Learn More - Click Here!

Active Threads | Active Posts | Unanswered Today | Since Yesterday | This Week
It is our understanding from the official interpretation in Reg C, when an interest rate is set via a "lock-in" agreement between the FI and the borrower, than this is the rate set date. EXCEPT, if a rate is reset or the lock is extended for the final time before the final action is taken (even when extended at the same rate) than at that time the new rate set date would be the date the FI requests change for either of those events.

EX: rate lock-in agreement between FI and borrower dated 4.1.21, the lock is extended on 5.1.21, loan originated 5.3.21. The lock needed to be extended after origination so the investor extended the lock on 5.10.21 The rate set date would be 5.1.21.

Are we interpreting this correctly?
Chat! - BOL Watercooler
Jump to new posts Re: Song Titles by GuitarDude @ 16 hours ago

Listen to Her Heart - Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers
Operations Compliance
Jump to new posts Re: Dormant & Inactive Accounts by DingoJ @ 09/17/21 11:21 PM

We have what we call a Dormant Release Authorization form which is always completed when a branch manually updates the dormant field on an account. What is required on the form and how many people must sign it depends on the activity being used to take the account out of dormancy:

1) Customer walks into branch: 3 signature required: Person helping customer, Manager, and Customer.

If it isn't discovered until later that the customer came into the branch, then the branch would research what was done that day (withdrawal, cash a check, etc.) and a copy of whatever item the customer signed that day would be attached in place of the customer signature on the Release form. Of course the customer’s signature has to be verified (compared to signature card) by two people at the branch, one being a manager.

If the customer didn’t sign anything that day, then this method cannot be used.

We also use DocuSign and can send the release form to the customer that way also.

2) The customer sends in a signed letter. Requires two branch signatures on form, one must be a manager, and letter from customer is attached.

3) Customer conducts a transaction which requires no branch interaction – this could be logging into their online banking, accessing telephone banking, or making a Debit Card transaction to a brick-and-mortar merchant. Only one branch signature is required on the form, plus they copy and paste the customer initiated activity from the account history to the form.

4) As an exception we allow telephone verification – however that requires that the manager perform a call-back to the customer to a number on file. We try to opt for DocuSign instead of phone verifications, but we do once in a while have some older customers that would not be able to navigate even something as easy as DocuSign.
Need to Remain Anonymous
Jump to new posts Re: Vets 4212 Filing by rlcarey @ 09/17/21 10:10 PM

Banks that are subject to Affirmative Action (over 50 employees) are subject to VEVRAA and must submit VETS-4212 report annually.
Jump to new posts Re: Risk Based Pricing by rlcarey @ 09/17/21 10:04 PM

A longer term results in a lower APR.
HMDA Overhaul 2018
Jump to new posts HMDA Reportable-second phase is TBD by dmk124 @ 09/17/21 08:38 PM

We have a borrower that is constructing a new home and will pay off most of the loan with the sale of their current home. They are undecided if they want to use savings to pay off the remainder of the debt, or if they will want to roll it into permanent financing. Since it is unclear what they want to do would be report it or no?
Jump to new posts Re: Changes in FTC FCRA Rules by rlcarey @ 09/17/21 07:31 PM

They were published today in the FR: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2021-09-17/pdf/FR-2021-09-17.pdf
General Discussion
Jump to new posts Re: REG O New Loan with Board Member by rlcarey @ 09/17/21 07:26 PM

Jim, - when it comes to Regulation O, even if I thought the bylaws said no - if she has the power to sign the loan docs, I would error on the side of caution regardless - just to avoid any arguments.
HMDA Overhaul 2018
Jump to new posts Re: Converting church to dwelling with funds by MBrownie @ 09/17/21 07:14 PM

Thank you Adam, I appreciate everyone's help!
Deposits and Payments
Jump to new posts Re: Debit card dispute involving Paypal by BSAguy @ 09/17/21 06:38 PM

Thanks Randy.
Lending Compliance
Jump to new posts Re: Late fee reimbursement by Nicole @ 09/17/21 06:17 PM

Appreciate the help!
Jump to new posts 2021 free census tract reference books by Len S @ 09/17/21 06:13 PM

GeoDataVision has made available free census tract reference books for BOL readers. The books are organized by state, county and then tract and contain information pertaining to tract income class, minority status, 2021 EMFI, distressed status and underserved status and can be retrieved here: Free 2021 Census Tract Reference Books
Jump to new posts Re: UCC4A by rlcarey @ 09/17/21 04:24 PM

I am a little confused. Is that from the current official required ACH audit - I have not seen a copy in the long time and it is not available to the general public. I can understand that requirement if you are the ODFI in that you need to make sure your originators of credit entries are informed concerning the compliance requirements of UCC-4A. However, as a RDFI - a receiver of a credit entry could be anyone of your customers.
TRID - TILA/RESPA Integrated Disclosures Rule
Jump to new posts Re: Property Value vs Estimated Property Value by rlcarey @ 09/17/21 03:32 PM

I added a fourth suggestion smile
Jump to new posts Re: New Scam by P*Q @ 09/17/21 03:31 PM

WITS, it's great! Literally retail staff enter a wire, customer even hasn't signed it yet and if Verafin think's it's suspicious, we get an immediate alert. Crazy how fast it all is.
Need to Remain Anonymous
Jump to new posts Re: Notice of Special Flood Hazard - Timing by Anonymous @ 09/17/21 02:26 PM

A new responder says: I agree with the other responses above, but wanted to elaborate that the meaning of "reasonable time before completion" means "not too short a time before loan closing." It has never been interpreted as "not too long a time before loan closing."

10 days before loan closing is reasonable adequate advance notice (and was actually the minimum number of days before closing, until a rule change in 2014 changed it from "10 days notice" to "reasonable notice"); likewise 10 months before loan closing is reasonable (as long as maps haven't changed, for instance, changing the same property from one zone to a different zone).

The intent behind "reasonable" is that it would unreasonable to wait until the morning of the closing to notify the borrower; the borrower is supposed to be given a reasonable number of days to find the flood insurance available and purchase it. It would not be reasonable to only give them 24 hours, etc. I don't think an auditor would need to waste time on why an extra amount of time was given to the borrower - that's far outside the intent of the rule - nor on why it took a given loan a long time to close, particularly if it's an isolated incident and there was no complaint by the borrower.
Lending Compliance
Jump to new posts Re: Modification vs Refinance by Richard Insley @ 09/17/21 11:03 AM

Originally Posted by Doug Sanders
true modifications and exceptions to the definition of a refinance.
As rainman indicates, if you sharpen the wording of the question, it's easier to get the answer you need. "Modification" is a business term, not a legally-defined term. The same is true for "refinance." The term "refinancing" is a defined term (Section 1026.20(a)), and your disclosure obligation depends on that definition and the facts of the transaction at hand.
Flood Compliance
Jump to new posts Re: Continous force placement - notification? by Compliance NABW @ 09/16/21 09:07 PM

Ah, so they addressed this in the new proposals. Cool. Thanks, Adam. I haven't got around to reading all those yet. They made some interesting changes with the construction loans, I did see that.
Lending Compliance
Jump to new posts Re: RV as second home-disclosures required? by Dan Persfull @ 09/16/21 08:51 PM

but since it is not a primary residence and if the loan is over $58,300 it is completely exempt from Reg Z


Would it be covered by the regulation if it was one loan to purchase the land and the RV to be used as a second home?

If the purchase of land is involved then it is not exempt from Reg. Z regardless of the loan amount.

(b) Credit over applicable threshold amount. (1) Exemption. (i) Requirements. An extension of credit in which the amount of credit extended exceeds the applicable threshold amount or in which there is an express written commitment to extend credit in excess of the applicable threshold amount, unless the extension of credit is:

(A) Secured by any real property, or by personal property used or expected to be used as the principal dwelling of the consumer; or

(B) A private education loan as defined in § 1026.46(b)(5).
HMDA Overhaul 2018
Jump to new posts Re: Fannie Mae Average Credit Score by C5nonmortgagebank @ 09/16/21 08:41 PM

Does anyone think this would not impact their HMDA reporting? My view is it does but thought I'd check if anyone has a different thought.
Lending to Servicemembers (SCRA, JWNDAA), War, Terrorism
Jump to new posts Rate Reduction and Accrued Interest Refund by TeamComply @ 09/16/21 06:20 PM

Borrower requests rate reduction, bank reduces rate and monthly payment amount. From the date of military orders/active duty status to date of rate reduction request there were no payments made on the loan, thus only a credit for accrued interest was to be refunded to the borrower. I beileve the bank is suppose to get express written consent to reduce the loan principal, otherwise the Bank must credit back to loan or pay to customer in cash. Must borrower still be given the right to choose how excess funds (in this case it was only accrued interest) are returned to them as a result of the rate reduction or is crediting back to loan acceptable in this scenario? If you have any regulatory citations to provide, that would be helpful as well. Thanks!
Need to Remain Anonymous
Another anon chimes in:

If you are here on this BOL forum, asking questions about this rule this late in the game, then I'd assume this part of the rule will be of the most interest and relevance to you. (For source, see rlcarey's link above).

(5) De minimis exception. (i) A card issuer is not required to submit any credit card agreements to the Bureau if the card issuer had fewer than 10,000 open credit card accounts as of the last business day of the calendar quarter.
TRID - TILA/RESPA Integrated Disclosures Rule
Tell them that the next time you need to purchase a buggy whip, you will be glad to keep them in mind since they appear to still be operating in the 20th century. smile
Need to Remain Anonymous
Jump to new posts Re: New Account - Suspicious! by Anonymous @ 09/15/21 08:30 PM

Anotha Anon: A credit union may have considerably more difficulty ditching an undesired account, but at a bank it's whatever your terms & conditions say. Ours is basically "upon reasonable notice" so we give consumers 30 days, businesses 90 days. Consumers are given a little more time (60 days, I think) if they are regularly receiving federal benefits into it, such as social security payments.

I'd also recommend you confer with your BSA Officer on such matters, as, depending on the nature of the suspicions and possibly depending on the dollar amount involved, you may already have a requirement for BSA to file a SAR, even if you close it quickly.
Jump to new posts Action Taken Date LOC and Term Loan Renewals by IGaev @ 09/15/21 07:47 PM

The Guide to CRA Reporting states the following:

- An institution should collect information about small business and small farm loans that it refinances or renews as loan originations.
- Institutions must collect and report data on lines of credit in the same way that they provide data on loan originations.
- Lines of credit are considered originated at the time the line is approved or increased; and an increase is considered a new origination.

The FFIEC 01/2021 CRA Micro Data guidance defines action date as: Date Originated or purchased.

In terms of lines of credit or renewed/extended term loans, I'm trying to confirm what should be used as the action taken date. In terms of the lines...approved date and originated dates seem to contradict one another.

When lines of credit are renewed, we issue an letter informing the borrower of the renewal and we typically use the date of the letter (i.e., origination date) for the action taken date. A new note is "not" executed. Is that correct or should we rely on the date the renewal was approved by the Bank, based on the CRA Reporting Guidance? Thoughts?

If the customer enters into a Modification Agreement that also contains an extension of term, the body of the Agreement may reflect an effective date that is different than the date of the Agreement or the date the Agreement was executed by the borrower. Should we use the effective date denoted in the Agreement as the action taken date, the date of the Agreement, or the date executed?

Thank you and we appreciate any assistance!
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3