3rd party fee increase

The initial Loan Estimate went out with a MERS fee of 11.00 . The loan was locked, a revised Loan Estimate was issued with the same MERS fee figure. A second revised LE was issued (7 days later) and the MERS fee increased 2.00. - The lender CoC states the third party fee increased. MERS increased their fees. The fee is in Section B of the LE and is a zero tolerance fee. I think the lender should have cured this. They disagree.

A vendor raising their price is not a changed circumstance. It has nothing to do with information changing concerning the borrower or the property.

Thank you!

The fee is located in Section B of the LE and CD. Are there any circumstances where a fee located in Section B would not be a required fee of the lender. Any chance they could place a " third party service not required by the creditor" in this section? I don't believe so, but going back and forth.

I am not really sure how a service that was not required would be a service that the borrower could not shop for?

1026.37(f)(2) Services you cannot shop for. Under the subheading “Services You Cannot Shop For,” an itemization of each amount, and a subtotal of all such amounts, the consumer will pay for settlement services for which the consumer cannot shop in accordance with § 1026.19(e)(1)(vi)(A) and that are provided by persons other than the creditor or mortgage broker.

Does this apply? If it did, I still don't see how this fee gets disclosed in Section B of the disclosures--- Property taxes and other charges paid to third-party service providers for services not required by the creditor. (§ 1026.19(e)(3)(iii)(E)) However, creditors may only charge consumers more than the amount disclosed when the original estimated charge, or lack of an estimated charge for a particular service, was based on the best information reasonably available to the creditor at the time the disclosure was provided. (§ 1026.19(e)(3)(iii)). Thus, these charges are subject to a “best information reasonably available” standard.

That has nothing to due with Section B charges. That is saying that if you fail to disclose property taxes that are due in Section F or other charges not required by the lender in Section H in good faith, then those charges are subject to a zero percent tolerance test. So if you know that property taxes are due and will be payable at consummation or that the borrower has indicated they are voluntarily getting some service that will be paid at closing that would normally be disclosed in Section H, if you leave them off your loan estimate, it is going to trigger a cure.

Again, thank you.

Here is the latest. This makes no sense to me. " The fee is a passthrough fee that the creditor doesn't have a choice in charging, therefore it is not a creditor fee."

" The fee is a passthrough fee that the creditor doesn't have a choice in charging, therefore it is not a creditor fee."

To me that indicates it is a required fee by the creditor (otherwise why is the creditor using the service) and it is also a service the borrower cannot shop for.

They can say whatever they want - the regulations say differently.

For example, if the consumer informs the creditor that the consumer will obtain a type of inspection not required by the creditor, the creditor must include the charge for that item in the disclosures provided under § 1026.19(e)(1)(i), but the actual amount of the inspection fee need not be compared to the original estimate for the inspection fee to perform the good faith analysis required by § 1026.19(e)(3)(iii). The original estimated charge, or lack of an estimated charge for a particular service, complies with § 1026.19(e)(3)(iii) if it is made based on the best information reasonably available to the creditor at the time that the estimate was provided.

Otherwise, it defaults to zero percent tolerance.