The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit last week saved PHH Mortgage and its parent more than $100 million when it sent the lender’s dispute with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau over issues related to the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act back to the bureau, basically starting over.
The mortgage industry has another opportunity to help usher in some potentially dramatic differences in the way the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau goes about its business in the post-Richard Cordray era.
Last week, the en banc panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued its long-awaited decision in the tussle between the CFPB and PHH Corp. The ruling addressed two distinct issues in the dispute, the first being the leadership structure of the CFPB, which PHH alleged was unconstitutional. The district court had previously sided with PHH, but the appeals court reversed that component of the ruling, and did so largely on party lines. On the other hand, the appeals court judges transcended party orientation and sided with PHH on the part of the dispute that deals with the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act. (See following story.) On the question of the constitutionality of the ...
The second part of last week’s ruling by the en banc panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit went in favor of PHH Mortgage in its lengthy legal dispute with the CFPB over issues tied to the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act. The court upheld the original three-judge panel interpretation of RESPA and its application to PHH in this case, stating that it was improperly applied and that the lender is entitled to the relief granted.More specifically, the en banc court reinstated the Oct. 11, 2016, panel decision related to the RESPA issues, which included vacating the bureau’s order imposing $109 million in disgorgement penalties, and remanded the matter for further proceedings based ...
RSS