QUESTION:
We are a
mortgage servicer. We subservice about $8 billion. Our servicing quality
control audits have been picking up compliance issues, particularly
overcharging late fees and charging consumers fees that should have been waived
per the CARES Act.
The CFPB's
recent Supervisory Highlights specifically mention these two issues in their
examination audits. We have no wish to have CFPB examiners identify such
findings in their audits.
We have been
through three audit firms for servicing quality control. But only the current
one picked up on these issues. Little good it does us since we've been making
these mistakes for years! And our clients are going through MORA reviews. Some
did not do servicing quality control, so they did not pick up on the problem.
Others have, and now they are threatening to leave us.
We know you
offer servicing quality control, so you have expertise in this area. We read
your article on servicing QC and found it very helpful. Our concern now is to
get a description of the implications of these process issues.
What are the
compliance implications of overcharging late fees in loan servicing?
What
regulatory issues arise when we charge consumers fees that should have been
waived per the CARES Act?
ANSWER:
The article
you refer to is Servicing Quality Control: Why's and Wherefore's. That article
dealt with a mortgage lender that did not conduct servicing quality control of
the sub-servicer. Interestingly, like some of your clients, that lender seemed
to indulge in the philosophy of "unknown known;" that is, because it
did not do the audits, it was unaware of the risks. Being unaware of known
risks – certainly when the risk are knowable – is a recipe for failure.
Your clients
should be conducting servicing quality control of their portfolio being
serviced by you.[i] This is an oversight function. They cannot evade liability
by pushing it to the servicer. If you are a Fannie Seller/Servicer, it is a
relationship mandate that the Fannie's MORA team will check.
Lenders who
use sub-servicers retain my firm to conduct Servicing Quality Control. A high
level of expertise is needed; not just any quality control auditor can do these
reviews, and most do not. Interested lenders and servicers can download our
Servicing QC presentation HERE. Or contact me HERE, and we'll arrange a call.
I think you
will have a hard time holding onto clients, not only the clients who did the
servicing QC audits but also those who did not do them. Especially those
clients that did not conduct servicing quality control audits and are involved
in Fannie Mae MORA audits,[ii] as they now face a double-barreled issue: (1)
they did not do the oversight requirement of servicing quality control, so MORA
will write them up for not doing so, and (2) as their sub-servicer, you are
going to give them servicing QC reports that show ostensible compliance issues
that the CFPB has identified to be regulatory violations.
The
compliance issues that the CPFB has found pervasive come under the regulatory
categories of violations of UDAAP and Regulation Z, the latter triggering
violations related to junk fees.
Overall, the
Bureau's examiners found that servicers overcharged junk fees that were
unlawful, repeatedly charged for unnecessary property inspection visits,
misrepresented that consumers owed PMI premiums, charged consumers fees that
should have been waived, charged consumers for PMI after it should have been
removed, and charged late fees after sending periodic statements listing a $0
late fee.
I will
address the two you mention, referencing the Supervisory Highlights[iii] you've
noted. The CFPB's examiners found multiple servicing compliance failures
relating to UDAAP and Regulation Z violations.
What are the compliance implications of
overcharging late fees in loan servicing?
Overcharging late Freights is assessing late freights in
excess of the quantities allowed by their loan agreements. It is an unfair acts or practices violation.
Specifically, where loan agreements included a maximum permitted late fee
amount, the servicers failed to input these late fee caps into their systems.
The
servicers charged the maximum permissible late freights under the applicable
state laws, which constantly exceeded the specific caps in the loan agreements.
This happened because the systems did not reflect the maximum late fee amounts
permitted by their loan agreements. Servicers cause substantial injury to
consumers when they impose these excessive late fees.
Consumers
can't reasonably avoid injury because they do not control how servicers
calculate late fees; indeed, they have no reason to anticipate that servicers
would impose excessive late fees. The CFPB's position is that charging
exorbitant late fees does not benefit consumers or the competition.
Consequently, examiners concluded that servicers also violated Regulation Z by
issuing periodic statements that included inaccurate late payment fees, since
they exceeded the amounts allowed by the loan agreements.[iv] In general, if this
is your situation, you can expect the CFPB to require you to waive or refund
late fee overcharges to consumers and correct the periodic statements.
What regulatory issues arise when we charge
consumers fees that should have been waived per the CARES Act?
The Corona virus
Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) directs servicers of
federally backed mortgages to grant consumers a forbearance from monthly
mortgage payments if the consumer is experiencing financial hardship resulting
from the COVID-19 emergency.
During the
time a consumer is in forbearance, no fees, penalties, or additional interest
beyond scheduled amounts are to be assessed. While the CARES Act prohibits
fees, penalties, or additional interest beyond scheduled amounts during a forbearance
period, consumers sometimes accrue these amounts during periods when they are
not in forbearance.
For
instance, a servicer is permitted to charge a late fee if a consumer was
delinquent in May 2020 and then entered a forbearance in June 2020.
In the case
of FHA loans, when consumers exit CARES Act forbearance and enter certain
permanent loss mitigation options, the HUD (Department of Housing and Urban
Development) requires servicers in certain circumstances to waive late charges,
fees, and penalties accrued outside of forbearance periods.
The CFPB's
examiners found that servicers engage in unfair acts or practices when they
fail to waive certain late charges, fees, and penalties accrued outside
forbearance periods, where required by HUD, upon a consumer entering a
permanent COVID-19 loss mitigation option.
This is not the first time the CFPB has cited UDAAP violations relating to charging fees to consumers during a CARES Act forbearance.[v] The CFPB's position is that the failure to waive the late charges, fees, and penalties constitutes a substantial injury to consumers. This injury is not reasonably avoidable by consumers because they have no reason to anticipate that their servicer would fail to follow HUD requirements, and consumers lacked reasonable means to avoid the charges. This harm outweighed any benefit to consumers or competition. You can expect the CFPB to require proof that you have improved your system controls. In addition, you'll need to waive all improper charges and provide refunds to consumers.
Post a Comment