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

CFPB 'fundamentally unaccountable': Hensarling

Notify me of new replies via email
Mortgage Professional America | 29 Jan 2014, 11:21 AM Agree 0
The chairman of the House Financial Services Committee blasted the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau as “fundamentally unaccountable” Tuesday during a committee hearing on the agency
  • david i | | 29 Jan 2014, 08:39 AM Agree 0
    that is proof the cfpb should be dissolved immediately as a total waste of resources to the American people
  • Nancy | | 29 Jan 2014, 08:39 AM Agree 0
    Congress needs to make more noise about this. Every instance where a consumer falls through the proverbial cracks of QM, ATR and APR, should be immediately reported to their congressman and senator.
  • AMEN Mr. Hensarling | | 29 Jan 2014, 08:41 AM Agree 0
    1. The CFPB is housed and paid for by the 'FED'.

    2. There is only one person running the entire department. It should be a board made up of people from various parts of the industry and consumer groups. This would help prevent damaging and unfair legislation to specific businesses and consumers.
  • Tim | | 29 Jan 2014, 08:41 AM Agree 0
    Unfortunately, I have had to turn away multiple borrowers that are purchasing homes under $100,000. As a small broker I am limited in what I can earn but the banks can, and do, charge what ever they want. So despite my hard work to get the borrower to come to me I must turn it over to the local bank where they will pay more than they would have if I was allowed to earn my normal income.
  • Viva la Revolucion | | 29 Jan 2014, 08:41 AM Agree 0
    Day late and a dollar short.
  • Keith Wilcox | | 29 Jan 2014, 08:46 AM Agree 0
    It's easy to beat everything up and being a republican for 30 years I'm tired of complaining while not coming up with solutions. The Cfpb is here with a lot of good and some bad. The good is people have a place to complain and really get things accomplished quickly since the financial industry is scared out of their wits of the Cfpb.
    The bad part is Dodd/Frank and Qm since it seems they never spoke with any brokers and the very people they want to protect(the consumers) are paying more after D/F than they ever have. They pay more for rate, appraisal, credit, FHA monthly mortgage insurance and more.
    And when it comes to jobs, how can brokers grow their companies making 2.75 on a $150,000 mortgage amount. And we are being asked to hire people...
    I hope they can use some common sense to make the good better and get rid of the bad. Yeah right!
  • Don | | 29 Jan 2014, 08:46 AM Agree 0
    AAAAH! let's see, didn't the illustrious congress place the CFPB under the Federal Reserve and therefore outside the oversight of the congress, the president and the courts. So the CFPB is being blasted by Hensarling for not being accountable .... HUH ... Run that by me again!
  • John Deleva | | 29 Jan 2014, 09:05 AM Agree 0
    If congress read the laws they pass instead of preening for the media with their well thought out sound bits followed by their instinctual efforts to figure out how and from whom to collect from as the laws work its way through congress they might well have had this debate before they passed the legislation that has lead to CFPB. As Nancy Pelosi so famously uttered "if you want to know what's in the bill you'll need to pass it". How the American people tolerate this I will never completely understand.
  • 2B | | 29 Jan 2014, 09:09 AM Agree 0
    Dodd Frank needs to be challenged as an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers. Neither Congress nor the presidency can legally delegate away it constitutional responsibilities. Problem is the legal fees, just to start would exceed $1M and the larger institutions do not find it in their interest.
  • Cheryl M | | 29 Jan 2014, 09:12 AM Agree 0
    Thank you Don!! Another example how Hensarling and other elected officials should do our job before making comment. I have personally made an attempt to better understand the CFPB and through extensive work through their website and other links I have found the CFPB has many to account to and for. From the sounds of it Hensarling should do similar research on the CFPB. As for consumer being helped I found that consumers are being helped by the cfpb and then some. The have a consumer database full of this information and most of it benefits the consumers. However, I do disagree with QM, not that Hensarling can pose a valid argument about it, QM does in fact hurt the consumer. By that, prior to January 10, consumers had the opportunity to pay a (let's call it "one time fee" so Hensarling can understand) that fee was "one" time. Under the QM rule those fees are now rolled in under the interest rate. Simple math, let's say that one time fee was ie: $3000.00 that's is "all" the consumer paid, with QM that same $3,000.00 has as ie: 4% interest rate attached to it. $3,000 at 4% over 30 years is A LOT OF MONEY. That hurts the consumer!!!!! So yes Hensarling is correct in that the CFPB should not be associated with full power.
  • Bill | | 29 Jan 2014, 09:16 AM Agree 0
    Complaining now is too late at the moment. The only possible daylight for any chnage at all is the mid term and 2016 where we can only only hope power can be takend back from the tree hugging liberal elite that control everyone that has their hand out and are too the present through the power of the vote of those too stupid to understand the old axiom of feed a man today vs. versus teach him how to feed himself. Greasing the palm of the new voting majority is "power" and the Dem's fully understand how to wield it. Put our effort into voting in change and forget the useless complaining. Then hold the new folks feet to the fire....term limits would be nice.
  • L.A. Stevens | | 29 Jan 2014, 09:27 AM Agree 0
    There's an old adage that says if you control yourself, others won't have to." If financial institutions hadn't flaunted their greed and lack of control and brought down our economy... Dodd-Frank and CFPB wouldn't be needed. The same lack of accountability that this article throws toward the CFPB was rampant in financial institutions under the last Bush administration. And, that lack of accountability was far more damaging to everyone in the US economy than the CFPB could ever be now. Everyone has suffered for the collapse of the economy under when the financial institutions were not held accountable. There is the possibility of abuse of power, wherever it exists. And trust me, I worry about CFPB audits and fines and work every day to mitigate the coming audit. And I also want credit to be available to low- to moderate-income people who show responsibility in handling what money they do have. I am among the low- to moderate-income folks myself. Still, I'd rather know someone is watching the greedy (those already rich who hope to get more so) rather than letting them run amok.
  • Traci | | 29 Jan 2014, 09:34 AM Agree 0
    Congress passed Dodd Frank with the CFPB being formulated out of why in the world didn't they make it accountable and set it up accordingly in the first place??? The fat cow is out of the barns can't just close the door aftwards. You need to start over...kinda sounds a lot like the failed Obama Crap (care).
  • john Deleva | | 29 Jan 2014, 09:59 AM Agree 0
    To LA Stevens

    Your comments are on point and well received, I would add that greed and malfeasance is not exclusive to the rich, it is well represented in all income levels and walks of life. The rich, middle income and the poor should all equally fear an intrusive government while embracing personal responsibility...
  • John C Durham | | 29 Jan 2014, 10:00 AM Agree 0
    Where was this guy during the last 5 years when more than a million households were thrown out of their houses? Of course, that's no big deal. Let's get back to the main point...which is...government, government, government...bad, bad, bad. Yawn.
  • R Glines | | 29 Jan 2014, 10:14 AM Agree 0
    LA Stevens -
    The issue that is not being addressed by your comment is.. the Dodd/Frank Bill and resulting legislation move the power up the ladder to the rich (Big Banks) .. the lobbyists in the smoke filled rooms wrote it or at least fine tuned it - to do damage to the little guy who can be competitive- and consolidate the originations at the bank level
  • john deleva | | 29 Jan 2014, 11:04 AM Agree 0
    To LA Stevens

    You have come around to the point of my original comment, intrusive government is not the answer. Injustice will only grow and shift with expanded government, today the bad folks on Wall Street tomorrow the directors of programs and agencies borne out of the nanny state mentality...human nature is what it is...the wise adage, "less is more" is often correct! Thanks for the exchange...peace!
  • John C Durham | | 29 Jan 2014, 11:06 AM Agree 0
    R Glines,

    I think you are right on point. Dodd & Frank were so drenched in conflict it is going to be easy for everyone one day to see why they both got the heck out of there after they dropped their bomb...
  • Griff | | 29 Jan 2014, 11:08 AM Agree 0
    Hensarling's problem is that Congress is not controlling the CFPB. Give him a congress controlled agency and he'd be fine with it. Bottom line we don't need the cfpb. When it comes to mortgage they have increased costs to the consumer and reduced options. The 3% rule simply caused lenders to waive underwriting fees by putting them in the rate, So now the consumer can make a higher payment for 30 yrs to the lender. Woohoo! Great job cfpb! So what if they stop one lender or catch some fraud now and then. Overall consumers are paying millions more so those who are too lame to make better life choices have an out.
  • John C Durham | | 29 Jan 2014, 11:19 AM Agree 0
    Oh? I wonder why Edmund Randolph would introduce the "highly centralized" Virginia Plan and WHEN INTRODUCING IT took time to point out a THE WELL KNOWN FACT of that time: "The LARGER the jurisdiction the greater protection of individual Rights, and we find the more at risk they are in SMALLER government entities."

    Sorry. I forgot for a moment that Ignorance of our actual History is always the Premium in the country now days.
  • Mimi Wills | | 29 Jan 2014, 12:02 PM Agree 0
    Most of what the CFPB is enforcing should be whatall lenders/brokers/bankers should have been doing all along, however, in some cases, what CFPB has implemented on January 10, 2014 could very well deny buyers & existing homeowners CHOICES of mortgage products and desirable interest rates.
    Also, the Bureau is nearly taking away the ability of well trained & educated underwriters to use their knowledge to make balanced decisions on approving or denying a mortgage for a consumer. Our world of mortgage underwriting is not necessarily boiler plate, there should be a certain amount of "common sense" still allowed when making decisions on mortgage approvals.
    I think the "rules" implemented by CFPB should be reviewed very carefully to be certain it is not denying the right to the consumer to own a home.
  • Tim | | 29 Jan 2014, 12:39 PM Agree 0

    I agree with a good portion of what you've said. However, I take issue with the "What we should have been doing all along" comment. The vast majority of lenders that are still in business were not the problem, we are still doing what we have done all along. (Service our customers at a reasonable and fair price.) The only difference now is that as a broker i am no longer to service a good portion of my clientele while the banks can charge what ever they want.
  • John C Durham | | 29 Jan 2014, 02:01 PM Agree 0
    Oh? We need a committee, a commission (commissars?) to make decisions?

    Then why, again during the Constitutional Convention, was it determined that the Executive should be ONE person but the Legislative ("...the source of much delay or hot mischief...") MANY? Because (as they made clear) it is essential that someone is responsible for the Execution of the Law and that person not be able to hide behind some group and also, answer to every voter in the Nation.

    How many times have you experience that in zoning and building projects? Where does "The Buck Stop". With Cordray. It's great. Only ONE person's mind has to be changed.
  • R Glines | | 29 Jan 2014, 02:14 PM Agree 0
    But Cordray was appointed by the executive branch without legislative review - in a recess appointment - Illegal IMHO- He is a advocate of "BIG" government as the solution. Try to change that ONE mind may be wishful thinking at best.
  • R Stone | | 29 Jan 2014, 02:52 PM Agree 0
    And yet there is no mention of the person who crafted the QM rule Raj Date. The interim head of the CFPB who made these rules then resigned to "spend time with family" and 30 days later opened a financial company "Fenway Summer" to cater to people who fall outside the QM box. If that doesn't smell of corruption what does?
  • John C Durham | | 29 Jan 2014, 05:34 PM Agree 0
    R Stone
    If Cordray didn't "craft the law, why isn't it easy to get him to change it? Is he defending it?
  • john deleva | | 30 Jan 2014, 09:43 AM Agree 0
    To Durham


    Democracy is messy and so are dictatorships which would you prefer...Kings or Congress?
  • Marc Brovender | | 31 Jan 2014, 06:18 AM Agree 0
    Ok, so the CFPB is "fundamentally unaccountable". And the law that set it up was written and enacted by Congress. And now they are complaining. And that's a problem. The NSA is also fundamentally unaccountable. And the law that allows it to be so was written and enacted by Congress. And now they are complaining. And that is a problem.

    If I as an employee kept doing things that didn't work, I would be fired. So why haven't we fired all of these idiots? We can.
  • Anonymous | | 31 Jan 2014, 08:06 AM Agree 0
    ...typical rantings from a conservative republican.

    CFPB is FINALLY cleaning up the parts of government that the republican party abused.

    See for yourself and visit the site. They ask for public comments on every issue that is pushed forward.

    When was the last time you saw a republican led government, ask for public opinion? And not just from the rich that line their coffers.
  • John C Durham | | 31 Jan 2014, 08:07 AM Agree 0
    Marc Brovender

    So why haven't we fired all of these idiots? We can.

    You have expressed 95% of the vital subject matter logically following the "bitching and moaning" commonly expresses when discussing a problem with some, or any, "government"* action.

    *government used advisedly and assuming everyone knows we have no such thing, ie, no government of our own, but instead, a whore for big banks and business.
  • Viva la Revolucion | | 31 Jan 2014, 08:15 AM Agree 0
    Hey Anonymous - what flavor of Kool Aid is most popular in your neck of the woods?
  • R Glines | | 31 Jan 2014, 08:43 AM Agree 0
    Incumbency is power... so even though we say throw the bums out... they pay to stay and play.
    Then they sign bills, written in smoke filled back rooms, saying " we need to vote it in, to see what is in it". What happened to the current administrative promise that bills would be open to debate on C-Span? and posting to the internet, so the public could read... Small local government means local control.. bit big gov't means rules from afar.. with no understanding of the local (broker model) etc etc etc..
  • John C Durham | | 31 Jan 2014, 08:50 AM Agree 0
    J Deleva
    King, if like Henry VII or Elizabeth I. No question at all. Far better than our Congress in the last 40 years.
  • Bill | | 31 Jan 2014, 10:00 AM Agree 0
    Anonymous....what uninformed dribble! If you knew anything about the couple years preceding the CFPB policy rollout you'd already know that there were over 50,000 comments filed just by the broker association members telling them exactly why many of the new guidelines were unfair to our industry and to the consumer alike and they were simply ignored and they used obteuse examples from liberally biased consumer organizations in an attempt to rationalize what the CFPB intended to do anyway. They just ignored all common sense and facts that actually applied so they could implement the draconion measures we are now having to live with. This is a governmental dictatorship in it's simpliest example. What other industry is facing the never before seen control of their income and ability to compete with the big banks? NO ONE I know of today! So get real will ya!!! It has nothing to do with left or right...if has everything to do with POWER!
  • John C Durham | | 31 Jan 2014, 10:26 AM Agree 0
    R Glines

    Yawn. Legislative Review? Pro Congress guy, I see. Love our Congress. Just like so, so many other Americans love our Congress. They are so, so POPULAR. Yes, let's give more POWER TO THEM. That's the TICKET... Yawn
  • R Glines | | 31 Jan 2014, 10:39 AM Agree 0
    States rights over central command ...
    Individual rights vs group rights? The founding fathers were individual rights advocates.
    Wonder what happen to all of the small community banks? Maybe regulated out of business. R vs D - all see government as the solution. Might be time for a change.. but won't be holding my breath as the Fed (big bank non government entity) now controls the process.
  • Viva la Revolucion | | 31 Jan 2014, 10:44 AM Agree 0
    @John C. Durham: Blah, blah, blah - you're rantings are tired and boring; don't believe everything you think you know.
  • Mimi Wills | | 31 Jan 2014, 11:04 AM Agree 0
    Bravo Bill
  • R Glines | | 31 Jan 2014, 11:18 AM Agree 0
    I will take a federalist approach anytime - even with the risks.. rather than a consolidation of power in the ruling class.
  • Mimi Wills | | 31 Jan 2014, 12:03 PM Agree 0
    Strengthen your local chapters, attend the meetings and support NAMP
    That's how we'll get to them
  • John C Durham | | 31 Jan 2014, 12:42 PM Agree 0
    R Glines
    You're kidding. You don't know that the variation of the present system created by the 0.002% has established a much more powerful elite than any system. It is World wide and is a "ruling class" tyranny.
  • John C Durham | | 31 Jan 2014, 01:21 PM Agree 0
    Viva la Revolución. Sorry, if I was being too personal. I'll try to better stay on the subject.
  • R Glines | | 31 Jan 2014, 01:48 PM Agree 0
    John C Durham-
    I agree- the 'ruled' class is comfortable watching reality TV.
    Dodd/Frank and CFPB should/must go.
    The consumer is blindly paying the price.
    My income was greater last year because of the fixed comp rules- but my borrowers paid for this- very sad to report
  • John C Durham | | 31 Jan 2014, 02:21 PM Agree 0
    R Glines
    I so no comparison between Dodd/Frank and the CFPB. Dodd/Frank is worthless. Cordray was a hold out against the TBTF banks in the settlement and was replaced by a Republican who caved to it. Cordray got Billions from the banks and hasn't won a dime from them.

    To review: How many people do you personally know who, when facing foreclosure in the past years found the banks never did anything, even when they called many many times, and that there was no Federal agency to appeal to? I would guess the total number was over 1 million Americans.

    This condition existed despite the foreclosing big banks didn't even have the NOTE. The documents were all forged. And, the legislation these cases operated under were 98% favorable to the banks. Your complaints against this insitution are minor and easily fixed. And, they will be fixed. And, I will bet, quickly also.

    But, I'm very much in favor that this insitution stay put. As, for Dodd/Frank, I favor the Republican David Stockman's solution: "Super-Glass-Steagall", as he calls it in his new book.
  • R Glines | | 31 Jan 2014, 03:21 PM Agree 0
    As the CFPB is a subset to Dodd Frank - IMHO it should be gone too... Way to much power and regulation. Markets should control- but only after a Super S/G is implemented - David Stockman has the best idea of all- but the lobbyists will make sure that it never comes to a vote.

    Foreclosures based upon bad decision making should just finalize the process.

    Loan officers, who didn't watch out for the borrowers should not be immune to penalties.

    The Fed has propped up the TBTF banks and free money- Fed Funds Rate- was used to pay penalties imposed by the DOJ...

    Every where one turns - corruption appears to rule.
  • John C Durham | | 31 Jan 2014, 03:53 PM Agree 0
    As a kid, I remember feeling proud that I lived in a nation unlike other corrupt countries. That feeling's gone.

    CFPB was the best thing about Dodd/Frank. The Banks hate it but couldn't keep it out.

    Happy to hear you support Stockman's idea. I think he is the best Republican around, although when he represented Michigan, I disagreed with his opposition to the Breeder Reactor. Carter actually killed it along with his program of deregulation of RR, Trucking, Telephone, Power, Oil, Air, etc., etc. A REAL "conservative" he was actually, ie, idiot.
  • TimmyD | | 05 Feb 2014, 12:55 PM Agree 0
    This remark is for Don. Congress passed Dodd/Frank back when the Senate/House/Whitehouse was controlled by Democrats. Same Congress passed Oama care. Now those are two laws that they have to be proud of - just joking of course.

    As for the two nitwits that sponsored this wonderful legislation - Chris Dodd was implicated in the Friends of Angelo Countrywide lending scandal as he obtained sweetheart mortgage terms. 2 bad the legislation doesn't give this opportunity to all the "poor consumers'. Guess you just have to be on the public payroll for that to happen... And as for Barney Frank, a favorite Mass-hole politician, who profoundly proclaimed that Fannie and Freddie were financially sound just before they went Bust and the taxpayers had to bail them out to the tune of many billions.... And finally, what could you possibly expect from a Whitehouse who thought an entire new regulatory agency was necessary on top of the FED, OCC, FDIC, OTS etc... Freaking Brilliant legislation that we in the industry will continue to deal with surely to the detriment of the consumer, who, in the beginning, was supposed to benefit. Remember the law of unintended consequences....
  • Viva la Revolucion | | 05 Feb 2014, 01:21 PM Agree 0
    TimmyD - Absolutely spot on except for one small distinction - it's actually the law of intended consequences, with legislation written by the banking lobby to drive individual and small brokers and bankers out of the industry and all business to the TBTF banks so they can rape and pillage the consumer with no competition. Everything else is white noise and straw man arguments to divert people from this factual reality.
Post a reply