InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
CFPB Announces First Public Enforcement Action; Issues Related Compliance Bulletin
On July 18, the CFPB announced its first public enforcement action - a Consent Order entered into by a major credit card issuer to resolve allegations that the issuer’s vendors deceptively marketed ancillary products such as payment protection and credit monitoring. The OCC made a corresponding enforcement announcement and released a Cease and Desist Order and Civil Money Penalty to resolve related charges. Under the CFPB order, the issuer will refund approximately $140 million to roughly two million customers, and will pay a $25 million penalty. The OCC order requires restitution of approximately $150 million (of which $140 million overlaps with the CFPB order) and an additional $35 million civil money penalty. Under both agencies’ actions, the issuer is prohibited from selling and marketing certain ancillary products until it obtains approval to do so from the regulators, and the issuer must take specific actions to enhance compliance with consumer financial laws.
Concurrently, the CFPB issued Bulletin 2012-06, which states that the CFPB expects supervised institutions and their vendors to offer ancillary products in compliance with federal consumer financial laws. The guidance cites “CFPB supervisory experience [that] indicates that some credit card issuers have employed deceptive promotional practices when marketing” such products, including (i) failing to adequately disclose terms and conditions, (ii) enrolling customers without their consent, and (iii) billing for services not performed. The Bulletin reviews applicable federal law and outlines the compliance program components that the CFPB expects supervised institutions to maintain.
OCC Identifies Risks Facing National Banks, Federal Savings Associations
On July 5, the OCC’s National Risk Committee issued its Semiannual Risk Perspective, which identifies issues that pose threats to the safety and soundness of banks. According to the report, the three major risks facing national banks and federal savings associations are (i) the lingering effects of a weak housing market, (ii) revenue challenges related to slow economic growth and market volatility, and (iii) the potential that banks may take excessive risks in an effort to improve profitability. Within each of the three major risk areas, the report identifies “key risk themes.” For example, with regard to the aftereffects of the housing market bust, the report observes as themes: (i) flaws in foreclosure processing that are exacting large remediation costs, record penalties, and reputational damage for mortgage servicers, (ii) continued above average rates of delinquency and charge-off for housing-related loans, and (iii) persistently high commercial real estate vacancy rates and high levels of problem assets. This is the first semiannual risk report published by the OCC; it is based on data as of December 31, 2011.
Regulators Extend Foreclosure Review, Issue Financial Remediation Framework, Publish Status Report
On June 21, the OCC and the Federal Reserve Board announced that the deadline for borrowers to seek review of foreclosures under the Independent Foreclosure Review program has been extended through September 30, 2012. At the same time, the regulators released a Financial Remediation Framework that sets out specific recommendations for remediation of financial injury for servicing errors, depending on the type of error and whether the foreclosure was in progress or complete at the time of remediation. Independent consultants will use the Framework to recommend remediation for financial injury identified during the Independent Foreclosure Review. Each servicer will prepare its own remediation plan based on independent consultant recommendations, which must be approved by the federal banking regulators. Also on June 21, the OCC published its second interim report on the status of the Independent Foreclosure Review and actions required under the April 2011 consent orders.
Federal Agencies Announce New Mortgage-Related Policies to Support Military Homeowners
On June 21, the CFPB, the federal prudential banking regulators, and the FHFA announced new policies to support servicemember homeowners. The CFPB, the Federal Reserve Board, the FDIC, the NCUA, and the OCC issued joint guidance that identifies specific servicing practices deemed by regulators to present risks to servicemembers. For servicemember homeowners who have received Permanent Change of Station Orders, the guidance instructs servicers to maintain adequate policies and procedures disallowing the identified practices. The guidance also informs servicers that if an agency determines that a servicer has engaged in any acts or practices that are unfair, deceptive, or abusive, or that otherwise violate federal consumer financial laws, the agency will take appropriate supervisory and enforcement actions. Concurrent with the regulators’ announcement, the FHFA announced that military homeowners with Permanent Change of Station Orders and with Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac loans will be eligible to sell their homes in a short sale even if they are current on their mortgage. Under the new policy, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will not pursue a deficiency judgment or any cash contribution or promissory note from covered servicemembers for any property purchased on or before June 30, 2012.
OCC Adopts Interim Final Lending Limit Rule
On June 20, the OCC adopted an Interim Final Rule that applies the OCCs existing lending limit rule to certain credit exposures arising from derivative transactions and securities financing transactions. The Dodd-Frank Act added credit exposures arising from a derivative transaction, repurchase agreement, reverse repurchase agreement, securities lending transaction, or securities borrowing transaction to the definition of loans and extensions of credit for purposes of the lending limit. The interim final rule implements the new definition, effective July 21, 2012, but gives national banks and savings association until January 1, 2013 to comply. The interim final rule permits use in certain circumstances of look-up tables for measuring the exposures for each transaction type, a change that is expected to reduce the burden on smaller institutions. The OCC is accepting comments on the interim final rule through August 6, 2012.
Federal Bank Regulators Seek Comment on Three Proposed Regulatory Capital Rules, Finalize Market Risk Rule
On June 12, the Federal Reserve Board, the OCC, and the FDIC jointly issued three proposed rules, which would implement the risk-based and leverage capital requirements in the Basel III framework and relevant provisions mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act. The first proposed rule would, among other things, (i) raise the minimum regulatory capital levels; (ii) introduce an additional common equity capital buffer; and (iii) adopt a stricter definition of capital. Taken together, these requirements would require banking organizations to increase the quality and quantity of their regulatory capital. The second proposed rule incorporates aspects of Basel II’s Standardized Approach to enhance the risk-sensitivity of a banking organization’s risk-weighted assets calculations. In addition, the second proposed rule sets forth alternatives that would replace the use of external credit ratings, a change required by Section 939A of the Dodd-Frank Act. The third proposed rule would apply to banking organizations that are currently subject to the advanced approaches rule or to the market risk rule, and for the first time, to savings and loan holding companies that meet the relevant size, foreign exposure, and trading activity thresholds. This rule seeks to enhance the risk-based capital rules’ sensitivity to trading risks and also would eliminate the use of external ratings as required by Section 939A of the Dodd-Frank Act. Comments on each of the proposed rules can be submitted through September 7, 2012.
Concurrent with the proposed rules, the federal regulators released a final rule regarding market risk. By amending the calculation of market risk, the final rule seeks to better characterize the risks facing a particular institution and to help ensure the adequacy of capital related to the institution’s market risk-related positions. The final rule incorporates comments received in response to a January 2011 proposed rule, as well as a December 2011 amended proposed rule, and applies to a banking organization with aggregate trading assets and liabilities equal to 10 percent of total assets, or $1 billion or more. According to the regulators, the most significant change from the proposals relates to the methods for determining the capital requirements for securitization positions. The final rule will impose greater capital requirements on the more subordinate tranches in a securitization because the final rule mechanism to calculate the capital charges on securitization exposures when the underlying pool of assets demonstrates credit weakness was altered to focus on delinquent exposures rather than on cumulative losses. This rule takes effect January 1, 2013.
OCC Finalizes Rule to Replace Certain Credit Rating References with Alternative Creditworthiness Standards.
On June 13, pursuant to Section 939A of the Dodd-Frank Act, the OCC published a final rule with regard to regulations applicable to investment securities, securities offerings, and foreign bank capital equivalency deposits. The final rule is identical to the rule proposed by the OCC in November 2011 and will require national banks to assess whether a security issuer has an "adequate capacity to meet financial commitments under the security for the projected life of the asset or exposure," a standard which may be met if the risk of default by the issuer is low and timely repayment of principal and interest is expected. For federal savings associations, the definition of "investment grade" would cross-reference the requirement established by the FDIC. Simultaneously, the OCC finalized guidance to outline measures (i) banks should put in place to demonstrate they have properly verified their investments, and (ii) institutions should put in place to demonstrate their compliance with due diligence requirements when making investments and reviewing investment portfolios. Specific due diligence factors will depend on the type of security, and firms will need to adjust the depth of due diligence to match the credit quality of the security, its complexity, and the size of the investment.
CFPB, Prudential Regulators Release Supervisory Coordination Memorandum
On June 4, the CFPB and the federal banking prudential regulators the Federal Reserve Board, the National Credit Union Administration, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the Office of Comptroller of the Currency jointly released a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) meant to facilitate coordination of supervisory activities. The Dodd-Frank Act grants the CFPB exclusive authority to examine insured depository institutions and insured credit unions with more than $10 billion of total assets (and their affiliates) for compliance with federal consumer financial laws. The prudential regulators retained supervisory authority for all other applicable laws for such institutions, and all supervisory responsibilities for institutions with $10 billion or less in total assets. The Dodd-Frank Act also requires the CFPB and the prudential regulators to share supervisory information and work to minimize regulatory burden by coordinating examinations. The recent MOU seeks to implement those statutory requirements by establishing guidelines for simultaneous examinations and a framework for sharing certain supervisory information. The MOU also sets forth, among other things, a process by which covered institutions can request separate examinations.
New York Thrift Charged with Mortgage Fraud by Manhattan District Attorney
On May 31, the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office (DA) announced charges against Abacus Federal Savings Bank (Bank) and nineteen of its former employees for their alleged involvement in a securities and mortgage fraud scheme from 2005 to 2010 that resulted in the sale of “hundreds of millions of dollars worth of fraudulent loans” to Fannie Mae. The DA charged the Bank with allegedly falsifying mortgage application documents, primarily for immigrants working in cash-only businesses, by inflating their income, assets, and job titles, as well as falsifying employment verifications and other income sources to meet investor guidelines to enable the Bank to sell loans to Fannie Mae. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Internal Revenue Service, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, and Office of the Inspector General provided assistance and cooperation with the investigation as part of their participation in the Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities Working Group.
Federal Prudential Regulators Issue Final Stress Test Guidance
On May 14, the Federal Reserve Board, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation issued guidance on stress tests for banks with more than $10 billion in total consolidated assets. The final guidance provides, in a manner largely consistent with the proposed guidance, principles for banks to follow when conducting stress tests, including: (i) a stress testing framework, (ii) general stress testing principles, (iii) stress testing approaches and applications, (iv) the importance of stress testing in assessing the adequacy of capital and liquidity, and (v) the need for internal governance and controls over the stress testing framework. The regulators amended the final guidance to clarify certain issues raised during the comment period, including changes to (i) incorporate an additional principle for stress testing, (ii) clarify application of the guidance to U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banking organizations, (iii) clarify the role of a bank’s liabilities and operational risk in conducting a stress test, (iv) explain that senior management should have the primary responsibility for stress testing implementation and technical design, and (v) clarify that a banking organization’s minimum annual review and assessment should ensure that stress testing coverage is comprehensive, tests are relevant and current, methodologies are sound, and results are properly considered. In a separate announcement, the banking regulators explicitly addressed concerns raised by community bankers by explaining that community banks are neither required nor expected to conduct the stress tests described above. However, the statement stresses that all banking organizations, regardless of size, should have the capacity to analyze the potential impact of adverse outcomes on their financial condition.