Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Expands Foreclosure Protections

cfpb

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Expands Foreclosure Protections
Updated Servicing Rule Provides Surviving Family Members and Other
Homeowners with Same Protections as Original Borrowers

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 4, 2016

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) today finalized new measures to ensure that homeowners and struggling borrowers are treated fairly by mortgage servicers. The updated rule requires servicers to provide certain borrowers with foreclosure protections more than once over the life of the loan, clarifies borrower protections when the servicing of a loan is transferred, and provides important loan information to borrowers in bankruptcy. The changes also help ensure that surviving family members and others who inherit or receive property generally have the same protections under the CFPB’s mortgage servicing rules as the original borrower.

“The Consumer Bureau is committed to ensuring that homeowners and struggling borrowers are treated fairly by mortgage servicers and that no one is wrongly foreclosed upon,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray. “These updates to the rule will give greater protections to mortgage borrowers, particularly surviving family members and other successors in interest, who often are especially vulnerable.”

Mortgage servicers are responsible for collecting payments from the mortgage borrower and forwarding those payments to the owner of the loan. They typically handle customer service, collections, loan modifications, and foreclosures. To address widespread mortgage servicing problems, the CFPB established common-sense rules for servicers that went into effect on January 10, 2014.

The CFPB issued proposed amendments to those rules in November 2014, and the final rule issued today adopts many of the proposed provisions. However, the Bureau made a number of changes in the final rule after considering comments received from the public.

The rule issued today establishes new protections for consumers, including:

  • Requiring servicers to provide certain borrowers with foreclosure protections more than once over the life of the loan: Under the CFPB’s existing rules, a mortgage servicer must give borrowers certain foreclosure protections, including the right to be evaluated under the CFPB’s requirements for options to avoid foreclosure, only once during the life of the loan. Today’s final rule will require that servicers give those protections again for borrowers who have brought their loans current at any time since submitting the prior complete loss mitigation application. This change will be particularly helpful for borrowers who obtain a permanent loan modification and later suffer an unrelated hardship – such as the loss of a job or the death of a family member – that could otherwise cause them to face foreclosure.
  • Expanding consumer protections to surviving family members and other homeowners: If a borrower dies, existing CFPB rules require that servicers have policies and procedures in place to promptly identify and communicate with family members, heirs, or other parties, known as “successors in interest,” who have a legal interest in the home. Today’s final rule establishes a broad definition of successor in interest that generally includes persons who receive property upon the death of a relative or joint tenant; as a result of a divorce or legal separation; through certain trusts; or from a spouse or parent. The final rule ensures that those confirmed as successors in interest will generally receive the same protections under the CFPB’s mortgage servicing rules as the original borrower.
  • Providing more information to borrowers in bankruptcy: Under the CFPB’s existing mortgage rules, servicers do not have to provide periodic statements or early intervention loss mitigation information to borrowers in bankruptcy. Today’s final rule generally requires, subject to certain exemptions, that servicers provide those borrowers periodic statements with specific information tailored for bankruptcy, as well as a modified written early intervention notice to let those borrowers know about loss mitigation options. Servicers also currently do not have to provide early intervention loss mitigation information to borrowers who have told the servicer to stop contacting them under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Today’s final rule generally requires servicers to provide modified written early intervention notices to let those borrowers also know about loss mitigation options.
  • Requiring servicers to notify borrowers when loss mitigation applications are complete: Whether a borrower is entitled tokey foreclosure protections depends in part on the date a borrower completes a loss mitigation application. If consumers do not know the status of their application, they cannot know the status of those foreclosure protections. Today’s final rule requires servicers to notify borrowers promptly and in writing that the application is complete, so that borrowers know the status of the application and have more information about their protections.
  • Protecting struggling borrowers during servicing transfers: When mortgages are transferred from one servicer to another, borrowers who had applied to the prior servicer for loss mitigation may not know where they stand with the new servicer. Today’s final rule clarifies that generally the new servicer must comply with the loss mitigation requirements within the same timeframes that applied to the transferor servicer, but provides limited extensions to these timeframes under certain circumstances. If a borrower submits an application shortly before transfer, the new servicer must send an acknowledgment notice within 10 business days of the transfer date. If the borrower’s application was complete prior to transfer, the new servicer must evaluate it within 30 days of the transfer date. If the new servicer needs more information to evaluate the application, the borrower would retain some foreclosure protections in the meantime. If the borrower submits an appeal, the new servicer has 30 days to make a determination on the appeal.
  • Clarifying servicers’ obligations to avoid dual-tracking and prevent wrongful foreclosures: The CFPB’s existing rules prohibit servicers from taking certain actions in foreclosure once they receive a complete loss mitigation application from a borrower more than 37 days prior to a scheduled sale. However, in some cases, borrowers are not receiving this protection, and servicers’ foreclosure counsel may not be taking adequate steps to delay foreclosure proceedings or sales. The CFPB’s new rule clarifies that, if a servicer has already made the first foreclosure notice or filing and receives a timely complete application, servicers and their foreclosure counsel must not move for a foreclosure judgment or order of sale, or conduct a foreclosure sale, even if a third party conducts the sale proceedings, unless the borrower’s loss mitigation application is properly denied, withdrawn, or the borrower fails to perform on a loss mitigation agreement. The clarifications will aid servicers in complying with, and assist courts in applying, the dual-tracking prohibitions in foreclosure proceedings to prevent wrongful foreclosures.
  • Clarifying when a borrower becomes delinquent: Several of the consumer protections under the CFPB’s existing rules depend upon how long a consumer has been delinquent on a mortgage. Today’s final rule clarifies that delinquency, for purposes of the servicing rules, begins on the date a borrower’s periodic payment becomes due and unpaid. When a borrower misses a periodic payment but later makes it up, if the servicer applies that payment to the oldest outstanding periodic payment, the date the borrower’s delinquency began advances. The final rule also allows servicers the discretion, under certain circumstances, to consider a borrower as having made a timely payment even if the borrower’s payment falls short of a full periodic payment. The increased clarity will help ensure borrowers are treated uniformly and fairly.

Today’s final rule makes additional changes to the CFPB’s mortgage servicing rules. These changes include providing flexibility for servicers to comply with certain force-placed insurance and periodic statement disclosure requirements. The changes also clarify several requirements regarding early intervention, loss mitigation, information requests, and prompt crediting of payments, as well as the small servicer exemption. Further, the changes exempt servicers from providing periodic statements under certain circumstances when the servicer has charged off the mortgage. Finally, concurrently with the final rule, the CFPB is issuing an interpretive rule under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act relating to servicers’ compliance with certain mortgage servicing provisions as amended by the final rule.

Most of the provisions of the final rule will take effect 12 months after publication in the Federal Register. The provisions relating to successors in interest and the provisions relating to periodic statements for borrowers in bankruptcy will take effect 18 months after publication in the Federal Register.

The final rule issued today is available at: http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/20160804_cfpb_Final_Rule_Amendments_to_the_2013_Mortgage_Rules.pdf

The interpretive rule issued today is available at: http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/20160804_cfpb_Bureau_Interpretations_Safe_Harbors_from_Liability_under_FDCPA.pdf

CONTACT: Office of Communications Tel: (202) 435-7170

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Related Articles

August 22, 2021
By Cathy Moran, Esq., (Redwood City, CA) When a married couple books a bankruptcy consultation, you have an immediate problem: There be dragons, as early map makers helpfully provided. Because, as a lawyer friend of mine says: Anytime there are two people sitting across from you, you have a conflict of interest. That pithy expression has stuck with me and...
Members
stevenson
May 8, 2022
My life in 1982 was in a bit of turmoil. I had recently gotten married and was working as in-house counsel for a regional furniture retailer. My position included a lot of collection work – beating up on debtors in state and bankruptcy courts. I was not unhappy but I was not comfortable with my work – it was clear...
July 28, 2019
By Robert (Bob) Schuman, Owner/Managing Broker, Network Financial Group I’m a mortgage broker. In that role, I see close up the immense relief that a homeowner feels when they file Chapter 13. They are no longer forced to deal with collection calls and a multitude of letters that are aggressive and intimidating, threatening to take their car, foreclose on their...
October 6, 2019
With scam artists hard at work all year, taxpayers should watch for new versions of tax-related scams. One such scam involves fake property liens. It threatens taxpayers with a tax bill from a fictional government agency. Here are some details about the property lien scam that will help taxpayers recognize it: This scheme involves a letter threatening an IRS lien...
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
December 4, 2022
Chapter 13 plan which provided a specific amount to be cured on a reverse mortgage under § 1322(b)(5) would be controlled by the specific term of the plan provision and not by the larger proof of claim filed by the creditor. (Baer) In re Edelstein, 2022 WL 16730027 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. November 7, 2022) Case Summary The Edelsteins filed Chapter...
Members
Molly Pro picture
August 28, 2022
If you put your ear to the ground you may hear the rumblings regarding a change to Bankruptcy Rule 3002.1 requiring the institution of a mid-case bankruptcy audit. This mid-case audit would be like the Notice of Final Cure but would be performed by a trustee’s office in the middle of a pending Chapter 13, rather than at the end,...
Members
May 3, 2020
On April 30, 2020, Frank M. Pees will retire from his position as the Chapter 13 Standing Trustee (Worthington) for the Southern District of Ohio, Eastern Division. Mr. Pees has been a Trustee since his appointment in 1978. Throughout his career, he has been actively involved in the National Association of Chapter 13 Trustees, serving as President (in 1987), and...
Members
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
October 2, 2022
Debtor’s filing application to extend or impose the automatic stay must comply with the service requirements of Rule 7004 as to all creditors or the stay cannot be imposed or extended. (Johnson) In re Hardy, 2022 WL 1196963 (C.D. Cal. April 21, 2022) Case Summary Kimberly Hardy had a long history in consumer bankruptcy. She had filed eight cases, including...
Members
September 20, 2020
By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Three-month delay in completing bare-bones petition. When the Chapter 13 debtor filed a skeletal petition, her motion for more time to complete schedules, statement and plan was denied, with no cause found for extending time after three-month delay, and show cause hearing was set to determine if case should be dismissed with 180-day...
Members
March 1, 2020
By Nathan E. Curtis and Peter Francis Geraci, Geraci Law LLC (Chicago, IL) Time does not stand still while a debtor is in Chapter 13. Nor do income and expenses. Ideally, consumer debtors who have filed a chapter 13 would not need to obtain credit during the term of their plan. Unfortunately, circumstances sometimes get in the way. The most...
Members