InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
District Court Denies Class Certification for Lack of Temporal Constraint on Proposed Class Definition
On August 30, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York issued an opinion and order denying the certification of a proposed class of investors alleging that a bank failed in its responsibilities as trustee of five residential mortgage-backed securities. The court found that “the proposed class cannot be certified because it is not ‘defined using objective criteria that establish a membership with definite boundaries’ . . . [such as] a fixed date, a window of acquisition, or length or continuity of ownership.” The judge ruled that the lack of a “temporal constraint on the proposed class definition” meant investors who bought and sold the securities before and after the alleged violations occurred could be included in the suit, despite the fact that any losses incurred by these groups would not necessarily be associated with the bank’s alleged misconduct. However, the court ruled that the plaintiff may file an amended motion proposing an alternative class construction within 45 days.
CFPB Issues Summary of Changes and Clarifications to 2017 TILA-RESPA Rule
On August 30, the CFPB released “2017 TILA-RESPA Rule: Detailed Summary of Changes and Clarifications” to assist the mortgage industry in implementing the disclosure requirements of the CFPB’s recently finalized TILA-RESPA Rule. The summary provides an in-depth outline of modifications to the rule, and explains and corrects certain provisions.
Topics covered by the summary include:
- “Effective date and mandatory compliance date”;
- “Coverage,” specifically with respect to cooperative units, trusts, and housing assistance loans;
- “Good faith requirement (i.e., tolerances) and revised disclosures”;
- “Shopping for settlement services”;
- “Disclosure of principal reductions (also known as principal curtailments)”;
- “Total of payments disclosure”;
- “Simultaneous subordinate lien loans”;
- “Construction loans”;
- “Use of positive and negative numbers for certain disclosures in the Loan Estimate and Closing Disclosure”;
- “Rounding”;
- “Calculating cash to close”;
- “Disclosure of payoffs of existing liens, and unsecured debt”;
- “Disclosure of estimated value when no sales price or appraised value”;
- “Separation of consumer and seller information on Closing Disclosures”;
- “Other disclosures in the Loan Estimate”;
- “Other disclosures in the Closing Disclosure”; and
- “Other minor changes” (including correcting typographical errors).
In addition to the summary, the CFPB also provided additional reference materials to help industry participants to comply with the rule. The rule becomes effective on October 10.
CFPB Publishes Final Rule Amending Annual Dollar Threshold in TILA Regulations
On August 30, the CFPB issued a final rule amending Regulation Z, which implements the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), under the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009 (CARD Act), the Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act of 1994 (HOEPA), and the Dodd-Frank ability-to-repay and qualified mortgage provisions (ATR/QM). The CFPB is required to make adjustments to dollar amounts in the Regulation Z provisions implementing these laws based on the annual percentage change reflected in the Consumer Price Index effective June 1, 2017. For open-end consumer credit plans under TILA, the minimum interest charge disclosure threshold will remain unchanged at $1.00 in 2018. For open-end consumer credit plans under the CARD Act amendments, the adjusted dollar amount for the safe harbor for a first violation penalty fee will remain unchanged at $27 in 2018, and the adjusted dollar amount for the safe harbor for a subsequent violation penalty fee will remain unchanged at $38 in 2018. For HOEPA loans, the adjusted total loan amount threshold for high-cost mortgages in 2018 will increase to $21,032, and the adjusted points and fees dollar trigger for high-cost mortgages in 2018 will be $1,052. To satisfy the underwriting requirements under the ATR/QM rule, the maximum thresholds for total points and fees for qualified mortgages in 2018 will be: (i) 3 percent of the total loan amount for loans greater than or equal to $105,158; (ii) $3,155 for loan amounts greater than or equal to $63,095 but less than $105,158; (iii) 5 percent of the total loan amount for loans greater than or equal to $21,032 but less than $63,095; (iv) $1,052 for loan amounts greater than or equal to $13,145 but less than $21,032; and (v) 8 percent of the total loan amount for loan amounts less than $13,145. The final rule is effective January 1, 2018.
National Bank, Debt Collection Agency Reach $4.3 Million Class Action Settlement for Alleged FDCPA Violations
On August 21, a national bank and a debt collection agency (Defendants) together entered a $4.3 million settlement in a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) class action lawsuit brought by borrowers who alleged the Defendants unlawfully attempted to collect certain mortgage payments. The July 2015 complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, accused Defendants of violating the FDCPA, California’s Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and California’s Unfair Competition Law, Business and Professions Code when they sent more than 20,000 allegedly misleading, unenforceable payment notices to borrowers after the bank had released the liens on the properties securing the mortgage loans.
According to a memorandum in support of the motion seeking preliminary approval of the settlement, approximately three percent of the 23,376 members of the settlement class members made payments on unenforceable loans. The rest of the class did not make any payments. After three mediation sessions and a series of negotiations, Defendants agreed to award class members amounts based on their placement into one of three tranches: (i) tranche 1: borrowers who made at least one “challenged payment” on a purchase money mortgage; (ii) tranche 2: borrowers who made at least one challenged payment on a non-purchase money mortgage; and (iii) tranche 3: borrowers who received an “allegedly deceptive payment communication” but did not make any challenged payments. The settlement terms stipulate that class members in tranche 1 will receive an initial payment worth 76 percent of the total challenged payments they made, and members in tranche 2 will receive an initial distribution of 38 percent of what they paid. Class members from Tranche 1 and Tranche 2 will be eligible for a second distribution if sufficient funds remain available. An approximately $22 payment will be sent to the majority of the class members (who fall into tranche 3), which will be paid from the $500,000 maximum statutory civil penalty available under the Rosenthal Act. Class members are not required to do anything to receive their award.
FFIEC Releases Guidelines on HMDA Data Testing and Resubmission Standards
Earlier this week the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) issued new FFIEC Home Mortgage Disclosure Act Examiner Transaction Testing Guidelines (guidelines). Examiners will use the new guidelines to assess the accuracy of the HMDA data recorded and reported by financial institutions and determine when an institution must correct and resubmit its HMDA Loan Application Register. The guidelines will apply to data collected beginning January 1, 2018. As further explained in a CFPB blog post issued the same day, this will be the first time all federal HMDA supervisory agencies—including the CFPB, FDIC, Federal Reserve, NCUA, and the OCC—will adopt uniform guidelines, which are designed to ensure HMDA data integrity (HMDA data includes certain information financial institutions are required to collect, record, and report about their home mortgage lending activity). The purpose for collecting the HMDA data is to evaluate housing trends and issues to monitor lending patterns, assist agencies with fair lending and Community Reinvestment Act examinations, and help identify discriminatory lending practices. According to a FDIC financial institution letter (FIL-36-2017) released on August 23, the highlights of the guidelines include, among other things, a data sampling process, error threshold levels, tolerance levels for minor errors, and the ability of examiners to direct a financial institution to make appropriate change to its compliance management system to prevent recurring HMDA data errors.
As previously discussed in InfoBytes, in 2016 the CFPB issued a request for public feedback on the resubmission of mortgage lending data reported under HMDA.
CFPB Issues Final Rule Amending 2015 HMDA Rule
On August 24, the CFPB issued a final rule amending Regulation C, which implements the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA). The changes are primarily for the purpose of clarifying the new data collection and reporting requirements published in October 2015, with most of the clarifications and revisions taking effect January 1, 2018. The CFPB released a proposed version of the clarifications on April 13 (April Proposed Rule)—on which it solicited public comments—to address technical errors, ease the burden of certain reporting requirements, and clarify certain key terms. A detailed look at the April Proposed Rule was provided in an InfoBytes Special Alert earlier this year. An additional request for comments was issued July 14 on proposed amendments to ease the burden on community banks and credit unions by temporary raising the HMDA reporting threshold for open-end lines of credit. (See previous InfoBytes coverage here.) The CFPB adopted the April Proposed Rule and July amendments largely as written, however, a limited number of substantive changes were made. In order to assist filers, the CFPB released a comprehensive summary of the changes and reference charts to help institutions determine whether they are covered by Regulation C for 2017 or 2018 and beyond. The CFPB also released updated filing instruction guidelines for data collected in 2017 and 2018. The guidelines list changes to the reported data fields and valid values, and covers guidance for HMDA data collected in 2017 and thereafter that must be submitted to the CFPB on March 1 of each calendar year following the year of data collection.
Highlights of changes made to the rule include:
- Amendments to Regulation C that temporarily increase the threshold for the collection and reporting of data about open-end lines of credit, for a period of two years. Financial institutions originating fewer than 500 open-end lines of credit in either 2018 or 2019 will not be obligated to begin collecting such data until January 1, 2020. During this time, the Bureau will consider whether to make the increase permanent;
- Clarification to several aspects concerning the collecting and reporting of race and ethnicity information, including (i) that applicants are not required to select an aggregate race or ethnicity category as a precondition to selecting a race or ethnicity subcategories; (ii) that applicants may provide a particular “other” ethnicity or race in the free-form field, whether or not the applicant selects the “Other Hispanic or Latino,” “Other Asian,” or “Other Pacific Island” subcategory; and (iii) how financial institutions should report ethnicity—following the outlined methods—if an applicant selects more than five ethnicity categories and subcategories combined; and
- Clarification to certain key terms defined in the 2015 HMDA Rule, including “temporary financing, automated underwriting system, multifamily dwelling, extension of credit, income, and mixed-use property.”
Buckley Sandler will release a more comprehensive analysis of the rule and its impact on financial institutions next week.
Federal Banking Regulators Issue Proposal to Simplify Capital Requirements to Provide Regulatory Relief to Community Banks
On August 22, the Federal Reserve, FDIC and OCC issued a proposed rule that capital requirements set to take effect in January 2018 would be suspended under a proposed rule for banking organizations not subject to the advanced approaches capital rules, such as community and midsized banks— generally those with less than $250 billion in total assets and fewer than $10 billion in foreign exposure. The federal banking regulators proposed the suspension as they develop a proposal that would simplify capital requirements to reduce regulatory burden. Banks subject to the advance approaches capital rules will still be required to comply with the capital rule requirements taking effect January 1, 2018. The proposal would pause the fully phased-in Basel III requirements regarding the treatment of mortgage servicing assets, certain deferred tax assets, investments in the capital instruments of unconsolidated financial institutions, and minority interests (see FDIC Financial Institution Letter FIL-34-2017). According to a press release issued by the FDIC, “the transitional treatment for those items is scheduled to be replaced with a different treatment on January 1, 2018.” FDIC Vice Chairman Thomas M. Hoenig issued a statement supporting the proposal but pushed for the need to provide additional relief for community banks such as predicating relief based on banking activities and tangible equity rather than asset size.
Comments on the proposed rule are due 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.
FTC Announces Agenda for Joint Conference on Protecting Military Consumers
On August 22, the FTC released the agenda for the Protecting Military Consumers: A Common Ground Conference to be held on September 7 in Los Angeles. As previously discussed in InfoBytes, the conference is geared towards military attorneys, law enforcement personnel, and consumer protection officials to provide training on consumer fraud and other issues affecting servicemembers and their families, and will be held in partnership with state and local authorities. Topics for discussion on the agenda include, among things:
- higher education;
- identity theft and imposter scams;
- real estate fraud;
- auto financing;
- debt collection;
- lending; and
- privacy issues such as data collection, storage, and sharing.
Freddie Mac to Begin Accepting Automated Appraisals for Eligible Home Buyers
On August 18, Freddie Mac issued a press release announcing an automated appraisal alternative for eligible consumers purchasing homes or refinancing existing mortgages. The program, known as an “automated collateral evaluation,” will permit lenders to utilize Freddie Mac’s proprietary platforms to see if an estimate of home value can be used in lieu of obtaining a traditional appraisal. Freddie predicts the program could save home buyers several hundred dollars and reduce closing times by as many as 10 days if it determines a traditional appraisal is unnecessary. Automated appraisals will become available for qualified transactions starting September 1, 2017. The program has been available for qualified home refinances since June 19, 2017.
DOJ Announces Settlements with Non-Bank Mortgage Lender to Resolve Alleged False Claims Act Violations
On August 8, the DOJ announced a $74.5 million settlement with a non-bank mortgage lender and certain affiliates to resolve potential claims that they violated the False Claims Act by knowingly originating and underwriting mortgage loans insured by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Veterans Administration (VA), and by selling certain loans to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that did not meet applicable requirements. According to the terms of the two settlement agreements, $65 million of the settlement will be paid to resolve allegations relating to FHA loans, and $9.45 million will be paid to resolve potential civil claims relating to certain specified VA, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac loans. The settlements also fully resolved a False Claims Act qui tam lawsuit that had been pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
The settlement included no admission of liability by the lender. The lender issued a statement responding to the settlements: “We have agreed to resolve these matters, which cover certain legacy origination and underwriting activities, without admitting liability, in order to avoid the distraction and expense of potential litigation. While we cooperated fully in these investigations since receiving subpoenas in 2013, we concluded that settling these matters is in the best interest of [the company] and its constituents.”