The U.S. Supreme Court will determine whether disparate impact claims can be applied to the Fair Housing Act and lending discrimination cases by reviewing a Minnesota case involving rental housing. Although many fair lending cases based on disparate impact have been brought and settled over the years, the standard has not been universally interpreted by federal appeals courts. In Magner v. Gallagher, private landlords sued the city of St. Paul, MN, for enforcing its housing code, leading to claims by the landlords that shutting down their properties made it too difficult for minority renters to find...

Despite its fairly impressive success rate in fending off hostile litigation, MERSCorp and its Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems remain popular targets. This time around, it’s Delaware Attorney General Beau Biden filing suit in Delaware Chancery Court against them, alleging repeated violations of the state’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act. “Since at least the 1600s, real property rights have been a cornerstone of our society,” said AG Biden. “MERS has raised serious questions about who owns what in America. A man or woman’s home is not just his or her largest investment, it’s their castle. Rules matter. A homeowner has the obligation to pay the mortgage on time, and lenders must follow the rules if they are seeking to take away someone’s house through foreclosure. The honor system won’t work.”

The nation’s five largest mortgage servicing companies now face a tab of $25 billion to bring to a conclusion the long-running negotiations with the state attorneys general over industry foreclosure practices, according to published reports of the latest behind-the-scenes developments. The deal with the big five servicers – Ally Financial Inc., Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Wells Fargo & Co. – is now said to include $5 billion in cash penalties, along with the requirement to produce $3 billion in mortgage refinances. Other aspects of the settlement are said to include principal reductions and other forms of aids to struggling homeowners. The top servicers would be released from certain claims having to do with loan servicing and origination, according to the reports – but to what extent exactly remains unclear. And there would be no release from claims related to mortgage securitization.

Last week, the 14 mortgage servicers covered by the enforcement actions taken by the banking regulators in April 2011 began mailing letters to eligible borrowers that explain how to request a review of their case if they believe they suffered financial injury as a result of errors, misrepresentations or other deficiencies in foreclosure proceedings related to their primary residence between Jan. 1, 2009, and Dec. 31, 2010. Borrowers may also visit www.IndependentForeclosureReview.com for more information about the review and claim process. Assistance with requesting a review and answers to questions about the process are available. Requests for review by the servicers’ independent consultants must be received by April 30, 2012. As part of the enforcement actions taken by the Federal Reserve, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision, the servicers had to correct deficiencies in their servicing and foreclosure processes and to enlist independent firms to conduct a multi-faceted independent review of foreclosure actions taken during 2009 and 2010.

The Federal Housing Finance Agency late last month announced a number of changes to the federal government’s Home Affordable Refinance Program for underwater borrowers with mortgages from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. But one important little detail that escaped the attention of many has to do with the borrower loss of non-recourse loan protections for borrowers who refinance. Millions of Americans live in states that have such protections that could keep them from being personally liable in the event of a default. But in many of these states, refinancing removes those protections – enabling a lender to pursue tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars more than they would legally have been entitled to without the refinance.

The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.GSE anti-money laundering, SARs reporting proposed. The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network proposed regulations that would require Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Home Loan Banks to develop anti-money laundering programs and file suspicious activity reports with FinCEN. The government-sponsored enterprises currently file fraud reports with their regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which then files SARs with FinCEN when the facts in a particular fraud report warrant a SAR under FinCEN’s reporting standards.

A white paper put together by a researcher at the Federal Reserve looks into what determines whether federal and state supervisors examine state banks independently or together. The results suggest that supervisors coordinate examinations in order to support states with lower budgets and capabilities and more banks to supervise. “I find that states with larger budgets examine more banks independently, that they accommodate changes in the number of banks mostly through the number of examinations with a federal supervisor and that, when examining banks together, state banking departments that have earned quality accreditation are more likely to write conclusion reports separately from federal supervisors,” researcher Marcelo Rezende said. The results also indicate that regulation affects supervision by changing the characteristics of banks. “Independent examinations decrease with branch deregulation, which is consistent with the facts that this reform consolidated banks within fewer independent firms and that state and federal supervisors are more likely to examine large and complex institutions together,” said Rezende.

The servicing settlement being negotiated between state attorneys general and major banks will likely require principal reduction via loan modifications and possibly refinances. Principal reduction, however, will likely only be required for certain mortgages held in bank portfolios. The Federal Housing Finance Agency has refused to allow principal reduction on mortgages serviced for the government-sponsored enterprises. Non-agency mortgage-backed security investors, meanwhile, have been more accepting of principal reduction of late but the vast majority of such mod activity is already concentrated on portfolio loans. ...

A subprime-related fair lending lawsuit was allowed to proceed to discovery last week in Illinois. In 2009, Lisa Madigan, the state’s attorney general, filed a lawsuit against Wells Fargo alleging that the lender steered minorities into high-cost subprime mortgages. ... [Includes three briefs]

Finding itself in one of the largest mortgage fraud cases ever prosecuted by the federal government, the Department of Housing and Urban Development may have a hard time explaining why it failed to act earlier against a lender that scammed the FHA for nearly a decade. It appears HUD, notwithstanding its assertions of increased vigilance and aggressive enforcement against violators of department regulations, dropped the ball on Allied Home Mortgage Corp. According to a lawsuit filed by the U.S. Attorney in Manhattan district court this week, Allied, an FHA loan correspondent, and its two top executives engaged in ...