Thread Options
#29820 - 08/28/02 03:44 PM HOEPA and Refi's
swiggles Offline
Power Poster
swiggles
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 7,333
Is this loan subject to HOEPA?

Five years ago, a loan was booked for the purpose of purchasing and improving a homestead. The loan was set up for 59 payments and a balloon. When it was time to renew, a "modification of note and lien" was executed and filed. Credit insurance was also added.

If there's no new note, would the transaction be subject to HOEPA if any of the tests were met? I'm trying to look forward to October 1. Since credit insurance was added to this particular transaction, I was wondering if a similar transaction, done after October 1, might be subject to HOEPA.
_________________________
The more you sweat in training, the less you bleed in battle.......

Return to Top
Lending Compliance
#29821 - 08/30/02 03:05 AM Re: HOEPA and Refi's
David Dickinson Offline
10K Club
David Dickinson
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 18,762
Central City, NE
OK, no one is trying this one, so I'll try to start something.

I'm going to lean on 226.20 that discusses "refinancings" vs. "modifications." If you completed a modification and no new note was consummated, I don't believe you have a loan subject to section 32.

Adding credit insurance to a transaction, doesn't make it a new note. I wouldn't recommend doing this, but you certainly can (legally).

I vote no new TIL so therefore, no Section 32 requirement.
_________________________
David Dickinson
http://www.bankerscompliance.com

Return to Top
#29822 - 08/30/02 02:41 PM Re: HOEPA and Refi's
Dan Persfull Offline
10K Club
Dan Persfull
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 46,416
Bloomington, IN
This is one of those “darn if I do, and darn if I don’t”, but based on the following sections from 226.20, there may be a need to do a new TIL.

(4) A change in the payment schedule or a change in collateral requirements as a result of the consumer's default or delinquency, unless the rate is increased, or the new amount financed exceeds the unpaid balance plus earned finance charge and premiums for continuation of insurance of the types described in Sec. 226.4(d).

(5) The renewal of optional insurance purchased by the consumer and added to an existing transaction, if disclosures relating to the initial purchase were provided as required by this subpart.

# 4 refers to no new money advanced except for earned finance charges and premiums for contiuation of insurance. In this scenario, insurance was not continued , it was added.

# 5 refers to the renewal of optional insurance and where the initial disclosures were provided. Again they did not renew the insurance, they added it.

Granted, they did modify the note and did not create a new note, but since they added credit insurance, was the proper disclosures given to exclude it from the finance charges?

I would lien to providing a new TIL. (However, I always lien to the conservative side.)
_________________________
The opinions expressed are mine and they are not to be taken as legal advice.

Return to Top
#29823 - 09/04/02 02:07 PM Re: HOEPA and Refi's
Compliance Poster Offline
Gold Star
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 380
Shirley, I would like to add on to David's discussion of refinancings vs modifications. He is correct. However, it has been my experience that lenders tend to use the terms 'extention', 'renewal', 'modification', and 'refinancing' often interchangably. This increases the confusion regarding a confusing part of the regulation. Further, based on the various regulatory definitions (Reg Z,B,HMDA,RESPA), examiners tend to consider an obligation that is replacing or satisfying a maturing obligation as a refinancing requiring new disclosures. This may not be correct in all instances, such as listed under 226.20, but many banks take the conservative route, fearing that attempts to parse the law regarding this issue isn't worth the compliance/legal risk.

Patrick T. Hubbs, CRCM, CBCO

Return to Top
#29824 - 09/04/02 10:42 PM Re: HOEPA and Refi's
Lucy Griffin Offline

Diamond Poster
Lucy Griffin
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 1,544
I like David's answer. As to the insurance, if the addition was voluntary, how does that really differ from adding insurance in year 3 of a 5-year balloon. The real test is whether the obligation has been extinguished and replaced.

Return to Top

Moderator:  Andy_Z