Although a written list of providers is required if the creditor permits the consumer to shop for a settlement service it requires and listed on the Loan Estimate, do the regulations prohibit a creditor from listing a provider even though the services are not listed on the Loan Estimate (such as for a pest inspection or a survey). I can't seem to find an answer in the regulations.

If you list providers that don't correspond to the services in the Closing Costs table, you don't comply.

19(e)(1)(vi) Shopping for settlement service providers.

3. Written list of providers. The settlement service providers identified on the written list required by § 1026.19(e)(vi)(C) must correspond to the settlement services for which the consumer may shop, disclosed pursuant to § 1026.37(f)(3). See form H-27 of appendix H to this part for a model list.

Agree with Randy. We only have multiple title/escrow companies on our default LSP. If we determine a pest inspection or survey is needed we send an updated LSP with those vendors with the LE sent due to the CC.

The only thing I'd say about Darth's answer is to make vendors singular. We only list the one provider we'd pick. You're responsible for the price you show on the LE being the price that the vendor will charge. Otherwise, you'll be curing.

Thank you all. I missed that one somehow.

One vendor on our LSP does refi's only, other vendor does purchases - just clarifying.

How are they available service providers for the services listed in Section C if they only do one or the other and you list them both.

I agree with Randy. If the one provider is only available to service a refinancing then they should not be disclosed on the list for a purchase transaction.

Back in the dark ages when we were first taking the wraps off the TRID rule, there was discussion about coming up with provider lists that could be used across a bank's footprint. There was a lot of talk about listing multiple providers for services, one for each "coverage area" of a state, for example.

The requirements that the list include each lender-required service in Section C and that each provider listed be available to provide the service made those multi-provider lists unworkable, IMHO, particularly the "available to provide" requirement. From my perspective, listing five radon inspection providers to blanket the imaginary State of of Confusion can work only if the lender crosses out the names of each provider not available to provide the service for the particular property involved in the loan transaction. And that looks just plain unprofessional, I think. The provider list needs to be adaptable to the borrower and property location.