Source: https://nafcucomplianceblog.typepad.com/nafcu_weblog/periodic-statements/
Timestamp: 2019-04-19 02:19:51+00:00

Document:
On August 4, 2016, the CFPB amended its mortgage servicing requirements. Since then, NAFCU has been combing through and analyzing the 900+ page rule to help our members better understand the changes and new requirements. We have already blogged on the changes relating to Successors in Interest, Force-Placed Insurance, and Loss Mitigation. Today, we will highlight some of the notable changes made to the periodic statement requirements under Regulation Z’s servicing provisions.
Here’s a link to the Final Rule. This final regulation includes the preamble with rulemaking background, and a section-by section analysis with the provisions of the final rule and public comments.
There’s a 9-page summary of the major changes which gives a high-level discussion of the major provisions of the rule. View the overview here.
The actual amended rule with model forms and commentary (and 100+ pages), can be found here.
If the balance of a mortgage loan has been accelerated but the servicer has agreed to accept a lesser amount to reinstate the loan, the servicer MUST disclose the LESSER amount, i.e. the reinstatement amount, on the periodic statement; not the entire accelerated balance. In the preamble, the CFPB reasoned that displaying the lesser amount rather than the full accelerated balance would make the consumer more likely to pay the reinstatement amount, thereby preventing foreclosure. The CFPB further explained that having the full acceleration amount on the periodic statement will cause confusion, particularly if the consumer was told previously that he/she was only required to pay a lesser reinstatement amount.
If the loan contract has been permanently modified, the servicer MUST disclose the amount due under the modified loan contract; not the pre-modified amount.
If the consumer has agreed to a temporary loss mitigation program, the servicer MAY disclose either: (i) the payment due under the temporary loss mitigation program; or (ii) the amount due according to the original loan contract.
The final rule limits the circumstances in which a servicer is exempted from providing a periodic statement. Under the final rule, a servicer is exempted from providing the periodic statement if a two-prong test is satisfied. A servicer is not required to provide a periodic statement if: (1) any borrower on the loan is a debtor in bankruptcy or has discharged personal liability for the mortgage loan through bankruptcy; and (2) any of the following occurs: (i) the borrower requests in writing that the servicer cease providing a periodic statement; (ii) the borrower’s bankruptcy plan provides that the borrower will surrender the home securing the loan, will avoid the lien, or otherwise does not provide for payment of pre-bankruptcy arrearage or maintenance of payments due under the loan; (iii) the bankruptcy court order provides for the avoidance of the lien, lifts the automatic stay, or requires the servicer to stop providing statements; or (iv) the borrower files a statement of intent to surrender the home securing the loan and has not made any payment on the loan after filing for bankruptcy.
The final rule applies the exemption at the loan level. Thus, a servicer is exempt with respect to all consumers on a mortgage loan if the exemption criteria are met with respect to any borrower on the loan.
Servicers are required to provide modified periodic statements for certain borrowers in bankruptcy. Section 1026.41(f) lays out certain omissions and additions for these modified statements. For example, the statement may omit information about late payment fees, certain delinquency information, and the notice of whether the servicer has issued the first notice or filing for foreclosure. On the other hand, the periodic statement must include a statement identifying the borrower’s status as a borrower or the discharged status of the loan, as well as a statement that the periodic statement is for informational purposes only. There are additional provisions relating to borrowers in bankruptcy under Chapter 12 or 13. For example, these periodic statements may omit the information regarding delinquency. Similarly, there are certain required additions as well. For example, the statement must show all the payments received since the last statement, as well as all charges the servicer has imposed since the last statement. Additionally, these periodic statement must disclose a statement that, as applicable: (i) the amount due includes only post-petition payments and no other payments due under the bankruptcy plan; (ii) the borrower should send post-petition payments to the trustee, and not the servicer, if the borrower’s plan so requires; (iii) the information disclosed on the periodic statement may not include payments the borrower made to the trustee, and may be inconsistent with the trustee’s records; (iv) encourages the borrower to contact his/her attorney or trustee with questions; and (v) if the borrower is more than 45 days delinquent on post-petition payments, the servicer has not received all payments that became due since the bankruptcy filing.
Exempts servicers from sending periodic statements if the loan is charged off, provided the servicer meets certain conditions (12 C.F.R. §1026.41(e)(6)). The final rule exempts servicers from the periodic statement requirements of §1026.41 for charged-off loans if: (i) the servicer will not charge additional fees or interest on the account; and (ii) the servicer provides a final periodic statement, clearly and conspicuously labeled “Suspension of Statement & Notice of Charge Off- Retain This Copy for Your Records.” This final periodic statement must contain certain disclosures, including statements that the loan has been charged off, the servicer will not impose new fees or interest, the lien on the property remains in place and that the borrower is liable for the loan and related obligations such as taxes, and that the lien is not being cancelled or forgiven. In the preamble, the CFPB stated that these disclosures were important to help borrowers better understand the meaning and consequence of charge-off, including the borrower’s ongoing payment obligations. Also, the Bureau concluded that this final statement will provide important consumer protections while easing the burden for servicers associated with providing ongoing periodic statements.
Provides sample periodic statement forms. The final rule provides sample forms that servicers may use for borrowers in bankruptcy to ensure compliance with the requirements under §1026.41.
Rule’s Effective Date: The changes regarding the bankruptcy periodic statement exemption and modified statements for borrowers in bankruptcy are effective 18 months after publication in the Federal Register, and the other periodic statement changes are effective 12 months after publication in the Federal Register. And yes, we’re still waiting for the rule to be published. Not there yet!
In the meantime, while preparing for the new compliance requirements, credit unions may want to consider reviewing their policies and procedures to make sure they reflect the new servicing requirements.
As always, if you have any questions relating to this article or any other issues concerning the amended mortgage servicing rules, please contact NAFCU’s regulatory compliance team. We’re here for you!
Bonjour, I am back from a wonderful Paris voyage where I tied the knot with the most wonderful man in compliance.
A few weeks ago we received a question from a member who wanted to know the specific requirements for periodic statements for loans. Regulation Z requires credit unions to provide borrowers with prompt, regular and accurate information for certain loan types. 12 C.F.R. § 1026. The content and format of periodic statements vary and it is important to occasionally check your credit union’s periodic statements to ensure the correct rules are being applied. I broke down the requirements for four loan types and included the section of the rule in which you can find the specific requirements. Keep in mind that some periodic statements will be shaped by state law and contractual obligations as opposed to federal regulations. Below is a quick reference chart with the loan type and applicable rules.
For “closed-end consumer credit transaction[s] secured by a dwelling”, such as closed-end first and second mortgage loans, Reg Z section 1026.41 and its official interpretation specifically address periodic statement requirements. The general requirement is to provide the borrower with a periodic statement for each billing cycle. See, 12 C.F.R. § 1026.41(a)(2). The sections that follow talk about timing, form, content and layout, and exceptions. See, 1026.41(b)-(e). Among the most notable exemptions is for small servicers that together with their affiliates, service 5,000 or fewer mortgage loans. See, 12 C.F.R. § 1026.41(e)(4).
Appendix H has useful sample forms that combine the components of periodic statements. For example, H-30(A) is a Sample Form of a Periodic Statement, H-30(B) is a sample of a Periodic Statement with Delinquency Box, and H-30(C) is a sample of a Periodic Statement for a Payment-Option Loan. Compliance officers may want to look at these samples and compare them to the ones currently used by their mortgage department to ensure that the statements have not been changed to accommodate vendors, exceptions, and marketing messages.
Regulation Z does not have specific requirements for these loans. The rule largely defers to the agreement between the credit union and the member to set timing, format and content requirements. Hence if the credit union’s loan agreement states that the credit union will provide the member with monthly/quarterly/annual statements, then the requirement to provide periodic statements becomes contractual. There may be state law requirements that regulate periodic statements for these loan types, so the credit union may want to discuss state law requirements with local counsel to ensure that it has the appropriate content, format and timing.
Similar to closed-end credit, Regulation Z breaks up requirements for home secured and non-home secured open-end credit. Specifically, Reg Z section 1026.7(a) and its official interpretation pertain to Home Equity Lines of Credit (HELOCs). The official interpretation in this section is very helpful and in-depth. Some of the information that a HELOCs periodic statements must have are account balance, transactions, credits, rates, balances on which finance charge was computed, amount of finance charge, APR, grace period, address for notice of billing errors, and closing date of billing cycle. See, 12 C.F.R. § 1026.7(a)(1)-(10).
For HELOCs, Appendix G-18 has sample periodic statement forms and it also breaks down some sections like interest charge fees and late payments. Make sure to reference home-secured open-end credit periodic statement model forms and not the credit card model form.
Section 1026.7(b), with its relevant official interpretation, pertains to non-home secured open-end lines of credit including credit cards. Among some of the components of this loan type are previous balances, transactions, noting any credits given such as a returned merchandise or rebate finance charge, periodic rates used to compute the interest rate charges, change-in-terms, due date and late payment costs, etc. See, 12 C.F.R. § 1026.7(b)(1)-(12). The format requirements are found in section 1026.7(b)(13) which discusses the positioning, proximity and grouping of certain information. 12 C.F.R. § 1026.7(b)(13).
For non-home secured open-end credit, Appendix G-18 provides a great example of the requirements found in the rule. Appendix G-18(D) has a credit card model form and the rest of the G-18 series has other open-end credit periodic statement disclosures and components.
Finally, I would like to highlight one final item—a photo from my wedding. This is proof that two compliance people can take some time out from rules and regulations to have fun. You may recognize the groom from numerous webcasts, conferences and face-to-face interactions he has with our members.
This week we've been discussing the possibility of sending electronic mortgage periodic statements. There are also quite a few other issues related to mortgage statements that credit unions need to be ready for. One, in particular, is whether or not combined statements are a viable option after the mortgage servicing proposals are finalized.
"Based on industry outreach, the Bureau understands that some institutions provide a combined statement for mortgage loans and other financial products. For example if a consumer has both a checking account and a mortgage with a credit union, the consumer may receive a single combined statement. The Bureau seeks comment on how servicers would actually combine statements. In particular, the Bureau notes that difficulties may arise when different disclosures have different timing requirements, and when multiple disclosures have requirements that information be presented on the first page of the statement. For example, if both mortgage loan disclosures and credit card disclosures are required to be on the first page of a statement, how would these statements be combined?"
Of course, NAFCU addressed this issue in our comment letter and asked the CFPB for flexibility so that credit unions would not be required to drastically change their current business practice given the fact that the benefit to members was not proven.
"The timing requirements of the proposed periodic statements will pose tremendous problems for both credit unions and their members. For example, many credit unions service mortgages with due dates throughout the month, and would have to mail statements each day in order to comply with the proposed requirement that a statement be sent within 4 days after the close of the grace period of the previous cycle.
Many credit unions currently provide combined statements at the beginning of each month. The combined statements contain a vast majority of the information that the proposed periodic statement contains. Borrowers are not only used to this format, but prefer it because they are not receiving multiple statements from their credit union throughout the month, but rather, a single combined statement that contains information about their loan, checking, share (savings) and other appropriate accounts. The proposed timing requirements would make this tried and true credit union practice virtually impossible to continue. Accordingly, NAFCU strongly urges the agency to carve out exceptions from the proposed timing and other requirements that would allow credit unions to provide combined statements, and provide a sample form of such combined statement. As the CFPB finalizes the rule, it should reach out to credit unions that currently provide combined statements to construct its final rule and NAFCU would be pleased to assist the agency in this endeavor."
If your credit union currently provides mortgage information on your other statements, be sure to keep an eye on this issue when the final rule comes out.
Member Call-In. NAFCU’s last member-only call-in of the year will take place December 6, 2012 at 3:30 p.m. (EST). Join NAFCU President and CEO Fred Becker and senior staff for an important briefing on current legislative developments and regulatory challenges affecting credit unions.
The call is free and a NAFCU-member exclusive benefit, but you must register to participate.
"Electronic distribution. TILA section 128(f)(2) provides that periodic statements “may be transmitted in writing or electronically.” Consistent with this provision, proposed § 1026.41(c) would allow statements to be provided electronically, if the consumer agrees. As discussed above, the requirement to transmit a periodic statement to the consumer may be met by sending the consumer an e-mail notification that the statement is available, rather than e-mailing the statement itself in light of information security concerns. This paragraph would require only affirmative consent by the consumer to receive statements, not compliance with E-Sign verification procedures. The Bureau does not believe E-Sign consent is required by the statute. E-Sign is designed to provide an electronic alternative to required writings. The statute, however, requires only periodic “statements” as opposed to “writings” to be transmitted to consumers. Additionally, the statute contemplates electronic statements, as TILA section 129(f)(2) provides that the Bureau shall prescribe a standard form, taking into account that the statements required may be transmitted in writing or electronically. Thus, the Bureau believes that Congress did not intend to require E-Sign verification procedures." (emphasis added).
Thus, if the CFPB's proposal is adopted as is - credit unions would have flexibility to send mortgage periodic statements electronically without following the full E-SIGN Act consent process. A member's authorization - properly documented by the CU - would be sufficient.
This flexibility also has the potential to cause confusion in your credit union's procedures and training. Your staff and colleagues will naturally ask why the E-SIGN Act process is required for share, checking and credit card statements but not for mortgages.
We'll be blogging about a few other similar issues in the upcoming weeks as well, so stay tuned.
20 Notices. If you are looking for an example of increased regulatory burden, you need not look any further than the CFPB's mortgage servicing proposed rules. The proposals, taken together, will require at least 20 notices by credit unions. Below I've included a listing of these proposed notices along with the proposed section number. Oh, and a majority of these notices have their own unique timing requirements.
Of course, this is an unofficial number but it does give you an idea of the CFPB's mortgage proposal changes.
Wow - that is quite a few proposed notices for financial institutions who did not cause the financial crisis and who did not use servicing practices that lead to the National Mortgage Settlement.
It would seem reasonable that the same rationale would apply to the other new notices proposed by the CFPB to correct the errors of large servicers.
Comments Needed. If you are wondering what action your credit union can take, consider commenting on the proposed rules and letting the CFPB know how difficult it will be to comply with 20 new notice requirements. NAFCU members can view our Regulatory Alert here (12-EA-24), comments are due to NAFCU by September 18, 2012. If you comment directly to the CFPB, comments are due October 9, 2012.
We've been blogging on the CFPB's mortgage servicing proposals quite a bit recently. And, naturally, quite a few of those blog posts have been lengthy. I wanted to take a bit to consolidate some of those blog posts in a central location (with links) to help keep everyone organized.
CFPB Issues Mortgage Servicing Proposal. This blog post announces the CFPB's mortgage servicing proposals, links to the actual proposals, summaries and additional resources.
Summaries of Three TILA Proposed Changes. This blog post includes the summaries of the CFPB's three main proposed changes to Regulation Z (TILA). The post includes links to the preambles, regulatory text, official staff commentary and any model forms.
Summaries of the First Three RESPA Proposed Changes. This blog post includes the summaries of the CFPB's first three main proposed changes to Regulation X (RESPA). The post also includes links to the preambles, regulatory text, official staff commentary and any model forms.
Summaries of the Last Three RESPA Proposed Changes. This blog post includes the summaries of the CFPB's last three main proposed changes to Regulation X (RESPA). The post also includes links to the preambles, regulatory text, official staff commentary and any model forms.
Proposed Exemption for Credit Unions that Service 1000 of Fewer Mortgages. This blog post reviews the CFPB's proposal to exempt - from the mortgage periodic statement requirement - credit unions that service 1000 or fewer mortgage loans.
Proposed Coupon Book Exemption. This blog post reviews the CFPB's proposed implementation of the "coupon book exemption" which would allow credit unions to send coupon books in lieu of periodic statements for their fixed-rate mortgage loans if they followed the proposed requirements.
Just the Beginning. Don't worry - there will be plenty of additional issues that come out of the CFPB's proposed mortgage rules. We'll do our best to keep everyone up to date on these issues. If you are interested, we'll be covering the CFPB's proposed mortgage rules in depth during our September 5th webcast as well as our Regulatory Compliance Seminar in Seattle, Washington (October 23-26).
Note: The early-bird pricing for both of these events is rapidly approaching (Wednesday, August 29th for the webcast and Friday, August 31st for Seminar). Additionally, the main hotel for Seminar is completely booked - although there are numerous other hotels within short walking distance.
Yesterday's blog post looked at the CFPB's proposed exemption for mortgage servicers who service 1000 or fewer mortgages. Today, we'll look at the "coupon book exemption" that was mandated by Dodd-Frank and how the CFPB plans to implement this exemption.
Initially, here are the three pages of the CFPB's TILA mortgage servicing proposal that discuss the proposed coupon book exemption.
First, it is clear the coupon book exemption is only available for fixed rate residential mortgage loans. Any adjustable-rate mortgages would need to be provided the periodic statement (assuming the CU services over 1000 mortgages).
Second, the "coupon book exemption" applies when the credit union provides the borrower with "substantially the same information as required in paragraph (1)." So, what is required by paragraph (1)?
‘‘(A) The amount of the principal obligation under the mortgage.
‘‘(B) The current interest rate in effect for the loan.
‘‘(C) The date on which the interest rate may next reset or adjust.
‘‘(D) The amount of any prepayment fee to be charged, if any.
‘‘(E) A description of any late payment fees.
‘‘(F) A telephone number and electronic mail address that may be used by the obligor to obtain information regarding the mortgage.
‘‘(G) The names, addresses, telephone numbers, and Internet addresses of counseling agencies or programs reasonably available to the consumer that have been certified or approved and made publicly available by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development or a State housing finance authority (as defined in section 1301 of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989).
‘‘(H) Such other information as the Board may prescribe in regulations." (Emphasis added).
Thus, Congress indicated what information must be included in the coupon book to qualify for the exemption - but also gave the CFPB the ability to require additional items as well.
"The Bureau recognizes the value of the coupon book as striking a balance between ensuring consumers receive important information, and providing a low burden method for servicers to comply with the periodic statement requirements. As such, the Bureau seeks to effectuate the coupon book exemption. The nature of a coupon book (both its smaller size and static nature) creates difficulties in including substantially similar information as would be on a periodic statement. The main problem is the static nature of a coupon book. Because a coupon book may cover an entire year or more, it cannot include information that changes on a monthly basis. By contrast, a periodic statement can provide dynamic information that changes on a monthly basis. To address this problem, the Bureau is proposing to modify the coupon book exception permitted by TILA section 128(f)(3) to apply the exception where the coupon book contains certain static information and other dynamic information is made accessible to the consumer." (Emphasis added).
Thus, the CFPB is utilizing its authority to require additional information be provided before a coupon book would qualify for an exemption from the mortgage periodic statement requirement.
"Information made available. As discussed above, due to the static nature of the coupon book, certain dynamic information that is required to be included on periodic statements cannot be included. To use the coupon book provision, the proposed rule would require that the dynamic information be made available upon the consumer’s request. The servicer could provide the information orally, or in writing, or electronically, if the consumer consents. Thus, proposed paragraph (e)(3)(iii) would require the following dynamic information be made available to the consumer upon request: the monthly payment amount, including a breakdown showing how much, if any, will be allocated to principal, interest, and any escrow account; the total of fees or charges imposed since the last payment period; any payment amount past due; the total of all payments received since the beginning of the payment period, including a breakdown of how much, if any, of those payments was applied to principal, interest, escrow, fees and charges, and any partial payment suspense accounts; the total of all payments received since the beginning of the calendar year, including a breakdown of how much, if any, of those payments was applied to principal, interest, escrow, fees and charges, and how much is currently in any partial payment or suspense account; and a list of all the transaction activity (as defined in proposed comment 41(d)(4)-1) that occurred since the payment period.
The Bureau seeks comment on whether requiring servicers to make this information available would impose significant burden or costs that exceed consumer benefits. In particular, the Bureau seeks comment on whether providing the past payment breakdown information would impose greater burden then benefits." (Emphasis added).
Ultimately, this requirement for "dynamic information" clearly diminishes the benefit of the "coupon book exemption" and whether it is a useful avenue for credit unions to pursue.
For reference, the proposed regulatory text - 12 CFR 1026.41(e)(3) - is available here. The preamble to the proposed exemption is available here.
Comments. As with many of the other issues, credit union comments on their current practices and how the CFPB's proposed exemption impacts their practices are extremely important. If you have stories, information or data on your current practices that you would like to share with NAFCU - please pass it along and we'll make sure the CFPB is aware of how their proposal will impact credit unions.
Last Tuesday we highlighted the three main TILA proposed changes from the CFPB's mortgage servicing proposal. Today I wanted to delve into the mortgage periodic statement requirement a bit deeper - especially the proposed exemption for small servicers.
Proposed Exemption. The CFPB has proposed an exemption from the mortgage periodic statement for mortgage servicers that service 1000 mortgages or fewer that they originated and retained either the ownership or servicing rights. Importantly, the proposed exemption is not 1000 mortgages originated per year. Rather, it is 1000 mortgages that the CU services - which could include mortgages originated many years ago.
CFPB Assumptions. The CFPB readily admits that it "lacks the data necessary to precisely calibrate the amount of burden that would be imposed by the periodic statement requirement on servicers of different sizes." Despite this, the CFPB believes the 1000 mortgage exemption is the right level. The CFPB's explanation indicates that most loans are refinanced about every five years - which would work out to 200 mortgage originations per year to come under the proposed exemption of 1000 (5 years of 200 originations).
Based on Refinances in 5 Years. The CFPB's assumptions have some serious issues. The CFPB assumes that consumers only refinance loans with other entities. If a CU's member refinances their loan at the credit union (due to decreasing rates), that mortgage would still count toward the 1000 mortgages.
Additionally, what happens to refinance activity in an increasing interest rate market? Does the CFPB's assumption take into account that your members will not refinance or prepay their loans when rates are increasing? I think it is pretty clear the CFPB hasn't thought about that angle. While the CFPB's five year assumption was designed to reflect the current market - does it reflect the past history? Is it a workable exemption for a changing market? Does it provide relief for small servicers in both increasing and decreasing interest rate markets?
"The Bureau seeks comment on all aspects of the proposed exemption, particularly whether the regulation should exempt small servicers, and, if so, whether the proposed scope and definition of a small servicer is appropriate. Specifically, should the test be the one proposed regarding origination, and is 1,000 or less the appropriate size threshold? The Bureau particularly requests data on implementation costs and the level of general activity by small servicers. The Bureau also seeks comment on whether it would be appropriate to exempt small servicers from other elements of the proposed servicing rules under TILA and RESPA." (Page 97).
NAFCU's Regulatory Affairs team will be issuing a Regulatory Alert to NAFCU members highlighting the proposed changes and soliciting comments - including on the proposed exemption - to pass along to the CFPB. Now is the best time to analyze this issue and provide your comments as it is very difficult to get exemptions increased or altered after the regulations are finalized.
Special 3-Hour NAFCU Webcast. On September 5th, I'll be doing a 3-hour webcast "Inside the CFPB's Mortgage Proposals" where we'll look at the proposed mortgage periodic statement requirement (including the proposed exemption) in more detail. Sign up by August 29th to Save $100.
Editor's Note: Today's regularly scheduled post was bumped to Monday to provide the latest from the CFPB.
The Good News. The CFPB has added a search bar to their website.
The Bad News. The CFPB issued two mortgage servicing proposed rules today - one under Regulation Z (TILA) and the other under Regulation X (RESPA). The comment period will end October 9, 2012 and the CFPB intends to finalize these rules by January 21, 2013.
The Reg Z (TILA) proposal clocks in at 178-pages and the Reg X (RESPA) proposal clocks in at 250-pages. Small in comparison, you might say. Well, the CFPB seems to be feeling the heat for their massive proposals as they stopped using double-spacing.
Summary of Design and Testing Findings.
And, NAFCU's Regulatory Affairs team will be drafting Regulatory Alerts on both proposals for NAFCU members.
You may be banging your head on your desk scratching your head wondering how you can keep up. We'll do our best to help - including two upcoming education events.
Seminar. Our Compliance Seminar - October 23-26 in Seattle - will have sessions on the TILA/RESPA proposal, the remittances final rule and these latest mortgage servicing proposals. Sign up by August 31st and Save $100.
September 5th Mortgage Webcast. Additionally, on September 5th I'll be doing a NAFCU webcast titled "Inside the CFPB's Mortgage Proposals." I'll dive into the details of the TILA/RESPA proposal (including the potential change to finance charges and the APR), the HOEPA/high-cost proposal as well as the new mortgage servicing proposal. Sign up by August 29th to Save $100. Also, the webcast is currently slated for 1.5 hours but we'll definitely going much longer than that given the amount of material to cover.
The CFPB has been working on mortgage issues in a couple of different areas and I thought it would be a good idea to include links to their information in one location. Especially as issues seem to disappear on the CFPB's website. It is truly amazing that a 21st century agency has not included a search bar on either the first or second design of their website.
I hope the CFPB realizes that institutions cannot instantaneously track and review the hundreds of pages of information the CFPB releases each week. A search bar would be the first step in increasing transparency. It really isn't that hard. The NAFCU Compliance Blog has one.
Mortgage Origination. The CFPB plans to propose these rules this summer with a final rule in place by January 2013. Below are links to the CFPB's working documents.
According to the CFPB's press release, the CFPB can provide up to one year of implementation time (January 2014). However, the CFPB hasn't decided on the implementation period. Credit unions will want to be very clear in their future comment letters about how long this massive overhaul will take and why even the one-year period might not be enough.
TILA/RESPA Disclosures. The CFPB is also moving forward with their TILA/RESPA mortgage disclosure consolidation. This was the CFPB's first "Know Before You Owe" campaign. At this point, it looks like the CFPB is hunkering down with all of their comments with an aim of getting a proposed rule out by July 21, 2012.
And, this isn't all of it. The CFPB will be pretty much changing every aspect of mortgage lending within the next couple of years. For an eye to what else the CFPB is working on, take a look at their Agency Rule List.
If the outlines are 37; 60 and 42 pages - how long will the actual rulemakings be??

References: §1026
 §1026
 §1026
 § 1026
 § 1026
 § 1026
 § 1026
 § 1026
 § 1026
 § 1026