The CHOICE Act – affects CFPB structure and rule making. NOT the need for strong compliance.

By a vote of 233-188, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 10, the Financial CHOICE Act yesterday.  The bill, often referred to as the Dodd-Frank Act replacement bill, includes an overhaul of the CFPB’s structure and authority and makes significant changes to the rulemaking process followed by the CFPB and federal banking agencies.

As passed by the full House, the bill includes several amendments to the version of the bill passed by the House Financial Services Committee on May 4.  One such amendment is the amendment introduced by House Financial Services Committee Chairman, Jeb Hensarling, to strike the provision which purported to repeal the Durbin AmendmentBased on reports we have seen, it does not appear any of the amendments impact the bill’s provisions dealing with the CFPB.

The bill’s fate in the Senate is very uncertain, with most pundits predicting it will not pass the Senate in its current form.

An update on potential CFPB changes……

Hi folks, please be sure to read all the way to the bottom to see my comment.

Hot off the CFPB presses:

Dovetailing with President Trump’s recent Executive Order requiring a reduction in regulatory burden, on March 21, 2017, a CFPB official remarked at the American Bankers Association Government Relations Summit that the CFPB was planning to start its review of significant mortgage regulations, including the ability to repay/qualified mortgage rule.

The Dodd-Frank Act requires the CFPB to use available evidence and data to assess all of its rules five years after they go into effect to ensure they are meeting the purposes and objectives of Dodd-Frank, and the specific goals of the subject rule.  January 2018 will mark five years since the ability to repay/ qualified mortgage rule was finalized, as well as other key mortgage regulations, in January 2013.

Citing this requirement and “common sense,” Chris D’Angelo, Associate Director of the CFPB’s Division of Supervision, Enforcement and Fair Lending, said that the CFPB is “embarking upon now the beginning of an assessment process for our major mortgage rules.” D’Angelo said that the CFPB would assess these rules’ “real-world effects” on the market, as well as “whether it had the effect which was intended, what the costs were, .”

D’Angelo noted that the CFPB was still receiving complaints related to the mortgage servicing industry despite the existence of these rules, and that most of the problems were due to “the third-party service providers and the folks who develop your technology solutions.”  He also stated that incentive compensation practices would be considered but noted that “We know that you need those in order to manage larger organizations and how you drive your employees.”

Given Presidential pressure to reduce regulatory burdens and the fact that the CFPB’s mortgage rules have been criticized by financial industry participants and consumer advocates alike, the CFPB review of the key mortgage rules warrants close attention.

So what does this say? My interpretation is that they are planning on waiting until at least next year, probably after January, to issue a report supporting what they have done to us since 2013. It is in their best interest to write a persuasive report and show the best possible results. Many of you out there think this agency will disappear or be weakened by the Administration. I am asking you to be concerned about the exact opposite. Now, more than ever you better keep your compliance guard up. After we enter 2018 and actually read their findings I could make a better prediction. No matter what you hear, there is no crystal ball you can use to predict how this will go.

We recently changed our program a bit to provide free web and social media audits and free Safe Act certifications. Further, we have expanded our “repurchase defense” practice and it is working very well. Let us hear from you, and see how we can be of service.

(800) 656-4584

Nelson A. Locke, Esq.

Compliance Services USA

CLICK HERE to view Web Site

CLICK HERE to send email and request more information

Mortgage Brokers and Realtors Indicted

Seventeen Mortgage Brokers and Settlement Service Providers have been charged in a 17-count indictment with conspiracy to commit bank fraud and various substantive bank fraud offenses, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1349 and 1344.

 

Wifredo A. Ferrer, United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, Timothy Mowery, Special Agent in Charge, Federal Housing Finance Agent, Office of Inspector General (FHFA-OIG), Southeast Region, George L. Piro, Special Agent in Charge, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Miami Division, and Juan J. Perez, Director, Miami-Dade Police Department (MDPD), made the announcement.

 

During 2007 and 2008, the defendants conspired to perpetrate a complex mortgage fraud scheme against various FDIC-insured lenders.

 

The defendants conspired to fraudulently obtain mortgage loans for unqualified buyers of units in two condominium projects on the west coast of Florida: Portofino at Largo, also known as Indian Palms, in Largo, Florida; and Bayshore Landing, in Tampa, Florida.

 

The defendants submitted fraudulent loan applications to induce the lenders to make mortgage loans to the unqualified buyers. The submitted loan applications contained false and fraudulent statements relating to: the borrower’s occupation of, or intent to occupy, the mortgaged property as a residence; the borrower’s employment, income, and assets; the borrower’s liabilities; the borrower’s payment of an earnest money deposit and cash-to-close; the sellers’ payment of kick-backs to the borrowers; and other information that was material to the borrower’s qualifications to borrow money from the lenders and the values of the mortgage properties.

 

The indictment states that the co-conspirators would require certain parties to use some of the proceeds from certain of the fraudulently obtained mortgage loans to pay a fictitious “marketing fee” to one of the “marketing companies” set up by the conspirators.

 

If convicted, the defendants face a statutory maximum term of 30 years’ imprisonment, a $1 million fine, and mandatory restitution, on each count in the indictment.

 

Mr. Ferrer commends the investigative efforts of the FHFA-OIG, FBI and MDPD. The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Dwayne E. Williams.

 

An indictment is a formal charging documents notifying the defendant of the charges. All persons charged by indictment are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

If you are concerned that you might have inadvertently done something like this, and you want us to review your situation, call us at (800) 656-4584. Sooner is better.

So you only do “commercial loans” and that means you are exempt?

Florida Senate to re-open 494 with special attention to Commercial Lending and Unlicensed Loan Originators

 We told you so. There has been so much abuse regarding the re-branding of residential property into commercial or investment classifications that it now looks like the state is going to close the loop hole.  The OFR is tightening up what residential means, tracking it to what RESPA and TILA consider residential. Next, they are looking at those of you who tell us all the time you don’t “hold yourself out” to the public, yet you clearly do. Finally, with these new interpretations, where is your license?

 If this news is making you nervous you probably need our services. You can reach us at (800) 656-4584 x103.

 We have experience evaluating and advising “commercial lenders” who are in the danger zone.

 If you ignore this regulatory and enforcement trend you will find yourself on the wrong end of an audit very soon.

sb-1298-mortgage-brokers

 Again, call (800) 656-4584 x103. Let us help you get out of the grey zone and into the safe zone.

 Respectfully,

 Nelson A. Locke, Esq.

Mortgage Industry Compliance Expert

Attorney and Expert Witness

Office (800) 656-4584

Cell (305) 951-2785

http://www.lockelaw.us

http://expertlenderservices.com

LL Logo 112715

 

Realtor relationships with Brokers under fire…….better pay attention.

407719_234057816674660_100002113291323_521870_333322627_n

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (where “BATMAN” works) today ordered Prospect Mortgage, a major mortgage lender, to pay a $3.5 million fine for improper mortgage referrals in what the regulator calls an alleged “kickback” scheme.

The lender paid illegal kickbacks for mortgage business referrals. Prospect Mortgage isn’t the only one being fined. The CFPB also dealt out penalties to real estate brokers and a mortgage servicer who took kickbacks from Prospect. These three will pay a combined total of $495,000 in consumer relief, repayment of ill-gotten gains and penalties.

“Today’s action sends a clear message that it is illegal to make or accept payments for mortgage referrals,” CFPB Director Richard Cordray (“BATMAN”) said. “We will hold both sides of these improper arrangements accountable for breaking the law, which skews the real estate market to the disadvantage of consumers and honest businesses.”

Here are three reasons the CFPB said it is fining Prospect Mortgage:

Paid for referrals through agreements:

Prospect maintained various agreements with over 100 real estate brokers, including ReMax Gold Coast and Keller Williams Mid-Willamette, which served primarily as vehicles to deliver payments for referrals of mortgage business. Prospect tracked the number of referrals made by each broker and adjusted the amounts paid accordingly. Prospect also had other, more informal, co-marketing arrangements that operated as vehicles to make payments for referrals.

Paid brokers to require consumers – even those who had already prequalified with another lender – to prequalify again with Prospect:

One particular method Prospect used to obtain referrals under their lead agreements was to have brokers engage in a practice of “writing in” Prospect into their real estate listings. “Writing in” meant that brokers and their agents required anyone seeking to purchase a listed property to obtain prequalification with Prospect, even consumers who had prequalified for a mortgage with another lender.

Just yesterday a client of ours asked about a realtor who was pushing an over-market leasing arrangement for a desk that was to be exclusive but had no security as required by GLB. Further, the individual realtors who worked there openly solicited fees from the broker.

If you have a lease arrangement presently with a realtor, maybe I should take a look?

Respectfully,

Nelson A. Locke, Esq.

Compliance Services

Click Here to view our Web Site

 

 

The CFPB is filing Lawsuits and Enforcement Actions and you might be next. Are you protected?

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is ramping up enforcement actions ahead of a possible political showdown between President Donald J. Trump and the agency’s director, Richard Cordray. They appear to be targeting different areas of financial services and without regard for the size of the entity.

As an example of this, note that the CFPB filed two separate consent orders Monday against CitiFinancial Servicing and CitiMortgage (Mortgage Lending) over claims the servicers failed to help borrowers with foreclosure relief. That came just days after the bureau filed lawsuits against TCF National Bank (Mortgage Lending) and student loan servicer Navient (Student Loans) after both companies said they refused to be pressured into settling allegations of wrongdoing before the Trump administration took office. Our office has taken calls from Brokers in Florida, California, and Texas asking us for help with regulatory inquiries.

Though the business community had hoped a new administration would rapidly put a halt to the CFPB’s aggressive approach, so far the change in political power instead appears to be emboldening the CFPB to act.

“The CFPB is going to be more aggressive in the short term because their future is uncertain,” said Ashley Taylor, a partner at the law firm Troutman Sanders. “Agencies in transition often become more aggressive if the people who work there think their power will be curtailed.”

On Friday, the White House issued an executive order calling for a freeze of all pending or new regulations. However, the order applies only to executive agencies and not the CFPB, though non-executive agencies are generally expected to follow suit.

The CFPB has not so far issued any new regulations—which might be overturned via the Congressional Review Act of 1996—and has focused its efforts on enforcement activity.

LL Logo 112715And that, folks, is why you need us more than ever. To find out more about our Audit Protection Plan and how we stand with you in the event of an audit or enforcement action, call us at (800) 656-4584.

You can visit our website and learn more about us and our program.  CLICK HERE

 

 

Some good Q&A for you Mortgage Brokers to read…….

Q: Can an Alta Settlement Statement REPLACE the use of a HUD-1 or a Closing Disclosure?

A: ALTA has developed standardized ALTA Settlement Statements for title insurance and settlement companies to use to itemize all the fees and charges that both the homebuyer and seller must pay during the settlement process of a housing transaction. Settlement statements are currently used in the marketplace in conjunction with the federal HUD-1. The ALTA Settlement Statement is not meant to replace the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s Closing Disclosure, which went into effect on Oct. 3, 2015. Four versions of the ALTA Settlement Statement are available.

Q: Do we need to use a Closing Disclosure for non-agency loans?

A: The final rule applies to most closed-end consumer mortgages.  It does not apply to home equity lines of credit, reverse mortgages, or mortgages secured by a mobile home or by a dwelling that is not attached to real property (in other words, land).  The final rule also does not apply to loans made by a creditor who makes five or fewer mortgages in a year.

Q: Who has to prepare the CD?

A: Under the final rule, the creditor is responsible for delivering the Closing Disclosure form to the consumer, but creditors may use settlement agents to provide the Closing

Disclosure, provided that they comply with the final rule’s requirements for the Closing Disclosure.20  The final rule acknowledges settlement agents’ longstanding involvement in the closing of real estate and mortgage loan transactions, as well as their preparation and delivery of the HUD-1.  The final rule avoids creating uncertainty regarding the role of settlement agents and also leaves sufficient flexibility for creditors and settlement agents to arrive at the most efficient means of preparation and delivery of the Closing Disclosure to consumers.

Q: What about a HECM? Is it a LE or a GFE?

A: Reverse mortgage transactions subject to RESPA.  (1)(i) Time of disclosures.  In a reverse mortgage transaction subject to both § 1026.33 and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (12 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.) that is secured by the consumer’s dwelling, the creditor shall provide the consumer with good faith estimates of the disclosures required by § 1026.18 and shall deliver or place them in the mail not later than the third business day after the creditor receives the consumer’s written application.

Q: I’m a Mortgage Broker Business. Can I do my own disclosures?

A:  If a mortgage broker receives a consumer’s application, either the creditor or the mortgage broker shall provide a consumer with the disclosures required under paragraph (e)(1)(i) of this section in accordance with paragraph (e)(1)(iii) of this section.  If the mortgage broker provides the required disclosures, the mortgage broker shall comply with all relevant requirements of this paragraph (e).  The creditor shall ensure that such disclosures are provided in accordance with all requirements of this paragraph (e).  Disclosures provided by a mortgage broker in accordance with the requirements of this paragraph (e) satisfy the creditor’s obligation under this paragraph (e). If provided by the creditor, copies of the creditor disclosures MUST be kept in the mortgage broker’s files to show an auditor that the rule was complied with.

Q: I only do foreign national loans, am I exempt from TRID?

A: Not if the property is a 1-4 family dwelling and not if the buyer is a human person. There could be some crossover here to commercial lending, but most of what I have seen is probably TRID lending. I have seen a lot of issues here, sham entities.

Q: I only make ten or fewer loans a year with my own money. Do I need a Lender’s License?

A: Probably – YES. And if all you do is create entity after entity to act as your lender, and you own each entity, that is a probable sham and is probably avoiding the licensing rules of Dodd-Frank and your state regulator. Folks, the regulators are smart enough to see though this kind of conduct. If you hold yourself out to lend money, even in as small way as a business card, or using an agent ( a lawyer, a mortgage broker) who brings you borrowers, YOU ARE ACTING AS A LENDER.

I am also attaching an ALTA Training Webinar to the blog. The blog can be found at nltrainingsite. You guys should look at this ALTA Webinar. Very good information.

trid-webinar-82715

Happy Holidays to all! We will be working right up to Friday afternoon, so feel free to call. And we are here next week. Regulators never sleep so we won’t either.

Respectfully,

Nelson A. Locke, Esq.

Mortgage Industry Compliance Expert

Attorney and Expert Witness

Office (800) 656-4584

Cell (305) 951-2785

http://www.lockelaw.us

http://expertlenderservices.com