The ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that the CFPB wrongly interpreted the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act will have a huge impact on the mortgage market and the regulatory landscape, industry attorneys said. In a closely-watched case involving PHH Mortgage and its captive mortgage reinsurance unit, the court upheld the notion that the plain language of RESPA permits a bona fide payment by one settlement service provider to another if ...

GSE shareholders seeking to challenge the Federal Housing Finance Agency based on its single-director structure may now face an added challenge. The Federal Housing Finance Agency has asked the courts to review the decision of the DC Circuit in PHH Corp. v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau as it relates to similar complaints against the agency. When a 2016 ruling found that the similarly structured Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is not constitutional, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac shareholders filed lawsuits asking the courts to vacate the Treasury sweep of GSE profits altogether.

A three-judge appellate court panel late last week ruled that federal regulators improperly set risk-retention requirements for managers of collateralized loan obligations. The ruling overturned a decision by a lower court but won’t take effect immediately as the federal government could appeal.

Ginnie Mae this week warned nine VA lenders suspected of engaging in loan churning to each develop a plan to slow the rapid pace of prepayments they have triggered in the agency’s securitized loan pools. According to Ginnie, the issuers were directed individually to deliver correction action plans containing measures that could be deployed immediately to bring prepayment speeds in line with market peers. The agency told issuers they would be barred from multi-issuer pools if they do not come up with a plan. Participation would be allowed only in the agency’s custom pools. The latest action builds off the Ginnie Mae/VA Loan Churn Task Force, which has been working since September to resolve the churning problem. “We have an obligation to take necessary measures to prevent the lending practices of a few from impairing the performance of our multi-issuer securities, and thus raising the ... [ Chart ]

The Department of Veterans Affairs will require lenders to provide early disclosures to veterans seeking to refinance into a VA Interest Rate Reduction Refinance Loan. The new policy aims to ensure that the VA streamline refi loan they sought would actually lower their monthly mortgage payments and is not just a scam for lenders to charge higher fees. Loan churning, or serial refinancing, is at the root of the VA policy change. Churning refers to multiple refinancing of an unseasoned mortgage loan within a very short time, often within six months of origination. Serial refinancing may add more payments and interest to the new loan, prolonging debt repayment, and can strip equity. It also potentially raises the risk of default by the borrower. In addition, the risk of prepayment could affect pricing of Ginnie Mae securities, which could cause lenders to charge higher rates on VA loans to make up for the ...

Two recent internal policy memos from the Department of Justice suggest that the agency is reevaluating its approach in two key areas of enforcement, which may significantly affect False Claims Act litigation in FHA cases. Issued last month (one was actually leaked), the memos pertain to the dismissal of frivolous whistleblower cases when the government declines to intervene, and the prohibition of DOJ attorneys relying on an entity’s noncompliance with agency guidance as presumptive or conclusive evidence that the entity violated the law. Written by Michael Granston, director of the DOJ’s Commercial Litigation Branch, Fraud Section, the leaked Jan. 10 memo directs federal prosecutors to consider dismissing meritless FCA complaints by whistleblowers when considering whether DOJ should intervene in the ...

FHA delinquencies rose sharply in Puerto Rico following the devastation brought by hurricanes Maria and Irma last year. At the end of 2017, 28.8 percent of FHA mortgages on the island were at some stage of delinquency, including 15.8 percent that have fallen 90 days behind on their mortgage payments. Deutsche Bank Securities analysts believe the spike in delinquency rates overall is “a short-term phenomenon.” They noted that FHA, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have declared temporary moratoria on evictions and foreclosures in Puerto Rico and other hurricane-ravaged regions. Issuer exposures in devastated areas remain unclear and Ginnie Mae has not updated its MBS hurricane exposure data since October last year. In the initial disclosure, the agency reported 9.7 percent (1,066,028 loans) of its total MBS portfolio were impacted by Harvey, Irma and Maria. The affected loans’ unpaid principal ...

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.

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 ...