So I am about ready to open up a Chick-fil-A and be done with this compliance stuff. Anyone with me?

My real question is, Applicant did not fill in the gender box on the application. They filled out the race and ethnicity but not gender. The lender did not jot any notes down on the application that the customer did not furnish the GMI and that they were making a best guess based on observation. The applicant did close the loan in person and actually, the lender knows this person as they are a long time customer. Would it be acceptable in ya'lls opinion to document in the file that the lender observed that this applicant is this gender?
Or should I have them write on the application that the applicant did not provide the information but this is their best guess based on observation?

Question 2. If the application is phone, and HYPOTHETICALLY the lender neglects to as for the GMI. If they know the customer, may we include that we know them and report that GMI? Or could we even refer back to an older application?

Chick-fil-A? Anyone...anyone...

Q1: How was the application taken (not how was the loan closed)?

If in person, the lender needs to document the gender and note that they completed it. You can do that for them now.
If the application was not in person, then the gender should be left blank and the lender should document the application was not in person to explain why it is blank.

Q2: If the application was by phone, they should ask for GMI. If they don't get it, they document it was by phone and not guess or complete any of the info. You should not indicate you know them and report any guesses. You should also not refer back to an older application.

Read the disclaimer above the GMI collection boxes. Most of this is explained there and you can use it to train your lenders.

Thank you! Very helpful.

My long held understanding was if the boxes were not checked and the lender closed the loan face-to-face that we could rely on their observation for that information. Is this accurate?

Be careful as then it could result in only originated loans having the GMI and non-originated ones would not.

I understand what you are saying, our practice is to get the information at the time of application, but if something has been not filled in and the lender closes face to face, we rely on observation at that point. Is that something that can be done if it is an exception to the norm, or should it be avoided altogether?

You can collect GMI at closing (if the application was not taken face-to-face), you simply don't need to. My question would be "why do so?" JSD brings up a good point although I don't think there's a fair lending risk in having more info on closed loans than non-closed. It's simply another burden to do at closing and unnecessary.

Bottom line, you need to be consistent. You shouldn't have some lenders filling out at the closing table and others not.
It has been my long standing contention that because HMDA is APPLICATION based, the information we should use is all from the time of application only. If an applicant leaves something blank (and it's not face to face) than that's how I report it, even if my mother is the borrower. That way loans that don't close have the same collection criteria as loans that are originated.

Great advise Truffle!