CFPB Amends Rules to Provide Flexibility and Clarity to Certain Mortgage Lenders in Collecting Information

CFPB Amends Rules to Provide Flexibility and Clarity
to Certain Mortgage Lenders in Collecting Information

Bureau Also Seeks Public Comment on Proposal for Disclosure of Mortgage Data

RELEASED: 9/20/17

The CFPB modified Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) regulations to provide additional flexibility for mortgage lenders in the collection of consumer ethnicity and race information. These amendments will provide greater clarity for mortgage lenders regarding their obligations under the law, while promoting compliance with rules intended to ensure consumers are treated fairly.

Separately, the CFPB also seeks comment on proposed policy guidance describing the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data the Bureau proposes to make available to the public beginning in 2019, including modifications to protect consumers’ privacy.

“The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act helps shine a light on how consumers are treated in the nation’s largest consumer financial market,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray. “The Consumer Bureau is committed to promoting fair lending and protecting consumer privacy, and will continue working to ensure that the rules work as intended.”

Providing Flexibility and Clarity for Lenders

The ECOA is a federal civil rights law that protects against discrimination in the financial marketplace. Regulation B, the CFPB’s rule implementing ECOA, includes restrictions regarding lenders’ ability to ask consumers about their race, color, religion, national origin or sex, except in certain circumstances. These circumstances include required collection of the information for some mortgage applications under Regulation B.

The changes finalized 9/20/17 will provide compliance flexibility for individual mortgage lenders, and also support the broader mortgage industry’s ability to use consistent forms and compliance practices. Mortgage lenders will not be required to maintain different practices depending on their loan volume or other characteristics, allowing more lenders to adopt application forms that include expanded requests for information regarding a consumer’s ethnicity and race, including the revised Uniform Residential Loan Application. 

The Bureau also finalized other amendments to Regulation B and its commentary to facilitate compliance with Regulation B’s requirements for the collection and retention of information about the ethnicity, race, and sex of applicants seeking certain types of mortgage loans.

The final rule on ECOA issued 9/20/17 is available at: http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/201709_cfpb_final-rule_regulation-b.pdf
 
Promoting Transparency and Protecting Privacy

The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act requires many lenders to report and disclose to the public certain information about their mortgage lending activities. HMDA data is used for a variety of purposes, including: to monitor whether financial institutions are serving the housing needs of their communities, to assist in distributing public-sector investment to attract private investment to areas where it is needed, and to identify possible discriminatory lending patterns.

In 2015 the CFPB finalized changes to Regulation C, the CFPB’s rule implementing HMDA, updating the quality and type of data that financial institutions report. Financial institutions will begin collecting the new information in 2018, which includes data fields such as the property value, the interest rate of the loan, and the applicant’s debt-to-income ratio.

Public disclosure of mortgage data is central to the achievement of HMDA’s goals. The Bureau has considered whether and how HMDA data should be modified prior to its disclosure to the public, in order to protect applicant and borrower privacy while also fulfilling HMDA’s public disclosure purposes. The proposed policy guidance issued today describes the loan-level HMDA data that the Bureau proposes to make available to the public beginning in 2019. While the Bureau proposes to make the bulk of this information public, it also proposes important modifications to the data to protect consumers’ privacy. For instance, the Bureau proposes to exclude certain data fields from what is shared publicly, including the property address and applicant’s credit score. The Bureau also proposes to disclose certain information with reduced precision, for instance by disclosing an applicant’s age as a range rather than a specific number.

The Bureau is seeking public comment on the proposal issued today, and will carefully consider any feedback received through the comment process before announcing the final policy guidance. The public comment period will be open for 60 days following publication in the Federal Register.

The proposed policy guidance issued today is available at: http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/201709_cfpb_hmda-disclosure-policy-guidance.pdf
 
CONTACT: Office of Communications Tel: (202) 435-7170

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Related Articles

Copy of Hildebrand-2016
I never set out to be a bankruptcy lawyer, much less a trustee. It was always my intent to be trial lawyer. The thrill of victory, the agony of defeat, and the captive audience of a jury; having to think fast on your feet was exciting. Facing jurors and witnesses with a modicum of confidence was what my view of...
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
August 14, 2022
Where a stipulation of a settlement of an objection to confirmation provided that a creditor’s claim would be “excepted from discharge pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6)”, the stipulation would not prevent the discharge of the claim based upon a breach of fiduciary duty, tortious interference with business relations, unfair competition, defamation, and conversion which resulted in a state jury...
Members
February 10, 2019
Jan M. Sensenich graduated from Windham College in Putney, Vermont in 1978 and Vermont Law School in 1983. He served as Core Faculty Member and Director of the Woodbury College Legal Clinic from 1983 to 1987and from 1990 to 1992. Jan was an Associate with Jerome I. Meyers, P.C. from 1987 to 1990 when he opened his own practice concentrating...
July 18, 2021
By Lawrence R. Ahern, III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Introduction The primary purpose of this two-part paper is to explore recent legislation that makes it easier for some individuals to modify the terms of their residential mortgages, especially if they are farmers or small business owners. The emphasis is on the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (SBRA).1 A...
Members
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
Chapter 13 plan cannot be modified to treat a priority claim as general unsecured after the time for reconsideration of the order has passed. (Easterbrook) Matter of Terrell, 39 F.4th 888 (7th Cir. July 12, 2022) Case Summary The Terrells’ Chapter 13 plan proposed a classification to pay the State of Wisconsin in full as a priority claim because, they...
Members
October 13, 2019
Taxpayers with expiring Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs) can get their ITINs renewed more quickly and avoid refund delays next year by submitting their renewal application soon, the Internal Revenue Service said 10/10/19. An ITIN is a tax ID number used by taxpayers who don’t qualify to get a Social Security number. Any ITIN with middle digits 83, 84 ....
Members
October 27, 2019
By Lawrence R. Ahern, III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Part IV Two More Things Trustees Should Know About the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 Introduction Four bankruptcy-related bills were enacted during the 116th Congress and signed into law on August 23, 2019.1 The legislation affected both business and consumer cases. One bill, the Small Business Reorganization Act of...
Members
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
March 13, 2022
In order to invoke remedies granted under the CARES Act, Chapter 13 debtor need not have been current on the date of enactment as long as the debtor satisfies the conditions in the CARES Act. (Grabill) In re Gilbert, 622 BR 859 (Bankr. E.D. La. Oct. 6, 2020) Case Summary Chapter 13 Trustee sought dismissal of a number of cases...
Members
February 28, 2021
By Cathy Moran, Esq. (Redwood City, CA) When BAPCA gutted the ipso facto clause, reaffirmation was left as the only way a debtor could be assured of retaining his wheels. Car lenders took sides back then, then changed sides, on whether they would automatically repossess a vehicle when the debt was not reaffirmed. Some wanted the in terrorem effect of...
Members
DeCarlo01
December 18, 2022
The Bankruptcy Code produces some difficult results. Sometimes those results pass difficult and extend into problematic. The Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho crossed well over difficult in In re Clifford, 2022 WL 16727279 (Bankr. D. Id. 2022). The question addressed in Clifford is one that comes up in every Chapter 13 case – how do we calculate “Current...