by

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

by

The Sterbcow Law Group would like to Congratulate Dave Stevens who was confirmed as the new Commissioner of the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) on Friday, Dave Stevens is a phenomenal choice to help turn FHA around. Long & Foster’s loss is America’s gain and judging by our experience with Mr. Stevens on the Real Estate Services Providers Council (RESPRO) the real estate industry and consumers will be better off with his policy making decisions in the near future.

David H. Stevens was the past President & COO of Long & Foster Realtors; Vice President of Mortgage, Title, and Insurance Division for Longer & Foster; Executive Vice President for Wells Fargo Home Mortgage; on the Lender’s Advisory Council for the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA); on the Board of Directors of the National Association of Mortgage Brokers (NAMB); on the Board of Directors of the Real Estate Services Providers Council (RESPRO).

by

The United States Supreme Court shocked the national banking industry today in their ruling in the case CUOMO V. CLEARING HOUSE ASSOCIATION, 08-453. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that state regulators have the authority to investigate national banks for lending discrimination. In 2004, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) issued a regulatory change that made it extremely difficult for state regulators to enforce state laws against national banks. The Cuomo v. Clearing House Association case is a tremendous decision for consumers and state regulators because the OCC.

The OCC has been routinely criticized for not investigating consumer complaints against national banks. This decision means that states can now enforce their own state laws against national banks so long as they follow due process procedures set forth under state law. This is an enormous victory for not only consumers but also state bank regulators.
Continue reading

by

Reporter Kate Moran of the Times Picayune wrote a terrific article on a lawsuit the Sterbcow Law Group LLC and Melancon Rimes LLC filed on in behalf of their client and plaintiff Sarada LeBourgeois who was the victim of mortgage fraud.

“Lawsuit alleges that a loan originator stole money from a client” was published on May 12, 2009 and briefly describes the events surrounding the lawsuit. The federal case was recently remanded back to Civil District Court in New Orleans by U.S. District Judge Lance Africk.

Kelly McCarel with RESPA News also wrote an excellent article on the case on Feb. 12, 2009 entitled Louisiana case ties RESPA violations to alleged mortgage fraud”

Continue reading

by

Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley has introduced two new legislative bills that the real estate industry and public need to be keenly aware of: Senate Bill 911 known as The Transparency for Homeowners Act and Senate Bill 912 known as The Promoting Mortgage Responsibility Act. Sen. Merkley believes that abolishing the Yield Spread Premium (YSP) will stop the real estate mortgage problems in the United States because by eliminating the YSP will kill off the mortgage brokerage industry who rely on the YSP as part of their compensation. There have been abuses with the YSP and never was that more apparent during the sub-prime mortgage craze but if Senator Merkley was really interested in reigning in abusive practices they why didn’t he address the Service Release Premium (SRP) abuses which far exceeded the abuses of the Yield Spread Premium? Robert Blake of the Mortgage Insider criticizes both bills as an attempt by the banking lobby to kill off their competition.
Continue reading

by

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

by

The Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act’s (RESPA) Section 9 (12 U.S.C. §2608) and Regulation X (§ 3500.16) prohibits, either directly or indirectly, a seller from requiring a purchaser to buy title insurance from a specific title company in any transaction as a condition of the sale.

Section 9 of RESPA (12 U.S.C. §2608) states that:
1. No seller of property that will be purchased with the assistance of a federally related mortgage loan shall require directly or indirectly, as a condition to selling the property, that title insurance covering the property be purchased by the buyer from any particular title company.

2. Any seller who violates the provisions of subsection (a) of this section shall be liable to the buyer in an amount equal to three times all charges made for such title insurance.

The only way a Seller can mandate that purchaser use a particular title company is if the seller paid 100% of all title insurance and related title costs. HUD’s RESPA Division has stated on numerous occasions that unless the seller pays 100% of the title related costs then the seller has violated RESPA. REO companies need to pay particular attention to Section 9 because required use practices by REO companies are on the HUD’s radar right now.

Additionally there are several local real estate purchase agreements that are in use in parts of the United States where the language in the purchase contract states that Seller picks the title company but purchaser pays for title costs. It should be clearly noted that you can not contract out of a RESPA Section 9 violation. Just because the purchase agreement is signed by the borrower doesn’t prohibit the borrower from coming back and suing the seller for required use if the borrower is stuck with any of the title related fees.

Lastly another clever technique that is in use is where the seller says they will pay for the owner’s title insurance policy but that purchaser has to pay for the lender’s title insurance policy and all other costs. This does not pass the smell test nor does it pass HUD’s smell test. The practice while novel in its approach is still considered a Section 9 violation. If you are a borrower has been a victim of this technique within the last year please give our firm a call.
Continue reading

by

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.

by

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama’s Southern Division handed down a decision on April 20, 2009 in the Vicki V. Busby v. JRHBW Realty, Inc. d/b/a RealtySouth case. The case centered on Section 8(b) of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) and whether Administrative Brokerage Commissions (ABC Fees) are illegal.

United States District Judge Virginia Emerson Hopkins ruled the ABC Fees that RealtySouth charged consumers in a residential real estate transaction involving a federally related mortgage was nothing more than an unearned fee because the ABC fee would not be linked to a bona-fide settlement service that RealtySouth performed in the transaction.

The Birmingham News “Homebuyers were unfairly charged fee, federal court in Birmingham rules” by Russell Hubbard broke the story.

Continue reading

by

Freelance reporter Marcie Geffner for Bankrate.com had a story picked up by the Seattle Times’ titled “New appraisal rules may hurt home buyers” with respect to the Home Valuation Code of Conduct (HVCC) which goes into effect on May 1, 2009. The rule which takes effect on all Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae loans is highly controversial in the real estate industry.

The appraisal industry could see an increase in the number of national Appraisal Management Companies at the expense of the independent appraisal company. The concern that many in the real estate industry have towards the HVCC is the potential ramification that a national appraisal management company will not understand a local real estate market. The lack of local appraisers in a particular real estate market could further depress home prices because the fear is that a national appraisal management company would create a home valuation process that is determined by Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae not by what the true value of the immovable property actually is.

As to how this relates to the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), many appraisal management companies are owned by lenders or other settlement service providers. Lenders & title insurance underwriters can own appraisal management companies so long they disclose their ownership relationship within twenty four (24 hours) of the referral and their use is not required. Many are under the impression that lenders or other settlement service providers are forbidden from owning their own appraisal management company but that is inaccurate as this practice is completely legal under RESPA.

Continue reading
Contact Information
824 Elmwood Park Blvd #205
New Orleans, LA 70123
Toll Free: 877-854-2182Fax: 888-241-6248
Disclaimer: We reserve the right to modify, revise, and otherwise alter feedback comments published on RESPA Lawyer Blog.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2016 – 2026, Sterbcow Law Group LLC
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design