One trade group said Phillips has already reached out to the industry, gathering opinions on key issues facing the market, including Fannie and Freddie…
CEO Mat Ishbia said the interest-rate issue concerned just 5 percent of the lender’s loans that were closed in California between 2011 and 2014. “We didn’t benefit one penny and not one borrower was harmed,” he said.-
Well, the good news for the mortgage industry is that someone finally got around to talking about the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act when it came time to file another brief in PHH Corp. v. CFPB. But the bad news: It was the CFPB, and it doubled down on the main arguments it made the first time around, reaffirming its controversial interpretation. The CFPB insisted Director Richard Cordray correctly interpreted the act. First, the agency said PHH’s “kickback scheme” violated RESPA. The interpretation of RESPA by the three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit was incorrect, said the CFPB. “Its crucial error was holding that the meaning of section 8(c)(2) of RESPA – in ...
Three financial regulation scholars told the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that the CFPB is a highly accountable agency when looked at in its entirety. Making that argument in a friend of the court brief in PHH Corp. v. CFPB were two law professors, Michael Barr at the University of Michigan Law School and Adam Levitin at Georgetown University Law Center, along with Deepak Gupta, founding principal of the Gupta Wessler law firm in Washington, DC. Gupta was senior litigation counsel and senior counsel for enforcement strategy at the CFPB back in the days when Elizabeth Warren was setting up the fledgling agency. “Viewed holistically, the CFPB is a highly accountable agency,” the trio said....
In another unusual, unexpected development in the legal wrangling between the CFPB and PHH Corp. over alleged violations of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, the U.S. Department of Justice, now under the direction of the Trump administration, has asked permission of the court for a few minutes of its time to present its case. Oral arguments in the case, before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, are scheduled for May 24, 2017. The court has allocated 30 minutes per side for arguments. In an unopposed brief filed earlier this month with the USCA, the DOJ asked for 10 minutes of argument time. “The United States agrees with petitioner PHH Corp. that the for-cause removal ...
RSS