The CFPB’s integrated disclosure rule will be “treacherous” for mortgage lenders and will likely be as challenging to comply with as its massive size and complexity suggests, according to top industry experts. Speaking to attendees of an Inside Mortgage Finance webinar last week on the CFPB’s TILA/RESPA Integrated Disclosure rule – known as “TRID” – Rod Alba, senior regulatory counsel for the American Bankers Association, rattled off a number of concerns that mortgage lenders still have with the new rule, which is set to take effect Aug. 1, 2015. “The regulation is enormously voluminous in length. The sheer size of this rule, we think, makes this regulation treacherous for banks in terms of liability, in terms of enforcement, in terms of understanding ...

If lenders think they have a full plate of regulations to digest, just wait. More appetizers and main courses are on the way, courtesy of the CFPB and the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. For the real estate finance industry, there is more to follow all the mortgage-related rules that took effect in January of this year, or the integrated disclosure rule under the Truth in Lending Act and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, which takes effect in August of 2015. “This summer, we also issued a proposed rule to implement changes Congress made to the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray, in appearance before the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee ...

The CFPB recently warned credit card companies of the risk of engaging in deceptive and/or abusive acts and practices in connection with solicitations that offer a promotional annual percentage rate (APR) on a particular transaction – such as convenience checks, deferred interest/promotional interest rate purchases, and balance transfers – over a defined period of time. The bureau said it is concerned that some companies are luring consumers with offers of reduced or zero interest for a specific purchase or balances transferred from another credit card, and then hitting them with surprise interest charges. In CFPB Bulletin 2014-02, the bureau states that it has observed that some card issuers do not adequately convey in their marketing materials that a consumer who accepts such ...

Industry Tries to Rustle Up Support for QM Points-and-Fees Legislation. The Mortgage Action Alliance, the grassroots advocacy group of the Mortgage Bankers Association, recently issued a “call to action” to its members to get on the telephone and call their Senators and urge them to pass legislation that would make key changes to the way points and fees are calculated under the qualified mortgage definition in the CFPB’s ability-to-repay rule. S. 1577, the Mortgage Choice Act of 2013, introduced last year by Sen. Joe Manchin, D-WV, exempts any affiliated title charges and escrow charges for taxes and insurance from the QM cap on points and fees. Manchin’s bill is a legislative companion to H.R. 3211, the Mortgage Choice Act, which ...

The recent adoption by the Securities and Exchange Commission of its Regulation AB II disclosure rule is expected to be a “credit positive” for the auto loan and lease ABS sector, but it probably will also raise costs for market participants and, ultimately, consumers, according to an industry consensus of the new rule. The new regulatory regime mandates standardized loan-level disclosures for ABS backed by auto loans and leases, as well as other classes, as reported previously. The loan-level data have to be provided on the SEC’s free online database known as the EDGAR system. Although specific data requirements vary by asset class, the new asset-level disclosures generally will include...

Commercial banks and thrifts reported a modest decline in their non-mortgage ABS investments during the second quarter of 2014, although several key sectors showed growth, according to a new analysis and ranking by Inside MBS & ABS. Bank call reports show that the industry held $171.2 billion of non-mortgage ABS in portfolio as of the end of June. That was down 0.8 percent from March, marking the second straight quarterly decline after bank ABS holdings hit a record $173.8 billion at the end of 2013. Bank holdings of auto loan ABS actually increased...[Includes one data chart]

Servicer performance in the Home Affordable Modification Program is at one of the lowest levels in the five-year history of the loss mitigation program, according to the Treasury Department and the Special Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program. Last week, the Treasury revealed that four of the seven largest servicers participating in the non-agency portion of HAMP need at least moderate improvement. CitiMortgage was ranked the lowest among the large servicers and will have its HAMP incentive payments withheld by the Treasury until the servicer’s performance improves.

The Federal Housing Finance Agency should abandon its proposed increase in guaranty fees charged by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, according to a number of industry groups. The Mortgage Bankers Association said in a comment letter that it opposes hikes in g-fees and loan-level price adjustments, noting that g-fees have become attractive to Congress as cash cow means for funding non-housing programs. “Clearly, the GSEs were undercapitalized...

Commercial banks held $1.386 trillion of residential MBS at the end of June, marking their second consecutive quarterly gain in MBS investment, according to a new Inside MBS & ABS analysis. The 0.7 percent increase in bank MBS holdings was enough to offset a 3.5 percent drop in thrift investment in the sector. On a combined basis, banks and thrifts saw an 0.3 percent increase in residential MBS during the second quarter, though the industry remained 0.2 percent below the level set at the midway point in 2013. All of the increase came...[Includes two data charts]

The legal settlement between Goldman Sachs and the Federal Housing Finance Agency over soured non-agency MBS sold to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac featured an unusual buyback of the securities by the investment bank. It leaves just three big defendants left to settle or go to trial, legal observers note. Under the terms of the settlement announced Aug. 22, Goldman is required to pay $3.15 billion to repurchase securities that were the subject of the claims in the FHFA’s lawsuit. The economic value of the settlement is estimated...