refunds’ figure grew over the period, deposits applied toward home purchases account for approximately Sh1.76 billion, while refunds as conventionally understood, that is savers withdrawing their money as cash, grew by approximately Sh15.1 million,” he said.
“The overwhelming share of the growth reported as Kenyans pulling out is, in fact, Kenyans completing the purchase of homes.”
Hinga further said one in five contributors who withdraw their savings later resume saving for a home, arguing that many households temporarily access their money to meet urgent financial needs before returning to the programme.
“A scheme Kenyans were abandoning would not be adding a quarter of a million registered users, doubling its savings base and converting Sh1.76 billion of savings into home purchases in fourteen months,” he said.
His explanation comes days after questions were raised over the sharp rise in refunds processed through the Boma Yangu platform, with the State Department maintaining that the largest share of the amount reflected savings used to buy homes rather than contributors exiting the Affordable Housing Programme.