**CASTEEL & CASTEEL, P.L.L.C.**

**ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW**

**29710 US Hwy. 281 North**

**Bulverde, Texas 78163**

# Tel: (830) 980-6000 Fax: (830) 980-6030

CARTER CASTEEL CHERYL CASTEEL BARRON CASTEEL

The Office of General Counsel

Regulations Division

Department of Housing and Urban Development

451 7^th^ Street, SW

Room 10276

Washington, DC 20001

 

**[Comments on Real Estate Settlement Procedures]{.underline}**

**[Act (RESPA): Proposed Rule to Simplify and]{.underline}**

**[And Improve the Process of Obtaining]{.underline}**

**[Mortgages and Reduce Consumer]{.underline}**

**[Settlement Costs]{.underline}**

**[Docket No. FR-5180-P-01]{.underline}**

 

Dear Sirs:

 

I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed rule regarding the
Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) that was published in the
*Federal Register* on March 14, 2008.

 

I am an Attorney/CPA in partnership with my Mother and Brother who are
also attorneys. Between our two offices, we employ approximately eight
individuals. We are agents for AmeriPoint Title in Bulverde, Texas and
also run a general law practice in New Braunfels, Texas. My Mother and
law partner, Carter Casteel, is a past Texas Legislator and now in
addition to practicing law, she has a lobbying firm.

 

I believe the rule will be very harmful to the title business.

 

The closing script is of very serious concern and presents a number of
problems for the title industry. This will put me and my company in a
position of explaining loan terms to which we are not a party. This is
the responsibility of the lender, not the settlement agent. This will be
a major new burden on our industry. Further, there is no liability
protection for the settlement agent as he or she is brought into the
process of explaining loan terms. The settlement agent is present to
execute the closing of the loan, not present to explain the loan\'s
terms. In fact, if the settlement agent begins to \"explain\" the loan
terms, one can find themselves engaged in the unauthorized practice of
law.

 

HUD is requiring that it be ready 24 hours before settlement, but there
is no corresponding requirement that the settlement agent receive the
necessary documents prior to this time period to properly prepare the
closing script.

 

The closing script concept is completely new, but, it is redundant of
all the information that is contained in the loan documents. Lastly,
this will end any closings done via mail for customer convenience \--
again adding time and cost to the real estate industry.

 

I believe that in a sale transaction, a closing script is far too late
in the process to be explaining loan terms, and it will interrupt if not
cancel home settlements. I do not believe HUD has given sufficient
attention to the ramifications of the oral closing script coming at the
settlement table when people are waiting for the keys to their new home.

 

The closing script needs to be conducted by the lender and much earlier
in the process, not at settlement.

 

Additionally, HUD\'s new GFE states that \"government recording and
transfer charges\" [cannot]{.underline} increase at settlement. This
shows a lack of understanding of local and state law on HUD\'s part.
There are 254 counties within Texas and each county is allowed to set
its own recording fee. These fees are known by the local title office,
but not the lender, particularly a regional or national lender.
Attorneys prepare the closing documents by instructions from the lender.
The attorneys control the number of pages on each recordable document.
In order to avoid the consequences of not sticking with the ten percent
tolerance of the GFE, it is likely that title agents and companies will
have to absorb cost overruns, including recording fees. Not only is this
the wrong policy, but it could lead to a \"kickback\" that is illegal
under Section 8 of RESPA.

 

Thank you for your consideration of these comments.

 

 

Sincerely,

Cheryl Casteel