Our correspondent lender just suspended a loan from funding indicating the Right to Cancel form does not have the property address on it. This is strange as we have used the same RTC form for the past three years and this has never been an issue.

Our RTC form has the Borrower name, loan number, appropriate date information and all required language from the regulation. I have checked the Model Form from Reg Z and it does not have a requirement for the address nor does the correspondent lender's own selling guide. Their guide is silent on this item.

Has anyone else run into this issue before? Am I missing somewhere in Reg Z where it is required?

Thanks for your feedback.

Just 'cause you got a suspense notice doesn't mean the investor's right. Tell them there is no Reg requirement for the address and they should check the last six loans they bought from you already. Sometimes you just have to poke the varmits back into their cages.

While agree with Truffle there is no reg requirement, in correspondent lending you have to play by the golden rule - "they who have the gold make the rules".

I had dealt with Indymac for their idiotic interpretations of the regulations for many years, finally figured I wasn't going to convince them to re-write thir policy. Look to see if the address requirement is in their documentational requirements. If not talk to them.

A lot of times, they have quirky requiremens because they got burned in a lawsuit and came up with a rule to prevent it from ever happening again (or at least until the next lawsuit they lose.)

Love that statement! May I quote you?

M, certainly!

Southern Banker, I agree with you. However, the original post stated that the requirement was not in the investor's selling guide so there's no basis for the suspense notice even by their own guidelines. Probably just some over zealous intake specialist trying to throw their weight around. That's why I said to poke 'em.

Or point out that since the loan number is on the ROR, it ties the ROR form to the loan which is secured by property located at........hmmmmm......the property address of the loan collateral! A six-year old could make that connection. Yes, it was probably some frivolous lawsuit where the borrower argued that they thought the ROR applied to some other property....yeah, right.

or a newbie following "the checklist"