InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
Eleventh Circuit Holds No Private Right of Action Under HAMP
On April 19, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that there is no implied private right of action under the federal Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP). Miller v. Chase Home Financing, LLC, No. 11-15166 (11th Cir. Apr. 19, 2012). In this case, the servicer agreed to enter into a temporary modification of the borrowers mortgage under HAMP, but later notified the borrower that it would not extend a permanent modification. The borrower alleged that the servicer failed to comply with its obligations under HAMP and sued the servicer claiming (i) breach of contract, (ii) breach of implied covenant of food faith and fair dealing, and (iii) promissory estoppel. The district court dismissed the case because (i) HAMP does not provide an express or implied private right of action and (ii) the claims otherwise fail as a matter of law. On appeal, the court upheld the district court dismissal, holding, without oral argument, that there is no discernable legislative intent to create a private right of action and noting that such a right would contravene the purpose of HAMP as servicers fearing litigation would limit their participation in the program. Last month, the Seventh Circuit held that a plaintiff bringing claims against a servicer based on similar fact pattern could maintain a suit against the servicer. That case is distinguishable, however, because while the borrower was not able to state a cause of action for a breach of HAMP directly, the borrower properly pled claims for breach of contract and promissory estoppel based on the servicers promise to offer a permanent modification. In that case the Seventh Circuit also held that the borrower sufficiently pled fraudulent misrepresentation and state statutory fraud claims, and that those claims were not preempted by federal law.
CFPB Clarifies Transitional Licensing for Mortgage Loan Originators
On April 19, the CFPB issued Bulletin 2012-05 to clarify issues related to the transitional licensing of mortgage loan originators under the SAFE Act and Regulation H. According to the Bulletin, (i) states are allowed to provide a transitional license to an individual with a valid license from another state, but (ii) states are prohibited from providing a transitional license for a registered loan originator who leaves a federally regulated financial institution to act as a loan originator while pursuing a state license.
NFHA Files Second REO Administrative Complaint
On April 17, the National Fair Housing Alliance and certain of its member organizations (collectively NFHA) filed an administrative complaint with the Department of Housing and Urban Development alleging discriminatory practices with regard to real estate owned (REO) properties in violation of the Fair Housing Act. This is the second of several complaints and lawsuits the NFHA is expected to file with regard to these alleged practices.
CFPB Files Briefs in Three TILA Actions
On April 13, the CFPB filed amicus briefs in TILA cases pending in the Third, Fourth, and Eighth Circuits. As it did previously in a brief filed in the Tenth Circuit, the CPFB argued that borrowers who do not receive the material disclosures required by TILA are not required to file suit within the three-year rescission period. Rather, the CFPB argues that a borrower can rescind the transaction as long as they provide notice to the lender of the cancellation within three years of consummation.
FHFA Calls for Streamlined Short Sales, Freddie Mac Updates Short Sale Requirements
On April 17, the FHFA directed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to develop procedures for streamlining short sales, deeds-in-lieu and deeds-for-lease in order to avoid foreclosures. Under the new Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac policies, servicers will be required to (i) review and respond to requests for short sales within 30 calendar days from receipt of a short sale offer and a complete borrower response package, (ii) provide weekly status updates to the borrower if the short sale offer is still under review after 30 calendar days, and (iii) make and communicate final decisions to the borrower within 60 calendar days of receipt of the offer and complete borrower response package. Also on April 17, Freddie Mac issued Servicing Guide Bulletin 2012-09, which clarifies existing requirements and adds new minimum requirements for communication timelines for Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives Short Sales and short sales processed under Guide Chapter B65. Servicers are encouraged to begin implementing the new requirements as soon as possible, but must do so for all new borrower evaluations conducted on or after June 15, 2012.
CFPB Previews Mortgage Servicing Rules
On April 9, the CFPB previewed its upcoming mortgage servicing rules, which likely will be proposed this summer and finalized in January 2013. The key aspects of the proposal relate broadly to (i) monthly mortgage statements, (ii) ARM adjustment disclosures, (iii) force-placed insurance, (iv) payment crediting, (v) error resolution and borrower inquiries, and (vi) borrower outreach and borrower information. The majority of the details were provided in an outline prepared for a Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) panel, which will consider the potential impact of the planned rules on small businesses. The outline includes model forms related to periodic statements, ARM reset notices, and force-placed insurance notices, which the CFPB has been testing in recent months. The CFPB release also included questions directed to the small entity representatives in order to assist the SBREFA panel in understanding the potential economic impacts of the particular proposals under consideration by the CFPB. Generally, the servicing proposals incorporate statutory changes imposed by the Dodd-Frank Act, which would go into effect in January 2013 unless final rules are issued on or before that date. The concepts in the proposal that do not address specific Dodd-Frank requirements are consistent with servicing requirements imposed by recent mortgage servicing consent orders and/or recent requirements for servicing delinquent loans owned by or serviced on behalf of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac (see, e.g., Federal Reserve Board Consent Orders and Fannie Mae Ann. SVC 2011-08R).
Florida Appeals Court Holds Servicer's Verified Allegation Insufficient to Establish Standing in Foreclosure Suit
On April 4, the District Court of Appeal for the Fourth District of Florida reversed a trial court decision requiring a commercial borrower to make payments to the servicer of a securitized trust pending a foreclosure action because the servicer did not properly plead standing. Elston/Leetsdale, LLC v. CWCapital Asset Management LLC, No. 4D11-3151, 2012 WL 1108531 (Fla. 4th DCA Apr. 4, 2012). In this case, the borrower executed a promissory note as evidence of a loan, and secured payment by executing a mortgage, security agreement, and an assignment of lease and rents. The lender assigned its rights to a trust company, which in turn assigned the rights to another trust, who is now the owner and holder of all the loan documents. The servicer for the trust filed a foreclosure action in its own name, alleging in the verified complaint that it was duly authorized by the trust to take all action to protect the interests of the trust. The servicer also sought continued payment pending the foreclosure action, which the trial court granted. The borrower challenged the servicer’s standing to bring suit on behalf of the trust, which the trial court rejected. The appeals court found that the servicer’s evidence in support of its standing, which was nothing more than its own allegations and affidavit, was insufficient. Instead the court noted that in other cases in which courts found that a servicer had established standing, the trustee joined the action or ratified the servicer’s commencement of the lawsuit through an affidavit. The appellate court reversed the trial court payment order and remanded for further proceedings.
Federal Reserve Offers Policy Guidance for REO Rental Programs
On April 5, the FRB released a policy statement that reiterates its general policy that banking organizations should make good faith efforts to dispose of foreclosed properties, also known as REO properties, as soon as practicable. However, under current market conditions, the FRB explains that banking organizations may hold and rent residential REO properties within legal holding-period limits without demonstrating continuous active marketing of the property for sale provided suitable policies and procedures are followed. The guidance offers risk management and compliance considerations for renting REO properties, as well as specific expectations for large-scale REO rental programs. The FRB release also points out that REO rental properties may meet the definition of community development under the Community Revitalization Act (CRA), and, if so, a banking organization would receive favorable CRA consideration.
Federal District Court in Florida Lacks Jurisdiction Over TILA and RESPA Claims After State Court Foreclosure Judgment
On April 2, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida dismissed an action brought by a borrower against her mortgage lender alleging violations of TILA and RESPA and seeking a declaratory judgment that the lender holds no interest in the property. Chipman v. US Bank, N.A., No. 10-cv-483, 2012 WL 1093144 (M.D. Fla. April 2, 2012). The borrower brought the pro se action alleging that a forensic audit revealed certain TILA violations. Upon discovering those violations, the borrower submitted two Qualified Written Requests, at least one of which was not acknowledged by the lender in the time frame established by RESPA. The borrower brought suit seeking a recession of the loan. The court dismissed the case, taking judicial notice of a final foreclosure judgment in state court and holding that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine applies. Applying that doctrine, the court found that it is precluded from reviewing the state court final foreclosure judgment because (i) the parties to the two actions are the same, (ii) the state court ruling was a final judgment on the merits, and (iii) the borrower could have raised the TILA and RESPA claims in the state court action.
Fannie Mae Provides Guidance Regarding Chicago Vacant Property Ordinance and Payment of Homeowners' Association Dues and Condo Assessments
On April 11, Fannie Mae published Servicing Guide Lender Letter LL-2012-04, which follows up on a previous notice regarding the City of Chicagos (the City) vacant property ordinance. Effective May 1, 2012, servicers will be required to submit expense reimbursement requests using the Cash Disbursement Request and updated expense designations for all expenses related to the ordinance that are not otherwise required by the Servicing Guide. The Letter attaches a list of the expense designations. Fannie Mae reminds servicers that payments to the City in connection with the ordinance must be made under protest by sending a written communication to the City with the registration fee. Further, (i) all ordinance-related expenses must be submitted to Fannie Mae within 10 business days of the date they are paid by the servicer, (ii) ordinance-related expenses incurred from November 19, 2011 through April 30, 2012 must be submitted for reimbursement using the new expense categories no later than May 31, 2012, (iii) servicers will not be reimbursed for any penalties, fines, expenses or interest assessed by the City for failure to comply with the ordinance, and (iv) servicers must submit a request for pre-approval for ordinance expenses that exceed the allowable limits on or after May 1, 2012. Also on April 11, Fannie Mae published Servicing Guide Announcement SVC-2012-05 to provide guidance regarding payment of homeowners association (HOA) dues and condo assessments. Effective July 1, 2012, servicers must ensure that any priority liens for delinquent HOA dues and assessments on acquired properties are cleared immediately, but no later than 30 days, after the foreclosure sale or acceptance of a deed-in-lieu of foreclosure. The Announcement also revises the reimbursement policy to align with the amount a servicer must pay to protect the lien position and ensure properties are clear of any liens for HOA dues and condo assessments. The Announcement further reminds servicers of their responsibility to continue (i) advancing funds to pay HOA dues and property taxes as they become due following a foreclosure sale and (ii) performing certain property management duties.