Thread Options
#1622682 - 11/01/11 03:49 PM Permissible Purpose?
Likes to Comply Offline
Diamond Poster
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,054
In the mountains
RE loan is originated and booked on the system (not HPML or HOEPA). A credit report was not pulled on the applicants during the underwriting process.

Internal loan policy states that a credit report must be pulled on RE loan applicants.

Loan documentation review department notes that a credit report was not obtained. Loan officer wants to pull a credit report so that there is no policy exception.

Is this permissible? The report would only be pulled to meet policy requirements, it wasn't even considered for the actual loan transaction.
_________________________
Always learning something new...

Return to Top
#1622693 - 11/01/11 03:53 PM Re: Permissible Purpose? Likes to Comply
rlcarey Offline
10K Club
rlcarey
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 78,965
Galveston, TX
I would live with the policy exception. Why ding the customer at this point and cost the bank money?
_________________________
The opinions expressed here should not be construed to be those of my employer: PPDocs.com

Return to Top
#1622697 - 11/01/11 03:56 PM Re: Permissible Purpose? Likes to Comply
Kathleen O. Blanchard Offline

10K Club
Kathleen O. Blanchard
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 21,277
If you want to clear the exception from the current list being tracked, have someone in senior management authorize not obtaining the credit report since their is no value at this point.
_________________________
Kathleen O. Blanchard, CRCM "Kaybee"
HMDA/CRA Training/Consulting/Mapping
The HMDA Academy
www.kaybeescomplianceinsights.com

Return to Top
#1622705 - 11/01/11 04:00 PM Re: Permissible Purpose? rlcarey
Likes to Comply Offline
Diamond Poster
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,054
In the mountains
I agree, but would it be wrong to pull the report? The decision was already made to approve the loan and it was done without consideration to the credit report, and its not being pulled for an account review. Pulling it now has no bearing on the transaction whatsoever. It just doesn't seem permissible to pull it now. The loan officer disagrees.

So back to the original question...Would this fall under a permissible purpose to pull a credit report?

(Thanks for the replies...I agree...we have a waiver that can be approved by senior management...but the loan officer wants that report...I think he doesn't want to have to answer for not having a bureau pulled in the first place.)
Last edited by SRR; 11/01/11 04:03 PM.
_________________________
Always learning something new...

Return to Top
#1622713 - 11/01/11 04:05 PM Re: Permissible Purpose? Likes to Comply
rlcarey Offline
10K Club
rlcarey
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 78,965
Galveston, TX
Would this fall under a permissible purpose to pull a credit report?

No, hence our answers - what permissible purpose is the loan officer claiming, besides his failure to get a proper policy waiver????
_________________________
The opinions expressed here should not be construed to be those of my employer: PPDocs.com

Return to Top
#1622748 - 11/01/11 04:20 PM Re: Permissible Purpose? rlcarey
swiggles Offline
Power Poster
swiggles
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 7,333
Permissible purpose is found in 604.

"intends to use the information in connections with a credit transaction."

You're not going to be using the report in connection with the credit transaction as it has no bearing on the transaction.
_________________________
The more you sweat in training, the less you bleed in battle.......

Return to Top
#1623260 - 11/02/11 02:17 PM Re: Permissible Purpose? swiggles
Likes to Comply Offline
Diamond Poster
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,054
In the mountains
I was called in today by the CEO. Can you believe everyone is upset because I won't let them pull a credit bureau after a loan is closed in order for them to "fix" their mistake of not pulling the report during the underwriting process. I got the "how would the examiners know?" It's wrong and dishonest and I would know. Not to mention any good auditor or examiner would find it if they looked.

What I wanted to say was that since they rely so heavily on the credit report, how are they forgetting to pull it in the first place? But I didn't want to get fired. smile
_________________________
Always learning something new...

Return to Top
#1623343 - 11/02/11 03:22 PM Re: Permissible Purpose? Likes to Comply
rlcarey Offline
10K Club
rlcarey
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 78,965
Galveston, TX
What examiner is going to criticize a one off policy violation. Note the file and move on. Then show then this:

619. Obtaining information under false pretenses [15 U.S.C. 1681q] Any person who knowingly and willfully obtains information on a consumer from a consumer reporting agency under false pretenses shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned for not more than 2 years, or both.
_________________________
The opinions expressed here should not be construed to be those of my employer: PPDocs.com

Return to Top
#1623413 - 11/02/11 04:03 PM Re: Permissible Purpose? rlcarey
Kathleen O. Blanchard Offline

10K Club
Kathleen O. Blanchard
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 21,277
Yes, they seem to want to fix a one off error with a much bigger violation.
_________________________
Kathleen O. Blanchard, CRCM "Kaybee"
HMDA/CRA Training/Consulting/Mapping
The HMDA Academy
www.kaybeescomplianceinsights.com

Return to Top
#1623465 - 11/02/11 04:29 PM Re: Permissible Purpose? rlcarey
Likes to Comply Offline
Diamond Poster
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,054
In the mountains
rlcarey, thanks for that reference. That's exactly the kind of thing that will help them take this seriously!
_________________________
Always learning something new...

Return to Top