A mobile home park is selling a double-wide mobile home without land to a consumer to be used as a " secondary " residence. The bank is financing the mobile home and all of the fees. The m/home park management is conducting the closing and is charging a $350.00 " closing fee " for doing so. The Bank is not really "requiring" the borrower to use the park as their closing agent, but park management insists on the closing being conducted "on site" with their fee being paid. Also, some of the other parks in the area call this fee a " Broker Fee ".

Question #1: Under Reg. Z Section 226.4(a)(2) should the bank disclose this $350 as a pre-paid?

Question #2: Would it make any difference if this was a primary residence?

What is making this particularly confusing is the last sentence in the Commentary to Section 226.4,(a)(2), which reads:

"A charge for conducting or attending a closing is a finance charge and may be excluded only if the charge is included in and is incidental to a lump-sum closing fee excluded under Sec.226.4(c)(7).

So which comes first---the fact that the bank is not "requiring" or the last sentence in the commentary?

Regardless of what this park calls it - you said it is also typically referred too as a broker fee. I would be conservative and treat it as such and include it in the pre-paids.

Now if the deal was already done and I was arguing with a regulator - I would take the complete opposite stance.