CFPB Issues Interim Final Rule To Help Mortgage Servicers Communicate With Certain Borrowers At Risk Of Foreclosure

Bureau Also Seeks Comment on Separate Proposed Rule Modifying
Timing Requirements for Bankruptcy Periodic Statements

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: October 4, 2017

The CFPB issued an interim final rule and a proposed rule to provide mortgage servicers more flexibility and certainty around requirements to communicate with certain borrowers under the Bureau’s 2016 mortgage servicing amendments. The interim final rule gives servicers more flexibility regarding when to communicate about foreclosure prevention options with borrowers who have requested a cease in communication under federal debt collection law. The proposed rule would provide more certainty for mortgage servicers about when to provide periodic statements to consumers in connection with their bankruptcy case.

“Today’s action should make it easier for mortgage borrowers to receive timely information from their mortgage servicers about available options for saving their home, even if they have submitted a request to cease communication,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray. “In addition, we are proposing changes to clear up confusion about when to provide periodic statements with important loan information to borrowers in bankruptcy.”

In 2016, the Bureau made changes to the mortgage servicing rules to require mortgage servicers to send written notices, referred to as early intervention notices, to certain consumers at risk of foreclosure who have requested a cease in communication under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Under this law, consumers have the option to request that companies stop contacting them except for limited purposes. Once these borrowers become delinquent, the Bureau’s 2016 amendments generally require that mortgage servicers send notices to these consumers every 45 days to inform them of available foreclosure prevention options but prohibit servicers from sending the notices more than once in a 180-day period. The Bureau has heard concerns that once a servicer sends a notice to one of these borrowers, the rule requires servicers to provide the next notice exactly on the 180th day after the prior one, regardless of whether it is a weekend or a holiday.

To alleviate these concerns, the interim final rule issued today gives servicers a longer, 10-day window to provide the modified notices. The Bureau believes that this change offers greater certainty for servicers’ ability to comply with the rule, without undermining important borrower protections. The interim final rule becomes effective on Oct. 19, 2017, the same date that the related 2016 rule provisions become effective. The Bureau is seeking comment on this rule and will consider whether to revisit it in the future.

The Bureau has also learned that certain technical aspects of the 2016 amendments regarding the timing for servicers to provide periodic statements in connection with a borrower’s bankruptcy case may create unintended challenges and be subject to different legal interpretations. Thus, the Bureau is also seeking public comment on a proposed rule that would provide greater certainty for mortgage servicers regarding the timing for providing periodic statements in those circumstances. The proposed effective date for the proposed rule is April 19, 2018, the same date that the sections of the 2016 rule that the proposal would amend become effective.

The comment period on both the interim final rule and the proposed rule will close 30 days after publication in the Federal Register.

The interim final rule on mortgage servicer communication flexibility is available at: http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/201710_cfpb_amendments-to-2016-Servicing-Rule_interim-final-rule.pdf
 
The proposed rule on periodic statements is available at: http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/201710_cfpb_amendments-to-2016-Servicing-Rule_NPRM.pdf 

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

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Related Articles

Copy of Hildebrand-2016
In order to modify a plan confirmed under Chapter 12 pursuant to § 1229, the movant must demonstrate that there was a substantial change in circumstances that is sufficient to justify modification of a plan.  (Norton) Farm Credit Services of America PCA v. Swackhammer, 2023 WL 3591920 (8th Cir. BAP May 23, 2023) Case Summary The Swackhammers were farmers who...
November 15, 2020
By Lawrence R. Ahern, III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure Amendments Effective December 1, 2020 The Judicial Conference proposed, and Congress has not changed, the amendments to the following Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure: Rules 2002, 2004, 8012, 8013, 8015 and 8021. Absent Congressional action, which is not expected, they will be effective at the...
Members
September 15, 2019
By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Manufactured home did not become accession to real property. The creditor holding security interest in a manufactured home objected to confirmation, on the basis that § 1322(b)(2)’s anti-modification provision prevented bifurcation of its claim into secured and unsecured parts. The Eighth Circuit noted that the Bankruptcy Code does not resolve the issue of...
Members
June 27, 2021
By M. Jonathan Hayes, Resnik Hayes Moradi LLP (Los Angeles, CA) (Reprinted with permission. Originally published by the Los Angeles Daily Journal on May 20, 2021) We have been getting a lot of calls recently as you might expect from distressed small businesses. The “free” government money is starting to run out and panic is setting in. The potential client...
Members
March 24, 2019
3/19/19 IRS reminded taxpayers that it’s not too late to contribute to an Individual Retirement Arrangement (IRA) and still claim it on a 2018 tax return. Anyone with a traditional IRA may be eligible for a tax credit or deduction on their 2018 tax return if they make contributions by April 15, 2019. This news release is part of a...
January 27, 2019
By John P. Gustafson, United States Bankruptcy Judge, Northern District of Ohio, Western Division (Toledo, OH) Click here for Part 1 Click here for Part 2 Click here for Part 3
Members
June 21, 2020
By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Recordation of divorce judgment created secured claim. In Chapter 13 case, the debtor objected to former spouse’s secured claim, with pre-bankruptcy divorce judgment awarding former marital home to the husband but ordering equalization payments to the wife. No security was mentioned in the judgment, but its recordation created a lien under Wisconsin law....
Members
October 4, 2020
By Lawrence R. Ahern III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) PART IV – INTRODUCTION TO CONSUMER FORECLOSURE PROCEDURES 2020 portends a flood of bankruptcy filings. In the consumer bankruptcies, trustees and debtors' counsel often are uncomfortable with the rules in Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). In this space, we have looked at topics involving the interplay of...
Members
October 24, 2021
By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee (Nashville, TN) Chapter 13 debtor cannot submit missed payments to the trustee after the 60-month term of the plan has ended in an effort to cure defaults in the plan. (Bacharach) Kinney v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A., 5 F.4th 1136 (10th Cir. July 23, 2021) Case Summary Margaret Kinney filed a...
Members
October 6, 2019
By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee (Nashville, TN) One of the most difficult situations faced by a debtor and debtors’ counsel is the repossession of important collateral securing a debt owed to a creditor. These items, such as automobiles, furniture, boats, and mowers which have been pledged to a creditor are important – often critical – to...
Members