Our financial institution is not a HMDA reporter but occasionally will deny an application and do not hand it off to an investor for review?
Are we required to make changes in response to the new final rules?
Our financial institution has engaged a third-party mortgage lender to process our applications, including underwriting, on our behalf. We report these on our HMDA LAR. Our examiners are questioning this and feel the third party should report because they made the credit decisions. What should we do?
I have recently learned about a rather unique construction perm product and have a question about it in regard to the new upcoming TRID rules. Here's how the product functions now. The loan is a one-time close, 30-year term, fully amortizing from the beginning. Only one LE/CD is issued. The rate is fixed at opening and does not change at all during the term. There is no interest-only period. At closing, the funds are put into an escrow/reserve account and disbursed to the borrower periodically over the construction period. At this time they do not charge any inspection fees but are considering changing their process to have the inspections conducted by a third party and charging for three inspections. If these fees are disclosed to be collected at consummation, what recourse is there if an event occurs that requires an additional inspection? Does the bank simply have to absorb that cost since this is a zero tolerance cost and the CD has already been issued and compared to the LE? If these fees are to be collected after consummation, disclosed on a separate addendum, and this event requiring the additional inspection occurs, can the bank simply collect the additional fee without violating the zero tolerance?
If the lender provides the fire and hazard insurance on a mortgage loan, is this a zero tolerance for the loan estimate? While one can do a pretty good job using MLS / Internet to come up with an insurance value, but this amount could change when reviewing, say an insurance review that would be obtained prior to the closing disclosure. Say MLS cited 800 sq ft, but the insurance review cited 1200, or even if a for sale by owner, (FSBO), with limited "online" information, the insurance review comes back noting a custom kitchen, flooring, bath etc. when this was not known up front.