Tag Archives: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Reverse Mortgage Lowdown

Posted on by

17069-a-woman-and-older-man-sitting-at-a-table-pv

Athene quoted me in Is a Reverse Mortgage Right for You? It opens,

Experts weigh the pros and cons of this loan—to help you make a smart choice.

For homeowners age 62 and older who have a significant amount of equity (appraised value minus mortgage balance) in their homes, a reverse mortgage can seem like an attractive option. Simply put, a reverse mortgage allows you to convert a portion of the equity in your home into cash, without having to sell your home. But this type of loan isn’t right for everyone. Here’s help determining if a reverse mortgage is the smart choice for you.

Pros: A reverse mortgage is a loan against your home equity, which you can take as a lump sum payment, a monthly payment, or a line of credit. The loan is paid off when you no longer live in the home. “It allows a homeowner to access home equity in the present in order to supplement current income,” says David Reiss, a professor of law at Brooklyn Law School who teaches residential real estate courses.

Consider this loan if you would like to stay in your current home and

  • Have lived in your home for a long time and plan to use the equity to supplement Social Security and other investment income streams
  • Have other assets and are not using this as a loan of last resort
  • Might not be able to access the cash you need in emergencies

Cons: These loans aren’t cheap, says Scott Withiam, housing counseling supervisor at American Consumer Credit Counseling, Inc. Plus, the industry that sells them has been under scrutiny from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau for deceptive practices. “The reverse mortgage industry has had more than its share of shady operators who are drawn to all that equity that seniors have amassed,” says Reiss. “Homeowners considering a reverse mortgage should make sure to review the terms of the transaction with someone whose financial judgment he or she trusts.”

Wednesday’s Academic Roundup

Posted on by

Why Have a Complaint Window?

Posted on by

733px-Complaint_Department_Grenade

Angela Littwin of the the University of Texas School of Law has posted Why Process Complaints? Then and Now to SSRN. The abstract reads,

The creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) established the first comprehensive federal forum for processing consumer complaints about financial products and services. The CFPB not only handles consumers complaints; it also publishes a database that includes most complaints and their initial resolutions. For a symposium honoring the scholarship of Professor William C. Whitford, I analyze the CFPB’s complaint system and database using a framework he developed to explore the reasons why government agencies process consumer complaints and whether these reasons justify the resources that complaint processing entails. Whitford and his co-author proposed three “obvious” reasons to process consumer complaints: to settle consumer disputes; to inform the agency’s regulatory activities; and to generate good will for the agency among constituencies such as consumers, government actors, and the companies the CFPB regulates.

I find that the CFPB has mixed success in providing an alternative dispute resolution forum for consumers. I am, however, missing key information for this evaluation. The CFPB Consumer Complaint Database contains the financial institutions’ responses to consumer complaints but there is almost no information available about any follow up actions the CFPB takes. The CFPB is particularly strong on the regulatory function. It makes significant use of complaint data in its regulatory roles and evinces a commitment to ensuring that companies are handling complaints well. Last comes good will. With respect to public good will, I was unable to find much evidence one way or the other. As for good will among government actors, the CFPB appropriately appears not to apply different treatment to complaints referred by government entities or officials. Finally, the CFPB’s complaint data reveal an intriguing possibility that the process may provide some legitimization of financial institutions’ complaint resolutions. But given that consumer financial companies are pushing for the CFPB’s elimination, working to generate good will among financial institutions in this way may be entirely reasonable on the CFPB’s part. This is especially true because the CFPB has made important complaints decisions – such as publishing the database without redacting company names – despite financial companies’ vociferous objections.

I was interested by the “argument regarding bureaucratic companies . . . that a complaint process can find and resolve violations of the bureaucracy’s own rules.” (944) But Littwin also notes that the key issue is the “ineffectiveness in handling the harder cases, such as those raising issues of fact or law.” (Id.) We are still a long way off from figuring out the optimal system for addressing consumer complaints, but this article helps to frame the issue nicely.

Thursday’s Advocacy & Think Tank Round-Up

Posted on by
  • Enterprise Community Partners’ latest blog post in the Spotlight on HOME Investment Partnership series highlights the experience of 22 year old Lani, a single mother of two boy’s, who was able to transition from homelessness to stability with the help of Project Independence, a program administered by Adobe Services in Alameda California, partially funded by HOME.  Enterprise is highlighting the effectiveness of the program because deep budget cuts threaten to reverse the success of HOME.
  • The Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) released a letter sent to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) expressing concerns that the recently implemented Know Before You Owe/Truth in Lending Act/Real Estate Settlement Procedures Acts (TILA/RESPA) regulations are causing widespread market disruptions in the mortgage industry, and that lenders are worried about mistakes and potential liability – causing a decline in loan approval rates and ultimately liquidity.  The CFPB’s Director, Corday, issued a letter in response, acknowledging that the new rules will require extensive operational adjustment and stating: “examiners will be squarely focused on whether companies have made good faith efforts to come into compliance” and that initial examinations will be “corrective and diagnostic, rather than punitive.”
  • The National Association of Realtors (NAR)’s Pending Home Sales Index (a forward looking index) is down slightly for November, the fourth straight monthly decline.  Year over year the metric is up, for the 15th straight month. According to NAR the decline is attributable to tight inventory and rising home prices.
  • NAR’s RealtorMag predicts the top cities for first time homebuyers in 2016, among the contenders are Orlando, Florida; DeMoines, Iowa; and Banton Rouge, Louisiana.

P2P, Mortgage Market Messiah?

Posted on by

Monty Python's Life of Brian

As this is my last post of 2015, let me make a prediction about the 2016 mortgage market. Money’s Edge quoted me in Can P2P Lending Revive the Home Mortgage Market? It opens,

You just got turned down for a home mortgage – join the club. At one point the Mortgage Bankers Association estimated that about half of all applications were given the thumbs down. That was in the darkest housing days of 2008 but many still whisper that rejections remain plentiful as tougher qualifying rules – requiring more proof of income – stymie a lot of would be buyers.

And then there are the many millions who may not apply at all, out of fear of rejection.

Here’s the money question: is new-style P2P lending the solution for these would-be homeowners?

The question is easy, the answers are harder.

CPA Ravi Ramnarain pinpoints what’s going on: “Although it is well documented that banks and traditional mortgage lenders are extremely risk-averse in offering the average consumer an opportunity for a home loan, one must also consider that the recent Great Recession is still very fresh in the minds of a lot of people. Thus the fact that banks and traditional lenders are requiring regular customers to provide impeccable credit scores, low debt-to-income (DTI) ratios, and, in many cases, 20 percent down payments is not surprising. Person-to-person lending does indeed provide these potential customers with an alternate avenue to realize the ultimate dream of owning a home.”

Read that again: the CPA is saying that for some on whom traditional mortgage doors slammed shut there may be hope in the P2P, non-traditional route.

Meantime, David Reiss, a professor at Brooklyn Law, sounded a downer note: “I am pretty skeptical of the ability of P2P lending to bring lots of new capital to residential real estate market in the short term. As opposed to sharing economy leaders Uber and Airbnb which ignore and fight local and state regulation of their businesses, residential lending is heavily regulated by the federal government. It is hard to imagine that an innovative and large stream of capital can just flow into this market without complying with the many, many federal regulations that govern residential mortgage lending. These regulations will increase costs and slow the rate of growth of such a new stream of capital. That being said, as the P2P industry matures, it may figure out a cost-effective way down the line to compete with traditional lenders.”

From the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) to Fannie and Freddie, even the U.S. Treasury and the FDIC, a lot of federal fingers wrap around traditional mortgages. Much of it is well intended – the aims are heightened consumer protections while also controlling losses from defaults and foreclosures – but an upshot is a marketplace that is slow to embrace change.

Troubles with TRID

Posted on by

"The Trouble with Tribbles" Stark Trek Episode

Law360 quoted me in Rule-Driven Home Sale Slump Could Be Temporary. It reads, in part,

A slump in existing home sales in November can be traced to the implementation of a new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau mortgage closing regime, although experts say that most of the closing delays could ease as the industry and consumers get more comfortable with the new rules.

The National Association of Realtors released a report Tuesday saying that while a continued lack of inventory of existing homes for sale and other factors helped drive down the number of completed home sales in November, the number of signed contracts for home purchases remained relatively constant. With that in mind, the Realtors pointed to the CFPB’s TILA-RESPA Integrated Disclosure rule, which combined two key mortgage disclosure forms and went into effect in October, as the reason for the slowdown.

That slowdown was anticipated because real estate agents and lenders had reported difficulties in complying with the rule, which combined closing forms required by the Truth In Lending Act and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, prior to it coming into effect. However, experts say that the closing delays are likely to decrease as the industry understands the rule better and technology to comply with it improves.

“It’s like a python swallowing a boar … the boar has to work its way through the python,” said David Reiss, a professor at Brooklyn Law School.

The National Association of Realtors reported that existing home sales slumped to 4.76 million nationwide in November from 5.32 million in October, a fall of 10.5 percent. That October figure was also revised down from an initial estimate of 5.36 million.

The November figure was also down from the 4.95 million existing sales figure from the same period last year, and put total existing home sales 3.8 percent behind the total from last year, the National Association of Realtors said.

While the real estate industry group cited the usual factors of tight supply and inflated prices in many regions of the country as a reason for the slowdown in existing home sales, it also cited the TRID rule’s implementation as a reason for the slump.

*     *     *

Most lenders, real estate agents and other market participants had already begun to factor in the new TRID requirements in the closing process, adding 15 days to the usual 30-day closing process, said Richard J. Andreano, a partner at Ballard Spahr LLP.

“When I saw the November drop, I thought that was a natural consequence of correct planning,” he said.

Despite the slowdown, Yun said in the NAR release that because contracts were signed and the problems came down to issues with closing.

“As long as closing time frames don’t rise even further, it’s likely more sales will register to this month’s total, and November’s large dip will be more of an outlier,” he said.

The CFPB, Reiss and Andreano all agreed that at least some of the delays will work out of the system as the industry gets more accustomed to TRID’s changes.

“The ones that have adjusted have done it by adding a lot of staff, either reallocating or hiring and assigning them to the closing process to get it done,” Andreano said.

And the delays that remain may not be a bad thing, Reiss said.

“It really keeps consumers from being surprised at the closing table. This gives a little bit more time to the consumer where they’re not getting waylaid,” he said.

Monday’s Adjudication Roundup

Posted on by