Unofficial Transcripts of the Joint CFPB/Federal Reserve TILA-RESPA Integrated Disclosures Webinar

To address frequently asked questions regarding the TILA-RESPA Integrated Disclosure Rules that take effect next August, CFPB staff provided non-binding, informal guidance in a webinar hosted by the Federal Reserve Board on August 26.

BuckleySandler has prepared a transcript of the webinar that incorporates the CFPB’s slides. The transcript is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal opinions, interpretations, or advice by BuckleySandler. The transcript was prepared from the audio recording arranged by the Federal Reserve and may have minor inaccuracies due to sound quality. In addition, the transcripts have not been reviewed by the CFPB or the Federal Reserve for accuracy or completeness.

Click here to download the transcript.

Questions regarding the matters discussed in the webinar or the rules themselves may be directed to any of our lawyers listed below, or to any other BuckleySandler attorney with whom you have consulted in the past.

LinkedInFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
COMMENTS: 0
TAGS: , ,
POSTED IN: Mortgages

Fannie Mae Authorizes Servicers To Waive Deficiency Judgment Rights, Announces Other Servicing Policy Updates

On September 8, Fannie Mae advised in Servicing Guide Announcement SVC-2014-16 that servicers now have discretion to waive Fannie Mae’s deficiency judgment rights if doing so will help resolve foreclosure delays based upon individual borrower circumstances. The new authorization is applicable to conventional mortgage loans only, and the announcement provides a table of actions a servicer must complete prior to approving a waiver of deficiency judgment rights. The announcement also introduced the Suspended Counterparty Program (SCP), stating that servicers must establish and maintain a procedure to ensure any individual or entity on the FHFA’s SCP list is not involved in activities related to the origination or servicing of mortgage loans owned by Fannie Mae, including the marketing, maintenance, or sale of Fannie Mae REO properties. The program is effective immediately. Fannie Mae also announced several other servicing policy clarifications and form updates.

LinkedInFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
COMMENTS: 0
TAGS: ,
POSTED IN: Federal Issues, Mortgages

Fannie Mae Issues Fact Sheet on Prior Derogatory Credit Event Policies

On September 8, Fannie Mae published a fact sheet about borrower eligibility after a derogatory credit event. The fact sheet reviews Fannie Mae’s recently updated policy related to the minimum waiting periods following a bankruptcy, preforeclosure sale, or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure and provides sample borrower scenarios.

LinkedInFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
COMMENTS: 0
TAGS:
POSTED IN: Federal Issues, Mortgages

Fannie Mae Announces Selling Guide Updates

On August 26, Fannie Mae issued Selling Guide Announcement SEL-2014-11, which advises that Fannie Mae is retiring two standard Fannie Mae ARM plans—ARM Plan 1445 and ARM Plan 1446—because certain revisions to Regulation Z and the absence of any deliveries of loans under those ARM plans in recent years. The announcement also advises sellers that (i) the requirement to confirm that potential employees are not on the Suspended Counterparty Program list has been added to Fannie Mae’s requirements for lender hiring practices and to the procedures that third party originators must follow; (ii) Fannie Mae has amended the Guide to clarify that its policy with regard to requirements pertaining to lender review of disputed tradelines applies to manually underwritten loans; and (iii) Fannie Mae is clarifying the policy regarding the allowable age of credit documents to specify that when consecutive documents are in the loan file, the most recent document is used to determine the age.

LinkedInFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
COMMENTS: 0
TAGS:
POSTED IN: Federal Issues, Mortgages

Federal District Court Defers To HUD On Disparate Impact Rule Burden-Shifting Framework

On September 3, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois declined to invalidate to the burden-shifting framework established by HUD in its 2013 disparate impact rule, but remanded to HUD for further consideration certain comments on the rule submitted by insurers. Property Casualty Insurers Assoc. of Am. V. Donovan, No. 13-8564, WL 4377570 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 3, 2014). An association of insurers challenged HUD’s rule, which authorized so-called “disparate impact” or “effects test” claims under the Fair Housing Act. The insurers filed suit to enjoin HUD from applying the rule to the homeowners’ insurance industry, arguing that HUD’s refusal to build safe harbors for homeowners’ insurance violates the McCarron-Ferguson Act and is arbitrary and capricious. The court agreed that HUD acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner because HUD did not give adequate consideration to comments from the insurance industry relating to the McCarran-Ferguson Act, the filed-rate doctrine, and the potential effect that the disparate impact rule could have on the nature of insurance. Therefore, the court remanded those issues back to HUD for further explanation. The court also addressed the burden-shifting approach established by HUD to determine liability under a disparate impact claim. Under the rule, once a practice has been shown by a plaintiff to have a disparate impact on a protected class, the defendant has the burden of showing that the challenged practice “is necessary to achieve one or more substantial, legitimate, nondiscriminatory interests of the respondent . . . or defendant . . . . A legally sufficient justification must be supported by evidence and may not be hypothetical or speculative.” The court held that the final burden-shifting framework “reflects HUD’s reasonable accommodation of the competing interests at stake—i.e., the public’s interest in eliminating discriminatory housing practices and defendants’ (including insurer-defendants’) interest in avoiding costly or frivolous litigation based on unintentional discriminatory effects of their facially neutral practices[,]” and deferred to HUD’s interpretation of the Fair Housing Act pursuant to Chevron v. U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984).

LinkedInFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
COMMENTS: 0
TAGS: ,
POSTED IN: Courts, Mortgages

Foreclosure of DC Condominium Association’s Lien for Unpaid Assessments Extinguishes First Mortgage

(Chase Plaza Condominium Association, Inv. V. JP Morgan Chase Bank, No 13-CV-623 & 13-CV-674, decided August 28, 2014). In a case of first impression, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals held that a condominium association’s foreclosure of a lien for unpaid assessments extinguished the first mortgage on the unit. The District of Columbia’s condominium “super-priority lien” law (created in 1991) grants super-priority to condominium association liens for up to six months of unpaid assessments. The super-priority lien law does not specify what happens when the condominium association forecloses and the proceeds of the sale are insufficient to pay the first deed of trust. The Court of Appeals looked to general foreclosure law for guidance, finding that foreclosure of a lien with superior priority extinguishes liens with lower priority. Here, the $280,000 purchase money first mortgage was made in 2005, the owner’s assessments became delinquent in 2008, the association foreclosed its $9415 assessment lien in 2010, and the bidder at the foreclosure sale paid $10,000 for the property. The mortgagee sued to have the foreclosure set aside. The Court reasoned that the drafters of the super-priority lien law “understood that foreclosure of a super-priority lien could extinguish a first mortgage … but expected that mortgage lenders would take the necessary steps to prevent that result, either by requiring payment of assessments into an escrow account or by paying assessments themselves to prevent foreclosure,” and rejected the lender’s argument that permitting foreclosure of condominium assessment liens to extinguish first mortgages would be unreasonable as a matter of policy.

LinkedInFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
COMMENTS: 0
TAGS:
POSTED IN: Mortgages, State Issues

FHFA Proposes Revised Eligibility Requirements for FHLB Membership

On September 2, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) issued a proposed rule that would revise the requirements for financial institutions to apply for and retain membership in the Federal Home Loan Banks (FHLB). The proposed rule would change existing membership requirements primarily to: (i) require each applicant and member institution to hold one percent of its assets in “home mortgage loans” in order to satisfy the statutory requirement that an institution make long-term home mortgage loans; (ii) require each member to comply with the foregoing requirement on an ongoing basis, and where applicable, with the requirement that it have at least 10 percent of its assets in “residential mortgage loans”; (iii) define the term “insurance company” to mean a company that underwrites insurance for nonaffiliated persons as its primary business, effectively excluding from Bank membership captive insurers, but permit existing captive members to remain members for five years with certain restrictions on their ability to obtain advances; (iv) require a Bank to obtain and review an insurance company’s audited financial statements when considering it for membership; and (v) clarify the standards by which an insurance company’s “principal place of business” is to be identified in determining the appropriate Bank district for membership. The comment period will be open for 60 days following publication of the proposed rule in the Federal Register.

LinkedInFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
COMMENTS: 0
TAGS: ,
POSTED IN: Federal Issues, Mortgages

FHFA Proposes Affordable Housing Goals for GSEs

On August 29, the FHFA released proposed affordable housing goals for Fannie and Freddie that would leave in place the benchmark requiring the government-owned mortgage companies finance 23% of their mortgages in low-income areas through 2017. The proposal also included new alternative measures for the affordable housing goals, including one that would evaluate Fannie and Freddie based on how much of their business is directed to low-income areas as compared to how much the overall mortgage market serves those same areas. For the first time, the proposed rule would set benchmarks applicable to financing small, multifamily rental properties that are affordable for low-income families. FHFA’s current affordable housing goals are effective through the end of 2014. Comments on the proposal are due by October 28, 2014.

LinkedInFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
COMMENTS: 0
TAGS: , ,
POSTED IN: Federal Issues, Mortgages

New York AG Sues Bank for Alleged Redlining

On September 2, the NY AG sued a regional bank claiming the bank engaged in unlawful discriminatory practices by intentionally avoiding offering mortgage loan products to predominately African-American neighborhoods in Buffalo. People of the State of New York v. Evans Bancorp, Inc. et al., No. 14-cv-00726 (W.D.N.Y. Sept. 2, 2014). In the complaint, the NY AG asserts that by creating a map of its lending area in Buffalo that included most of the city and its surroundings, but excluded certain African-American neighborhoods on the city’s east side, the bank engaged in redlining in violation of the Fair Housing Act, New York state human rights law, and city code. The suit also alleges that the bank did not market its loan products to minority customers and located bank branches and ATMs outside of minority neighborhoods. The NY AG further claims that the bank’s rates of lending and receiving applications from African-American borrowers allegedly lags behind comparable banks and that these purported discriminatory effects are due to the bank’s alleged redlining practices.  The NY AG seeks injunctive relief, damages, civil penalties, punitive damages, fees and costs.  In its release announcing the lawsuit, the NY AG stated that the suit is part of ongoing investigations by the AG into potential mortgage redlining across the state.

LinkedInFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
COMMENTS: 0
TAGS: ,
POSTED IN: Mortgages, State Issues

Illinois Adds Omitted Subordinate Interest Provisions to Mortgage Foreclosure Law

On August 26, Illinois amended its Code of Civil Procedure by adding Section 15-1603.5 to address situations where a foreclosure sale occurred, but a junior lienholder was not named in the foreclosure complaint. Specifically, the law permits a holder of a certificate of sale who discovers an omitted subordinate interest to file a strict foreclosure complaint naming the person who has the omitted subordinate interest as the defendant. Unless the defendant objects, the court must enter a judgment extinguishing the omitted subordinate interest. If the defendant objects, the court must hold a hearing and order either (i) that the defendant has not agreed to pay the redemption amount, in which case the court must enter judgment; or (ii) that the defendant has agreed to pay the redemption amount. The law also sets forth the items that must and must not be included in the redemption amount, and provides that the defendant has 30 days after the entry of the order to pay the redemption amount. Although the person who has an omitted subordinate interest does not have a right to file a strict foreclosure action, the person does maintain the right to claim surplus proceeds from the foreclosure sale.

LinkedInFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
COMMENTS: 0
TAGS:
POSTED IN: Mortgages, State Issues

Mortgage Servicers Partner With Obama Administration To Enhance SCRA Protections

On August 26, the Obama Administration announced a new partnership with residential mortgage servicers designed to enhance protections under the Servicemember Civil Relief Act (SCRA). Speaking to the American Legion convention in Charlotte, North Carolina, President Obama observed that under the SCRA, service members and veterans are entitled to certain protections and benefits “but the burden is on them to ask for it and prove they’re eligible.” Under the new partnership, mortgage servicers will proactively identify eligible consumers and inform them of their rights and benefits under the law. Participating servicers will identify eligible participants by regularly checking their servicing portfolios against the Defense Manpower Data Center searchable database of military personnel. The initiative also aims to simplify the process for enrolling and satisfying the SCRA written notice requirements. The announcement was made as part of a White House effort to bolster services for service members, veterans, and their families.

LinkedInFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
COMMENTS: 0
TAGS:
POSTED IN: Consumer Finance, Federal Issues, Mortgages

Department Of Education Encourages FFEL Lenders To Adopt New Procedures For Determining SCRA Eligibility

On August 25, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) released a “dear colleague” letter authorizing and encouraging Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) lenders and lender-servicers to use the new procedures adopted by ED for determining which borrowers are eligible for benefits under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act. The new ED procedures require ED loan servicers to use the Department of Defense’s website to access the Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC) database. From there, the ED loan servicers compare their list of borrowers against the DMDC database to identify borrowers who are eligible for the SCRA interest rate limitation. Once the borrower’s status and service dates have been confirmed using the DMDC, the FFEL lenders and lender-servicers using this process may use the DMDC-generated certification information in lieu of having a servicemember submit a copy of his military orders and a written request to receive the SCRA benefits. When the FFEL lender or lender-servicer applies the SCRA interest rate limitation to the borrower’s account, it must notify the borrower of the interest rate change.

LinkedInFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
COMMENTS: 0
TAGS:
POSTED IN: Consumer Finance, Federal Issues, Mortgages

FHFA Announces Settlement Of Litigation With Investment Bank

On August 22, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) announced that it settled litigation with a major investment bank, other related companies, and several individuals over alleged violations of federal and state securities laws in connection with private-label mortgage-backed securities purchased by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac between 2005 and 2007. In 2011, FHFA, as conservator for the two GSEs brought suit in the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of New York seeking relief for damages that allegedly resulted from a failure to adequately disclose risks related to the subject MBS offerings. Under the terms of the settlement, the bank is required to pay $3.15 billion to repurchase securities that were the subject of the claims in FHFA’s lawsuit. The difference between that amount and the securities’ current value is approximately $1.2 billion. According to FHFA, that difference is sufficient to effectively make the two GSEs whole on their investments. With this settlement, FHFA has resolved sixteen of the eighteen RMBS suits it filed in 2011. For details on those settlements, please see FHFA’s update on private-label securities suits. For specifics relating to how the August 22 settlement will impact each of the GSEs, please see the purchase and settlement agreements with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

LinkedInFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

HUD Issues Final Rule To Eliminate Post-Payment Interest On FHA Loans

On August 26, HUD issued its final rule prohibiting mortgagees from charging post-payment interest under FHA’s single family mortgage insurance program. The final rule is responsive to the CFPB’s ATR/QM rule, under which post-payment interest charges will be considered a prepayment penalty in connection with FHA loans closed on or after January 21, 2015. Because prepayment penalties are prohibited on higher-priced FHA loans, the new definition of “prepayment penalty” under the ATR/QM rule would have effectively prohibited the making of higher-priced FHA mortgage loans. Also effective January 21, 2015, HUD’s final rule ensures consistency among FHA single-family mortgage products and provides the same protections for all borrowers. Under the final rule, monthly interest on the debt must be calculated on the actual unpaid principal balance as of the date prepayment is received.

LinkedInFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

HUD Issues Final Rule To FHA ARM Rate Adjustment Regulations

On August 26, HUD issued its final rule to amend FHA’s single family adjustable rate mortgage (ARM) program regulations to align with the interest rate adjustment and notification periods required for ARMs under the CFPB’s new TILA mortgage servicing rules. The final rule is effective January 10, 2015 and adopted the proposed rule issued on May 8 without change. Under the final rule, interest rate adjustments resulting in a corresponding change to the mortgagor’s monthly payment for an ARM must be based on the most recent index value available 45 days before the date of the rate adjustment. FHA’s previous regulations provided for a 30-day look-back period. Further, the final rule mandates that mortgagees of FHA-insured ARMs comply with the disclosure and notification requirements of the CFPB’s TILA servicing rules, which require at least 60-days, but no more than 120-days advance notice of an adjustment to a mortgagor’s monthly payment. Previously, the regulations provided for only 25 days advance notice.

LinkedInFacebookTwitterGoogle+Share
COMMENTS: 0
TAGS: , ,
POSTED IN: Federal Issues, Mortgages