Mortgage lenders may get greater clarity on the legal question of just who may sue them for alleged racial discrimination, after the Supreme Court of the United States announced recently it would take on separate lawsuits filed by the city of Miami against Bank of America and Wells Fargo. The city accused the pair of perpetrating discriminatory mortgage lending within its jurisdiction over a long period of time. The city alleged that the banks’ conduct violated the Fair Housing Act in that they intentionally discriminated against minority borrowers and that their conduct had a disparate impact, resulting in an unbalanced number of foreclosures on minority-owned properties. The precise legal issue before the high court is...

Lenders will face higher penalties for violations of agency rules and regulations as the FHA and the Department of Veterans Affairs adjust their respective maximum civil monetary penalties for inflation. The adjustments are mandated by the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015, which also requires publication of an interim final rule showing the current and adjusted penalty amounts. Effective June 22, 2016, VA’s maximum civil monetary penalties for false loan guaranty certification increased from $10,000 to $21,563, and from $5,500 to $10,781 for fraudulent claims or statements in any VA program. Comments on the VA interim final rule must be received on or before Aug. 22, 2016. Meanwhile, the FHA also is making inflation adjustments for its maximum civil penalties through an interim final rule that will take effect Aug. 15, 2016, the day before the ...

The New York legislature approved a bill late last week that will require servicers handling loans in the state to maintain vacant properties in certain circumstances. The requirements were strongly opposed by the Mortgage Bankers Association. In general, the new law requires servicers of residential mortgages in New York to complete an exterior inspection of properties within 90 days of a borrower’s delinquency to determine the occupancy status of the property. The law also requires ongoing inspections of properties related to severely delinquent mortgages every 25 to 35 days. If the servicer has a reasonable basis to believe that a property is vacant and abandoned, the servicer is...

CFPB Firmly in CHOICE Act’s Crosshairs. Since Inside the CFPB went to press last, House Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling, R-TX, released more details about the Republican alternative to replace the Dodd-Frank Act. Dubbed the Financial CHOICE (Creating Hope and Opportunity for Investors, Consumers and Entrepreneurs) Act, the bill not only includes provisions to provide a qualified-mortgage safe harbor for any mortgage that has been held in portfolio by a depository institution since origination, but also a host of provisions targeting the structure of the CFPB itself. For instance, the bill could change the name of the CFPB to the “Consumer Financial Opportunity Commission (CFOC),” and task it with the dual mission of consumer protection and competitive markets, with ...

An Arkansas Congressman introduced a bill last week that would require the Treasury Department to annually exam the possibility of ending the GSE conservatorship.Rep. French Hill, R-AR, said H.R. 5505, the GSE Review and Reform Act, would require Treasury Secretary Jack Lew to lead the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It would amend the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 to require annual studies on ending the conservatorship of the GSEs. He noted that outside of a study done in 2011, the administration has had little engagement with Congress on a path toward ending the eight-year conservatorship and reforming the “broken” housing finance system. Hill added that the...

The Securities and Exchange Commission will re-propose a rule addressing conflicts of interest regarding certain securitizations, according to SEC Chair Mary Jo White. The rule required by the Dodd-Frank Act was originally proposed by the SEC in 2011. “It’s proved to be much more complicated than our experts in the agency envisioned,” White said last week at a hearing by the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs. Section 621 of the DFA requires...

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac MBS guarantee fees are too high, given the strong credit profile of new business since the financial crisis, according to a diverse collection of real estate, banking and consumer interest groups. The groups called on the Federal Housing Finance Agency to lower MBS guarantee fees charged by the two government-sponsored enterprises, and to reduce or eliminate the loan-level pricing adjustments that are typically wrapped into the consumer’s note rate. The average g-fee has jumped from 22 basis points in 2009 to 58 bps in 2014, including the 10 bps surcharge that Congress mandated in 2011 to cover a payroll tax cut. Loan-level pricing adjustments can total...[Includes one data table]

The chance of Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac reform legislation passing Congress this year is virtually nil. But that hasn’t stopped industry trade groups from talking about the topic, or dispensing a barrage of advice for the Federal Housing Finance Agency about the withering capital cushions at Fannie and Freddie. The way things stand today, the largest industry trade organizations – and arguably the most powerful politically – are taking the position of “all or nothing” mortgage-finance ...

Housing industry trade groups and other interests joined forces this week in urging the Federal Housing Finance Agency to lower GSE guaranty fees. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are no longer exposed to the credit risk they were at the height of the crisis in 2008, they said in a letter to FHFA Director Mel Watt. The June 22 letter was signed by 25 organizations, including the Consumer Mortgage Coalition, Mortgage Bankers Association and U.S. Mortgage Insurers. It not only called for lower g-fees but also said loan-level price adjustments need to be reduced or eliminated. The groups argue that both fees prevent qualified borrowers from entering the housing market.

FHA lenders will face stiffer maximum monetary penalties later this year for various violations of agency rules and regulations. The higher monetary penalties are the result of legislation signed into law late last year requiring federal agencies to adjust the current maximum penalty amounts for inflation in order to maintain their deterrent effect. Specifically, the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 2015 (2015 Act) requires federal agencies to adjust the level of civil monetary penalties with an initial “catch-up” adjustment through an interim final rule and subsequent annual adjustments for inflation. The interim final rules with the initial penalty adjustments must be published by July 1, 2016. The new penalty levels must take effect no later than Aug. 1, 2016. Additionally, agencies are required to make annual inflation adjustments, starting Jan. 15, 2017, and for each year going forward. The adjustments will ...