Mortgage Professional America forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

Industry group to CFPB: Delay QM, disclosure rules

Notify me of new replies via email
Mortgage Professional America | 15 Nov 2013, 12:10 AM Agree 0
A new mortgage rule scheduled for implementation in January should be delayed for a year to study the harm it might cause consumers and originators, according to an industry head.
  • James W | | 15 Nov 2013, 08:29 AM Agree 0
    While I love the idea of the delay I don't think this is going to happen. We as an industry will just have to adjust to the new rules as we make this transition into a new era of mortgage lending.
  • MA broker | | 15 Nov 2013, 08:35 AM Agree 0
    Yes, James W, keep on marching to the beat - lemmings (brokers) over the cliff.
  • Mark Dallas TX | | 15 Nov 2013, 08:51 AM Agree 0
    James I agree
  • Bill | | 15 Nov 2013, 08:58 AM Agree 0
    I agree it probably won't happen since Codray has shown no concrete willingness to address any of the broker issues to date, but it should. If we expect to stay in business we either adapt or go the way of the dodo. But that doesn't mean we have to smile while we eat the bitter gruel. We should fight as long as there is someone willing to listen. Somewhere in the country there remains a scrap of fair play. They have done the same thing on Obamacare...the question is will the consumer even know it's happening to them? It's doubtful the consumer will feel the same painful shock consumers are seeing on the that program compared to the nmortgage business unless we carry the message to the mass media. There's a thought....FOX loves these kinds of stories. Get representatives of the various broker element association groups on Hannity and so on. That's action and not just bitching.
  • Gguy | | 15 Nov 2013, 09:00 AM Agree 0
    Same as the Federal Reserve 2 years ago. Many brokers became branches. A suit went nowhere. Regulators do what they want.
  • gheinecke | | 15 Nov 2013, 09:45 AM Agree 0
    Media and a class action will get attention. Someone has to have the nerve to stand up.
    It will be impossible to make a living and you cannot even warehouse FHA unless you have a net worth of 2.5 million. Bankers and politicians have figured a way to steal your equity and screw the public and the industry. Worst President in history. No budget for four years. Print more money and make side deals in the hundreds of billions to liquidate America's Post Offices while giving the commission to Feinstein. Frank is out there laughing his tail off and I hear giving seminars on how to usurp the Crum put together by the elitists. Oh yes who is to forget about RAJ who ran the CFPB and tried to destroy Fannie and FHLMCC so they could pick up the spoils. Time to redo the whole government. TIME to impeach!!!!!!!!!!!
  • John | | 15 Nov 2013, 09:56 AM Agree 0
    This is how the game works,, Banks control the Lobbyists they control the Congress and we all pay the price.
  • Gsquared7 | | 15 Nov 2013, 11:05 AM Agree 0
    John, sadly, you're dead on target. All of this, Dodd-Frank, the CFPB, newer tighter rules, are bought and paid for by big banks. They nearly account for 90% of all originations now, vs only about 60% 7 years ago. WE pay because they pay off !!!! Get rid of PAC's, get rid of lobbyists, and do not allow campaign fund donations of > "X" to be paid by any one "entity" and police that. Then our congressmen and women aren't bought and paid for by businesses that cheat to stay alive, rather than mutate, grow, improve, or go the way of the dodo.
  • Lee in CA | | 15 Nov 2013, 11:22 AM Agree 0
    Mr. Ryan Smith (article author) does a poor job of detailing legitimate concerns about the rule implementation. The only example given has become a common situation since the new GFE was introduced in 2010. Brokers are used to having to explain why we charge points and credit points. So it this another "sky is falling" moment... or are there mores serious concerns with the rule implementation than the author bothered to tackle?
  • M. Scott | | 18 Nov 2013, 05:38 AM Agree 0
    I agree. There has to be an attorney willing to take on a class suit of all the damaged brokers (ones that still exist and ones that were forced out). Until something like this is done to force the situation to be logically looked into and maybe for once fairly, the big banks will continue to control, destroy, wipe out, and monopolize the industry. The borowers will continue to pay more as we have seen over the last 5 years. Chase now charges $480 for a conventional appraisal and $530 for FHA. How much do you think the actual appraiser now sees of that? Another way for the big banks to pocket money.
  • C L Brown | | 18 Nov 2013, 07:02 AM Agree 0
    WOW. It amazes me how easily some of you give up just because you feel the odds are not in your favor. Maybe you should defect to join the banks as any form of your leadership is not needed on this side of the battleground. "Give me fairness of give me death!"
  • Connie in Dallas | | 18 Nov 2013, 09:57 AM Agree 0
    Lee asks a valid question. Yes we are used to explaining the difference in fee disclosure. The new rules though, would consider everything in the lender credit to the broker as income with no consideration to what fees other than origination are being paid for. Those fees are still counted as a cost. Thus the 3% cap becomes a real issue.
  • Jim | | 25 Nov 2013, 06:19 AM Agree 0
    The law will restrict lending, make it more expensive for the Borrower(s), ruin brokers and do very little actual good. Compliance preparation, updating software and training employees to be accurate in disclosing 100% of the time is impossible! Some legal rights afforded consumers are ridiculous! Bank's Fair Lending profiles could be altered and lead to significant examiner scrutiny! The points and fees calculation will lead to lower $ borrowers paying higher rates over the life of the mortgage rather than the option to pay the fees. Parts of the law address the same issues but with different standards. This was not well written.
Post a reply