Page 8 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Thread Options
#2195955 - 10/19/18 02:44 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House Truffle Royale
Truffle Royale Offline

10K Club
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 17,344
Following a field examiner's suggestion to file more data than is absolutely necessary can end up in having to resubmit the next time around and more. You don't get a free pass for giving them more information than required. They'll ding you for errors in those 'extra' fields. Why leave that door open?

Return to Top
HMDA

   
HMDA Academy
#2195961 - 10/19/18 03:54 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House rlcarey
RockChucker, CAMS Offline
Diamond Poster
Joined: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,644
The Country
Originally Posted By rlcarey
I sat in on a regulatory panel on Tuesday and the examiners actually encouraged partially exempt banks to continue to report all data eek mad Nothing like the field examiners undercutting regulatory relief. No wonder banks are so confused about regulatory expectations.


I sure hope you publicly corrected them which I am guessing you did.
_________________________
A successful man is one who can lay a firm foundation with the bricks others have thrown at him.
-David Brinkley

Return to Top
#2196210 - 10/23/18 04:32 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House Truffle Royale
Compliance NABW Offline
Diamond Poster
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 1,597
How about reporting for fields where there is no co-applicant? Would you do "No Co-Applicant" or "Exempt?" Both are true, so which is understood to override the other? My take is if you are going to report "Exempt" for the main applicant, then it would follow to also use "Exempt" for the co-Applicant. Or, does just using the "1111" eliminate the need for even completing the co-applicant field?

Return to Top
#2196216 - 10/23/18 05:02 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House Truffle Royale
Adam Witmer Offline
Power Poster
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,622
The FIG explains when Exempt is used vs 1111 vs leaving it blank, though there really aren't too many exempt fields specific to a co-borrower/co-applicant. For example, the credit score and credit score model should be listed as "1111" (exempt) for both the borrower and co-applicant/co-borrower, while the free-form text field should be left blank for both.

The current version of the FIG can be found here: https://s3.amazonaws.com/cfpb-hmda-public/prod/help/2018-hmda-fig-2018-hmda-rule.pdf
_________________________
Adam Witmer, CRCM

All statements are my opinion, not those of my employer, and should not be taken as legal advice.
www.compliancecohort.com

Return to Top
#2196287 - 10/24/18 01:41 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House Truffle Royale
Compliance NABW Offline
Diamond Poster
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 1,597
Thank you, Adam. I looked at the 2019 FIG, but it still wasn't totally clear to me, as it still says "Use Code 9999 in the co-applicant field if there are no co-applicants or co-borrowers on Page 88. But, I agree that 1111 should be used here.

Return to Top
#2196546 - 10/26/18 02:09 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House Truffle Royale
Christine81 Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 78
If you are a small filer do you still need to report the Amortization Type, Lock Date and APR? It seems like that would be a part of the rate spread section, and therefore no, but I can't find where they are specifically addressed anywhere. It appears our HMDA software vendor is going to be looking for those fields to be completed once it is updated for the changes.

Return to Top
#2196563 - 10/26/18 03:20 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House Truffle Royale
Adam Witmer Offline
Power Poster
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,622
No, those fields aren't required if you qualify for the partial exemption.
_________________________
Adam Witmer, CRCM

All statements are my opinion, not those of my employer, and should not be taken as legal advice.
www.compliancecohort.com

Return to Top
#2196567 - 10/26/18 03:49 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House Truffle Royale
Christine81 Offline
Member
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 78
Thank you!

Return to Top
#2196586 - 10/26/18 05:15 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House Truffle Royale
RVFlyboy Offline
Power Poster
RVFlyboy
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,978
Soaring over Georgia
There were 26 data points that are covered by the partial exemption and not required for qualifying small filers. Those 26 data points cover 53 separate data fields. While the BCFP's Interpretive rule identifies each of the 26 data points, they do not identify the corresponding data fields. To tie those together, you need to go to the Filing Instruction Guide which tells you for each data field what data point that field is tied to.

Interestingly, none of the three fields you mention are even fields or data points at all. There are four fields that related to the data point of Non-Amortizing Features - Balloon Payment, Interest-Only Payments, Negative Amortization, and Other Non-Amortizing Features. Lock date is not a reportable field at all. You need that date in some cases to calculate Rate Spread, but it never was, of itself, a reportable field. And now Rate Spread is an exempt data point as well. APR is also a field that was never a reportable field. There is a reportable data point for Interest Rate that is now exempt, but that was for the note rate, not the APR.
_________________________
Jim Bedsole, CRCM, CBA, CFSA, CAFP
My posts - my opinions

Return to Top
#2196618 - 10/26/18 07:26 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House Truffle Royale
RR Joker Offline
10K Club
RR Joker
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 20,654
The Swamp
This entire subject just makes me cross-eyes. I don't even want to attempt to tackle it. I was hoping my provider would send something out on it...like a solution whereby I don't have to really do much of anything...but so far....crickets.

I know it would make life easier for the masses to quit collecting/checking so many things but CRIMINY...I just wish we could go back to the days of when a regulation was reduced to writing that was IT. No...oh well...let's tweak this and change that 50 times before it's ever a done deal and THEN they go turn it upside down way later in the game...it's just insane to me.
_________________________
My opinion only. Not legal advice.

Say you'll haunt me - Stone Sour

Return to Top
#2196620 - 10/26/18 07:35 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House Truffle Royale
raitchjay Offline
Power Poster
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,721
OK
Right......regulatory relief after you've spent hundreds/thousands of hours training/checking software etc. doesn't feel like relief as much as it feels like "gotcha".
_________________________
I'm fixin' to fix that.

Return to Top
#2196623 - 10/26/18 07:37 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House Truffle Royale
RR Joker Offline
10K Club
RR Joker
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 20,654
The Swamp
Exactly!!
_________________________
My opinion only. Not legal advice.

Say you'll haunt me - Stone Sour

Return to Top
#2196664 - 10/29/18 02:09 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House Truffle Royale
RVFlyboy Offline
Power Poster
RVFlyboy
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,978
Soaring over Georgia
I just did 2 presentations for the SC Bankers Association on TRID 2.0/2.1 and on HMDA (including HMDA 2.0). At the beginning of both presentations, I included the following quote from the book "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand. It pretty much summarizes where it feels like the BCFP is on things:

Quote:
“There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with.”
- Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
_________________________
Jim Bedsole, CRCM, CBA, CFSA, CAFP
My posts - my opinions

Return to Top
#2196828 - 10/30/18 05:54 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House Truffle Royale
RR Joker Offline
10K Club
RR Joker
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 20,654
The Swamp
I've not read it, but my Father certainly did. I remember that!

I agree frown
Last edited by RR Joker; 10/30/18 05:54 PM.
_________________________
My opinion only. Not legal advice.

Say you'll haunt me - Stone Sour

Return to Top
#2196971 - 10/31/18 07:30 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House raitchjay
Compliance NABW Offline
Diamond Poster
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 1,597
Originally Posted By raitchjay
Right......regulatory relief after you've spent hundreds/thousands of hours training/checking software etc. doesn't feel like relief as much as it feels like "gotcha".

Exactly. Might as well just report the expanded fields at that point, imho.

Return to Top
#2197036 - 11/01/18 02:15 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House raitchjay
RR Becca Offline
Power Poster
RR Becca
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,245
out of the frying pan...
Originally Posted By raitchjay
Right......regulatory relief after you've spent hundreds/thousands of hours training/checking software etc. doesn't feel like relief as much as it feels like "gotcha".


Agree 100%. It's almost easier just to keep going with all the extra stuff, at least through year-end.
_________________________
You call it ADD. I call it multi-tasking.

Return to Top
#2197038 - 11/01/18 02:25 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House Truffle Royale
John Burnett Offline
10K Club
John Burnett
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 39,629
Cape Cod
At BOL Conferences' 2018 Lending Compliance Triage Conference last month, it was recommended that "partially exempt small reporters" continue to gather all of the data and to load their LARs up as if they are not partially exempt, so that they have in one place all the loan file data needed to do fair lending analysis themselves (or for an examiner or outside contractor to do such an analysis) and then use their vendor's option to report as a partially-exempt small reporter so that the 2018 LAR (to be submitted in 2019) will automatically be overwritten with the "1111" and "EXEMPT" responses needed before submission.

They would then have two LAR versions -- one with all the data that can be used for analysis (rather than having to dig all that info out under the gun for an analysis) and an official version reflecting their partial exemption status.
_________________________
John S. Burnett
BankersOnline.com
Fighting for Compliance since 1976
Bankers' Threads User #8

Return to Top
#2197040 - 11/01/18 02:30 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House Truffle Royale
RR Becca Offline
Power Poster
RR Becca
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,245
out of the frying pan...
But how is that 'relief' for anybody? In fact, it seems to be adding to the workload (maintaining two versions of the LAR).
_________________________
You call it ADD. I call it multi-tasking.

Return to Top
#2197042 - 11/01/18 02:38 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House Truffle Royale
rlcarey Online
10K Club
rlcarey
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 79,235
Galveston, TX
I think that is hogwash too. Either the information that is contained in the expanded fields is already available, as in loaded into your LOS, which can be extracted or it is not. The fact that they added these fields to HMDA in 2018 changes nothing from a fair lending analysis perspective. What you had available for such an analysis pre-2018 will still be available in 2018. Why put more bullets in the gun??
_________________________
The opinions expressed here should not be construed to be those of my employer: PPDocs.com

Return to Top
#2197043 - 11/01/18 02:43 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House Truffle Royale
Adam Witmer Offline
Power Poster
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,622
If a bank has the data (even if they didn't report it) and the examiner asks for the data, then the bank is going to have to hand it over. This means that every bank that has compiled the data should probably be reviewing all of this data themselves for a fair lending review. I would never want to hand examiners organized and compiled data that I hadn't already reviewed to some degree.
_________________________
Adam Witmer, CRCM

All statements are my opinion, not those of my employer, and should not be taken as legal advice.
www.compliancecohort.com

Return to Top
#2197044 - 11/01/18 02:49 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House Truffle Royale
RR Joker Offline
10K Club
RR Joker
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 20,654
The Swamp
Quote:
and then use their vendor's option to report as a partially-exempt small reporter so that the 2018 LAR (to be submitted in 2019) will automatically be overwritten with the "1111" and "EXEMPT" responses needed before submission.


If such a convenient option ever becomes available [and is proven fool proof, which I'm skeptical about] prior to submission fine and dandy. If not I'll be DANGED if I'm going in and editing all these fields...who the HECK has time for that?
_________________________
My opinion only. Not legal advice.

Say you'll haunt me - Stone Sour

Return to Top
#2197053 - 11/01/18 03:43 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House Truffle Royale
John Burnett Offline
10K Club
John Burnett
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 39,629
Cape Cod
It is reportedly available from some vendors. I don't have names, but it's so elegant a solution I am surprised it hasn't been adopted by all of the vendors.

On the other hand, there's no guarantee this is the final stop on this roller-coaster. The Bureau is still looking at further revising Reg C.
_________________________
John S. Burnett
BankersOnline.com
Fighting for Compliance since 1976
Bankers' Threads User #8

Return to Top
#2197061 - 11/01/18 04:10 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House Truffle Royale
Truffle Royale Offline

10K Club
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 17,344
I'm not blessed (or is it visited) by the small exemption but it would seem to me that if it's not on your LAR, how can an examiner ask for it? Are small exempt banks now suppossed to block out/not collect more information on the app? If all that's changing is what you report, then I'd tell an examiner 'what you see is what you get. I can give you the docs to support what I've reported. If I'm not required to report other data, I'm not scrubbing or proofing it.'
But again, this doesn't affect me directly but I do get questions from our client banks on what they keep in-house and have to report under the exemption.

Return to Top
#2197078 - 11/01/18 05:48 PM Re: HMDA bill passes House Truffle Royale
RVFlyboy Offline
Power Poster
RVFlyboy
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,978
Soaring over Georgia
I think what is being said is this. As a small filer, I won't have to report credit bureau score, CLTV, or DTI. But if we have a fair lending exam, the first thing the examiners are going to ask me for is our HMDA LAR with those three fields appended to the LAR. If I've already got those data fields in a non-filed LAR that I maintain with all of the expanded data points, then it makes fulfilling that request easy. If I don't have that, I may have to do some digging to get that data for them when they ask for it.

That said, I'm not sure that makes it worthwhile for me to put our lenders, loan assistants and loan processors through the extra hurdles to pull out each of the 57 data fields for the 26 data points that we no longer have to report just to make a subsequent examiner request easy to fulfill. We can extract the data from our system should that request come. We might keep these three most commonly requested additions, but a lot of the other eliminated fields we absolutely will stop inputting into our HMDA data collection screen.
_________________________
Jim Bedsole, CRCM, CBA, CFSA, CAFP
My posts - my opinions

Return to Top
Page 8 of 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8