January 29, 2010

RESPA: UPDATED RESPA RULE FAQs RELEASED ON JAN. 28, 2010

The U.S. Housing and Urban Development's Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) Division released new updated FAQs on Jan. 28, 2010. The new RESPA frequently asked updated question and answers (FAQs) are in bold.

One of the new questions asks whether a loan originator can require the use of its affiliate company for the tax or flood certificate. The updated RESPA guidance says that the loan originator may not require the use of its affiliate for the tax service or flood certificate, but a loan originator may require the use of a non-affiliated provider.

January 21, 2010

RESPA REFORM QUESTION: WHERE DOES THE SELLER PAID TRANSFER TAX CHARGE ON THE HUD-1 AND GOOD FAITH ESTIMATE (GFE) GO?

Three weeks have gone by since the new RESPA Regulations went into effect and the most commonly asked question we have encountered thus far is how are Seller Paid Transfer Tax Charges shown.

The Frequently Asked Questions "FAQs" state that "All charges typically paid by the borrower must be disclosed on the Good Faith Estimate regardless of whether the charges will be paid by the borrower, seller, or other party?" The FAQ under Section 4 & 5 (see pages 34 & 35): Right to Cure Tolerance Violations has caused a great deal of confusion in some areas of the country on the issue of where to put the transfer tax fee. The confusion centers on whether the transfer tax fee has to be disclosed on the borrower's Good Faith Estimate even if the seller is paying for 100% of the transfer tax.

In some areas of the United States the local custom or tradition in a real estate closing has been to make the seller pay for the entire or a portion of the transfer tax or there is language in the real estate contract stating the seller is to pay for all or part of the transfer tax.

The answer is if the seller is paying for the entire transfer tax or a portion of the transfer tax then it must be listed on the borrower's Good Faith Estimate (GFE) and must be shown on the HUD-1 on the borrower's charge column on page 2 of the HUD-1 settlement statement. A credit may be given from the seller to the borrower on page 1 of the HUD-1 to offset the charge. The only exception to this is if state or local law requires the seller pay for the transfer tax. If state law or local law specifically requires the seller to pay all or a portion of the transfer tax then that portion was not required to be on the Good Faith Estimate.

Please remember though that a transfer tax, unless state or local law requires that it be paid by the seller, is a zero tolerance charge and must be disclosed on the borrower's GFE and on the HUD-1. It should also be noted that a lender may overestimate the transfer tax charge as reductions are not considered tolerance violations under the new RESPA guidelines.

December 22, 2009

RESPA: HUD RELEASES NEW 49 PAGE SETTLEMENT COST BOOKLET

The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) released the new Settlement Cost Booklet. The 49 page informational booklet must be delivered to consumers within three days of the application along with the Good Faith Estimate (GFE) for a mortgage loan by their lender or mortgage broker. Even though the HUD informational guide was released on Dec. 16, 2009 it must be used beginning on Jan. 1, 2010. Failure to provide the new HUD booklet to consumers within three days of the loan application is a violation of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) Section 5.

An electronic copy of HUD's Settlement Cost Booklet can be sent to the borrower electronically in lieu of the printed booklet.

November 13, 2009

RESPA: HUD OFFICIALLY DELAYS "HUD ENFORCEMENT" OF NEW RESPA REFORM RULE

HUD announced today a delay in "HUD ENFORCEMENT" on the new RESPA Rule which goes into effect on Jan. 1st, 2010 on FHA loans. We need to highlight the fact that only HUD Enforcement of the new RESPA rule has been delayed for 120 days on FHA loans. Civil litigation on the new RESPA Rule goes into effect on Jan. 1st, 2010 and therefore is not delayed.

We applaud HUD for delaying enforcement of the new rule for 4 months it still exposes companies that do not implement the new changes to potential civil litigation issues for not complying with the new rule.

Another RESPA attorney said it best: "Better pin on your badge and strap on your gun looks like HUD will look to the plaintiff's bar to bring the heat in the first 4 months."

Below is a copy of the HUD press release:

Continue reading "RESPA: HUD OFFICIALLY DELAYS "HUD ENFORCEMENT" OF NEW RESPA REFORM RULE" »

October 30, 2009

RESPA REFORM: IVY JACKSON ISSUES CLARIFICATION ON YIELD SPREAD PREMIUM CREDIT TO BORROWER ISSUE

The Director of the Office of RESPA and Interstate Land Sales for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Ivy Jackson, clarified an major issue today that addresses industry confusion over the Yield Spread Premium "YSP". Several wholesale lenders issued guidance that the new RESPA restrictions required anyone who is not funding their own loan to have all the YSP, any money made on the interest rate, credited to the borrower. Some wholesale lenders were under the belief that anyone who brokered a loan would not be allowed to make any money on the loans interest rate or YSP.

For example under the current rule if the par rate today was 5.5% and its paying 100.500% that the broker would make their origination of 1% plus .5% on th rate in YSP. However, some wholesale lenders have been issuing guidance to mortgage brokers throughout the country that say the new RESPA restrictions forces the loan originator to credit the .5% YSP to the borrower at closing. This is not accurate as Ivy Jackson clarifies below:

Ivy Jackson said this is not accurate and states that "while true that any YSPs are now shown as a credit to the borrower in Box 2 under "Your Adjusted Origination Charges." The rule eliminates the 1% cap on origination charges for FHA loans.

Based on the wholesaler bankers example and a $100,000 loan, if the broker is going to make $1500.00 on the loan and there is a $500 YSP; Block 1 or "Our Origination Charge" would show $2000.00, Block 2, would show $500, resulting in an "Adjusted Origination Charge" of $1500.00."


October 28, 2009

RUMOR: RESPA REFORM BILL TO BE DELAYED SIX MONTHS: HUD DENIES DELAY

The Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act "RESPA" regulations set to take place on January 1, 2010 has purportedly been delayed by HUD for six months. We are now waiting for an official announcement to take place by HUD to officially confirm the six month delay which should make the new implementation date on or around July 1, 2010.

We don't know what precipitated this possible delay by HUD but the real estate industry has stepped up their criticisms on the new rule, including a recent letter sent to HUD by numerous trade organizations, issues with the new Truth In Lending Act form "TILA" integration, and other federal enforcement agencies concerns about the transparency of the new HUD-1 have forced HUD to re-evaluate parts of the new rule. Of course one of the other problems is that many in the real estate industry are still very much unaware or uneducated on the new RESPA Rule.

UPDATED at 10:39 PM:
Assistant Secretary of Housing David Stevens informed me that there will not be a delay in the implementation of the Jan. 1, 2010 RESPA rule. The information we received came from numerous credible sources in Washington, D.C. but it appears that the information regarding the delay according to HUD will not occur.

UPDATE #2 AT 11:53 ON THURSDAY:
Kelly McCarel atRESPA NEWS.COM is now confirming "that HUD has been holding private meetings about the possibility of a delay" according to their sources.

However, Assistant Secretary of Housing Dave Stevens stated to us in an email at 3:00AM this morning that "There have been all sorts of discussions on readiness but a delay on implementation has not been one of them. The industry needs to be prepared for January 1st."

Stay tuned.............

Latest Update November 13, 2009
HUD Announced a 120 day (4 month) delay in HUD Enforcement of the new rule or as HUD calls it a "Restraint in Enforcement."

September 8, 2009

HUD RELEASES ADDITIONAL COMPLIANCE GUIDANCE ON NEW RESPA RULE

The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) provided updated RESPA Reform compliance guidance on the HUD-1 Settlement Statement three times in the last few weeks. The following frequently asked questions (FAQs) involve only the HUD-1 below and are in addition to the initial FAQs released. We will add the Good Faith Estimate frequently asked questions at a later date. These rules, bearing a miracle, will go into effect on Jan. 10, 2010.

HUD-1 GENERAL

Question:
May separate HUD-1s be given to the seller and borrower with only their own information on each HUD-1?

Answer:
Yes. It is permissible to have two separate HUD-1s in a transaction; one with the buyer's credits and charges only, and one with the seller's credits and charges only. The settlement agent must provide the lender with a copy of both HUD-1s when the borrower's and seller's copies differ.

Question:
If an addendum is used, can the following text be added to the HUD-1: "See attached addendum for additional information"?

Answer:
It is acceptable to insert such a reference where appropriate on the HUD-1 for the purpose of making it clear to the parties what the completed HUD-1 comprises.

Question:
How should payments by the seller or real estate agent that are for settlement services included on the Good Faith Estimate (GFE) be shown on the HUD-1?

Answer:
If a seller or real estate agent pays for a charge that was included on the GFE, the charges should be listed in the borrower's column, with an offsetting credit reported in Lines 204-209 of the HUD-1, identifying the party paying the charge. For a seller-paid charge, the charge should also be listed in Lines 506-509. For a charge paid by the real estate agent, the name of the person paying the charge must also be listed.

Question:
The instructions in Appendix A to Part 3500 for completing the HUD-1 indicate how fees that are paid outside of closing should be designated on the HUD-1. Can the convention "P.O.C. (B*) be used instead, with the following footnote at the bottom of the page: *Paid outside of closing by borrower"?

Answer:
Yes, the HUD-1 Instructions require that P.O.C. items be listed on the HUD-1 by the settlement agent with an indication whether P.O.C. items are paid by the borrower, seller, or other party by marking the items paid for by whoever made the payment identified in the parentheses, such as P.O.C. (borrower) or P.O.C. (seller) as long as a footnote is added to the HUD-1 clearly noting the party paying for the items such as *Paid outside of closing by borrower or *Paid outside of closing by seller.

Question:
Where should fees for processing and administrative services be listed on the HUD-1 Settlement Statement?

Answer:
Processing and administrative services are services to perform origination and title service functions. For the loan origination function, charges for such services are included in the total on Line 801. For the title services function, charges for such services must be included in the title underwriter's or title agent's charge and are shown in the total on Line 1101. Examples of processing and administrative services include, but are not limited to, the following: document delivery, document preparation, copying, wiring, preparing endorsements, document handling, and notarization.

Question:
Where should the survey fee be disclosed on the HUD-1?

Answer:
The location of the survey fee on the HUD-1 is determined as follows:
(a) if the loan originator required a survey as a condition of the loan and the borrower selected the settlement service provider, the charge for the survey must be listed on a blank line in the 800 series in the borrower's column;
(b) if the loan originator required a survey as a condition of the loan and the borrower selected the settlement service provider, the charge for the survey must be listed as part of the total in Line 1301 of the HUD-1 and itemized as applicable;
(c) if a survey was required to issue a lender's or owner's title insurance policy, the charge for the survey is part of the charge in Line 1101 and must be further itemized if performed by a third party;
(d) if the borrower elected to obtain a survey that was neither required by the loan originator nor required to issue a lender's or owner's title insurance policy, then the charge is listed in the borrower's column on a blank line in the 1300 series.

Question:
May an addendum be added to the HUD-1 to list additional fees and other information?

Answer:
Yes, an additional page may be attached to the HUD-1 to add sequentially numbered lines as needed to accommodate the complete listing of all items required to be shown on the HUD-1, and for the purpose of including customary recitals and information used locally in real estate settlements (for example, breakdown of payoff figures, a breakdown of borrower's total monthly mortgage payments, check disbursements, a statement indicating receipt of funds, applicable special stipulations between buyer and seller, and the date funds are transferred).

Question:
The General Instructions indicate that if a charge has been shown on the GFE as payable by the borrower but at closing it is paid by another person, including by the loan originator in a loan other than a no-cost loan, the fee should be shown in the borrower's column on the HUD-1 and be offset by listing a credit to the borrower on lines 204-209 of the HUD-1. If a HUD-1A form is being used, lines 204-209 do not exist. How should the credit be shown on a HUD-1A form?

Answer:
Use of the HUD-1A form is an optional form to be used by the settlement agent in a transaction in which there is not a seller and as otherwise appropriate. If the use of a HUD-1A form is not appropriate, such as if there is a credit given by a loan originator or other party, the settlement agent must use the HUD-1 form.

Question:
In a transaction that is closed in the mortgage broker's name but is table funded by the lender, must the name and address of the funding lender be shown in Section F (consistent with definition of "lender" under 24 CFR ยง3500.2(b)) or may the mortgage broker's name and address be shown?

Answer:
The HUD-1 Instructions for Section F state that the name and address of the lender must be stated in this section. Therefore the name of the lender and not the mortgage broker must be stated in Section F on the HUD-1.

Continue reading "HUD RELEASES ADDITIONAL COMPLIANCE GUIDANCE ON NEW RESPA RULE" »

August 13, 2009

HUD RELEASES FAQ GUIDANCE ON NEW RESPA RULE

HUD released the following information today with regards to the HUD-1 Settlement Statement in order to help consumers and industry better understand the new RESPA rules that will go into effect on Jan. 1, 2010. We will list below all FAQ's HUD released with regards to the HUD-1 Settlement Statement.

If you have questions or comments please feel free to ask in our RESPA Blog comment section.

Continue reading "HUD RELEASES FAQ GUIDANCE ON NEW RESPA RULE" »

July 14, 2009

MORTGAGE DISCLOSURE IMPROVEMENT ACT (MDIA) GOES INTO EFFECT ON JULY 30, 2009

On July 30, 2009, some of the provisions of the Mortgage Disclosure Improvement Act of 2008 (MDIA) go into effect and lenders, mortgage brokers, title agents, real estate agents, and real estate brokerages need be alert as to these new federal governmental regulations. Here are the details for the MDIA:

1. The 3/7/3 Rule requires a seven business day waiting period once the initial disclosure is provided before closing a home loan (business days are everyday except Sundays and Holidays). This means that before a borrower can close on a transaction the borrower must receive the initial Good Faith Estimate (GFE) and initial TIL statement disclosing the final Annual Percentage Rate (APR) seven days prior to closing.

2. If the final annual percentage rate APR is off by more than .125% from the initial GFE disclosure then the lender must re-disclose and wait yet another three business days before closing on the transaction.

3. The consumer has the right to cancel and not proceed with the transaction if they so choose.

4. Lenders are forbidden from collecting money for appraisals, loan applications, etc. prior to the delivery of the Truth In Lending (TIL). Lenders can only collect from the borrower the credit report fee at the time of prior to delivery of the final TIL. No other fees are permitted to be collected at the time of application. If the TIL is sent by mail, additional charges can occur after the 3rd business day after the borrower receives the TIL in the mail.

5. The following language must be clearly written on the initial and final TIL: "You are not required to complete this agreement merely because you have received these disclosures or signed a loan application."

If you are a real estate agent or title agent you need to manage the process very carefully by:

A. Making sure that you check the initial Good Faith Estimate and Truth In Lending form for your buyers and look for discrepancies in charges. The new rules were put in place to protect consumers from being low balled one figure by a loan officer only to find out at the closing table that the fees charged were much higher. The new MDIA rules will absolutely delay closings if these steps are not followed carefully.

B. Buyers, sellers, and real estate professionals should not schedule a closing until the borrower has completed the seven day waiting period as required in the initial TIL.

Continue reading "MORTGAGE DISCLOSURE IMPROVEMENT ACT (MDIA) GOES INTO EFFECT ON JULY 30, 2009" »

July 13, 2009

THE CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION AGENCY (CFPA) PROPOSAL INCLUDES RESPA AND TILA REGULATORY GOVERNANCE

U.S. Rep. Barney Frank officially introduced legislation to create the Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA). The legislation, which is backed by the Obama Administration, would consolidate the consumer protection powers of the fifty various federal financial regulatory agencies by creating a single regulatory agency. The creation of this single regulatory agency is the single most important aspect of the proposed 229 page Consumer Financial Protection Agency proposal.

The current financial governing system encourages abuses in the industry to take place because of the loopholes created by an inefficient and ineffective regulatory structure. The loopholes are exploited even further by the mass infighting that many of the governmental regulatory bureaucracies regularly display. The consolidation of these various federal agencies into one rule-making and investigative federal division should provide more uniform rules for those in the real estate industry and for consumers of real estate products.

The CFPA will have sole authority to draft and interpret regulations under the existing consumer financial services and fair lending statutes. The recent Good Faith Estimate/HUD-1 Settlement Statement forms developed by HUD and the Truth In Lending Act form is a prime example of decisions being made by one federal agency without input from a completely different agency. The biggest benefit consolidation presents to the industry and to the consumer is that this will increase the number of enforcement investigators. The consolidation of regulatory investigators is crucial because quite often investigators in one agency stop investigating abuses that relate to other agencies due to a myriad of reasons.

Continue reading "THE CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION AGENCY (CFPA) PROPOSAL INCLUDES RESPA AND TILA REGULATORY GOVERNANCE" »

May 22, 2009

RESPA: THE FINANCIAL PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION ACT OF 2009

The Obama Administration is pushing new legislation which would create a financial services regulatory commission. The commission would be called "The Financial Product Safety Commission" and it would regulate all mortgages, credit cards, and mutual funds. The Washington Post's Zachary A. Goldfarb, Binyamin Appelbaum and David Cho wrote an article on May 20, 2009.

The Senate version of this bill under Section 10: Enforcement has some very strong criminal and civil money penalties that could further strengthen consumer protections against businesses. The current senate & house versions of the bill could add considerable consumer protections against loan servicing companies which under Section 6 of RESPA offer consumers very little protection from some mortgage servicing companies abusive practices. This is definitely one of those bills to keep an eye on as the ramifications could be huge for businesses and consumers.

Continue reading "RESPA: THE FINANCIAL PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION ACT OF 2009" »

April 28, 2009

FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE MOVES TO SUSPEND NEW GOOD FAITH ESTIMATE (GFE) AND HUD-1 SETTLEMENT STATEMENT

The Financial Services Committee for the House of Representatives voted to suspend the implementation of the new Good Faith Estimate (GFE) and Housing and Urban Development (HUD-1) Settlement Statement. The committee voted to amend the Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act (H.R. 1728) because the Federal Reserve Board is coming out with a new Truth-in-Lending Act (TILA) disclosure. Many in the industry are concerned that the new TILA disclosure will not integrate properly with the new HUD-1 and GFE. The bill will soon go to the full House and the Senate has its own version it will be pushing. So it looks like the new GFE and HUD-1 will have to wait until the TILA is finalized by the Federal Reserve Board.

The Real Estate Services Providers Council, Inc. (RESPRO) has more information on the House committee action.

January 29, 2009

RESPA: 2009 NATIONAL COMPLIANCE SUMMIT TO FEATURE CHARLES C. CAIN AS GUEST SPEAKER IN LAS VEGAS

October Research has selected Charles C. Cain to be a speaker at the 2009 National Compliance Summit on February 19-20, 2009 at The Westin Casuarina Las Vegas Hotel, Casino & Spa. Charles Cain is Of Counsel to the Sterbcow Law Group LLC in New Orleans, Louisiana and is President of Alliance Solutions LLC based in Cincinnati, Ohio.

December 22, 2008

RESPA REFORM: NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MORTGAGE BROKERS (NAMB) FILES LAWSUIT AGAINST NEW RESPA RULE

The National Association of Mortgage Brokers (NAMB) filed a lawsuit against the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) last week. The lawsuit seeks to prevent to HUD from implementing the the new RESPA rule. While NAMB is the first trade association sue HUD, most real estate industry observers expect that dozens of other various local and national trade associations will file suit as well to stop this rule from going into effect.

NAMB believes that the new RESPA rule violates the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA). The lawsuit also alleges that HUD failed to examine the new rules impact on small businesses arguing that the implementation of this rule will significantly hurt consumers and cause unfair imbalances in the mortgage lending marketplace.

If the Obama Administration doesn't kill the new RESPA rule in its entirety next month when they take office then the odds are this will hot button rule will be mired in litigation and cost millions of dollars in legal fees on both sides.


November 12, 2008

RESPA REFORM RULE'S NEW HUD-1 SETTLEMENT STATEMENT INITIAL ANALYSIS

The United States Housing and Urban Development's RESPA Department unleashed their new HUD-1 Settlement Statement today. The new HUD-1 doesn't change too much in format on the 1st page but its the 2nd and 3rd page that does.

Sections 100, 200, 400, & 500 don't have any changes from the previous HUD-1.

Sections 300 & 600 do break down "Gross amount due" and "Less amounts paid". I don't foresee these two sections as controversial.

Section 700 of the HUD was not modified or changed.

Sections 800, 900, and 1000 will be discussed later in conjunction with the GFE and the 3rd page of the new HUD-1. Its clear from page 3 of the new settlement statement that HUD has enacted price controls of no more than a 10% deviation. This will be extremely controversial and will likely cause most of the trade associations to file suit against HUD for overstepping its congressional authority by enacting price controls.

Continue reading "RESPA REFORM RULE'S NEW HUD-1 SETTLEMENT STATEMENT INITIAL ANALYSIS" »

November 12, 2008

RESPA REFORM CONGRESSIONAL HEARING SET FOR NOVEMBER 12, 2008 AT 2:00 PM EST

Federal Housing Commissioner/Assistant Secretary for HUD Brian Montgomery, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Regulation Gary Cunningham, and Director of RESPA Ivy Jackson will appear before the U.S. House Financial Services Committee today, November 12, 2008 at 2:00 PM EST to discuss HUD's new final RESPA rule.

The actual rule is still not available to the public but Housing and Urban Development (HUD) expects the rule to be published in the Federal Register in the coming days.

Continue reading "RESPA REFORM CONGRESSIONAL HEARING SET FOR NOVEMBER 12, 2008 AT 2:00 PM EST" »

November 10, 2008

RESPA REFORM RULE REVIEW CONCLUDED BY OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET (OMB)

RESPANEWS.COM is reporting that The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has concluded its review of the proposed RESPA REFORM rule that The United States Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has been pushing for.

The proposed 2008 RESPA Reform rule seeks to give HUD the authority to impose civil money penalties for violations of certain RESPA sections such as Section 4 (HUD-1); Section 5 (Good Faith Estimate "GFE" and Special Information Booklet); Section 6 (Servicing); Section 8 (Referral Fee and Fee Spliting prohibitions); Section 9 (Required Use); and Section 10 (Escrow Accounts).

The public proposal gives HUD and State Regulators authority to enforce injunctive and equitable relief , expands the statute of limitations for government and private actions against those who violate RESPA, and requires the delivery of the HUD-1 Settlement Statement to the borrower at least three days prior to closing.

Although it is not official it does appear that the highly controversial Closing Script proposal has been yanked from the rule.