The title company is charging a courier fee to deliver the closing/loan documents to the borrower - closing is not being held in person. I assume no one knew this up front and we did not disclose this fee on the LE. The title company has submitted this fee to us to disclose on the CD.

Since this appears to be the customer's choice to not attend closing in person, wouldn't the courier fee be listed in H. Other? It is not a service required by the creditor or the title company.

Sounds like a changed circumstance to me,

We've debated about this, adding a "Title - Courier Fee" to Section C for all LE's, since it's a possible charge, although we don't know for sure at time of issuing the LE. But then we decided no, that could be seen as padding Section C and the 10% tolerance if the borrower chooses our service provider. Are others choosing to always include the fee on the LE?

So we consider the addition of a courier fee as a CIC, and add it to a revised LE or the CD (if not yet issued) in Section C and it will reset the tolerance.

Correct?

But then we decided no, that could be seen as padding Section C and the 10% tolerance if the borrower chooses our service provider.

If the service is not provided, the amount on the LE for that service does not go into the 10% calculation. There would be no padding.

Great point, thank you! So no potential issue with always adding a courier fee?

Analyzing it differently, this service is not one that the bank requires as a condition of the loan. It is something imposed by a third party. I'd think about treating it as a Section H service, including it there in the Loan Estimate if it's required in most instances in the area in which you're making mortgage loans (or if you know at LE time that it will be required). Because it's required by the title company and not by the lender, I'd think about not considering it a changed circumstance if learned about before issuing the Closing Disclosure, and then think about whether it's subject to a tolerance limit at all.

John: It is something imposed by a third party.

The bank requires the loan to be closed through a title company. If this is a fee normally charged by the title company for closing the loan, then I think that is a little different than what the original poster asked.....

But this sounds like an oddity. The borrower informs the closing agent they won't attend in person, so the closing agent has to send the paperwork somewhere else to obtain the signatures. It would seem to me to be an "Other" and not affect tolerance nor require an additional waiting period as it is a direct request of the borrower to close while 'out of town'. What if you've already issued the CloD and then the borrower says...oh by the way...I'm going to be traveling cross country during that time...just send the paperwork to Kinko's in Sale City and I'll stop there and sign everything.

What I am trying to say is that there is a big difference between what the OP asked and having a provider on your list that typically charges a courier fee (for whatever they are couriering where).

Oh yes! I agree...but then, what is your opinion on this situation? Initially, you indicated change of circumstance, which to me would likely require a waiting period. And what if it's post initial CloD, again, chances are it would be.

If it's post initial CloD, Randy and I would both say you're going to eat the courier fee.

If it was post CloD I would throw it into "Other" and be done with it. If it was pre-CloD I would treat it as a changed circumstance and remove all doubt.

John, I remain confused. Why would the bank have to eat the fee when it was the customer who decided not to be present at closing? That is making no sense to me. No one required it. The only other choice would be to postpone the closing until Mr. World Traveler decided to be present.

OK. I surrender. When I consider that a full five years after HUD's 2010 overhaul of RESPA disclosures there were still scores of questions, I can't imagine that we have yet resolved all of the questions that have arisen or will arise under TRID. I'll agree with Randy. If the CloD has been issued before we learned of the need for this courier fee triggered by the customer's decision not to attend the closing, issue another CloD with the new cost in Section H (other), which will increase the cash from borrower (or reduce the cash to borrower) at closing, and don't treat it as subject to a tolerance limit.

If it's pre-CloD and you have time to issue a revised LE, do so and treat it as a changed circumstance. If you don't have time to issue a revised LE, get it on the CloD as a changed circumstance.

And I am not going to take this one any further. The cost of the courier fee doesn't warrant such gnashing of teeth.