Quote:

---

During an interim review, the FED found enough errors in our LAR to require full file review and resubmission. To make a very long story short...I have done a full sample and found there remains a 10% error rate. Exactly 8 errors within critical fields out of around 70 loans reviewed. My opinion is that all files will need to be looked at again...any one have an opinion? I think it would be highly frowned upon when they pull a sample next go-round and still find errors...this is VERY frustrating to say the least...anyone else had this much trouble with accuracy??? and what did you do to eliviate the problem going foward...obviously we have revised procedures and documentation. Any thoughts? Also, we only have a couple weeks remaining on our time limit to resubmit. Anyone ever have a "failed" review on the same data year 2 times?

---

I am a little confused. You said the Fed review required a "full file review" but you did a "full sample review" What is a full sample? From my understanding, when you are required to to a full review, that means pulling every file and reviewing for accuracy. You then make the necessary corrections and resubmit.

Going forward, I would suggest caning and electric shock with every error found. Ok, short of that, retraining and accountability. If you are doing the reviews, finding the errors and correcting them, then why should the person responsible do better, after all, you will clean it up. Where does this person get the info she enters? Does she have to pull it from the files or is it given to her from the loan operations staff. If they are providing her with bad data, then, unless it is her job to confirm everything given to her, they should be held responsible.

You might also remind the staff and management that there can be significant money penalties for HMDA errors.