UDAAP: Rule of Thumb

QUESTION
Recently, you provided some helpful tips about how to do a document review in preparing for a UDAAP examination. 

We are a small mortgage lender in the southwest. There is only one person who handles compliance: me! 

In my area, a lender about our size just went through a state banking exam, and UDAAP was very much a part of the audit. 

My question is more rudimentary than how to get our documents ready for a UDAAP audit. In studying UDAAP, I am more confused than ever about how to avoid UDAAP violations. I need a kind of handy rule of thumb to guide me. 

Can UDAAP be boiled down to just a few basic rules?

ANSWER
UDAAP is complicated, without a doubt! It is easy to be lost in regulations, rules, laws, and Best Practices because UDAAP is a sort of generic rubric for many, many regulatory requirements. Several federal and state regulatory agencies are involved in monitoring UDAAP implementation.

You refer to our recent article, entitled UDAAP Exam: Document Review. Preparation of documents is just one of many actions you must take to be ready for a UDAAP examination.

That is why we developed the UDAAP Tune-up®, which specifically reviews for UDAAP compliance. It is not expensive and provides a report and risk rating in sixty days. You then take the report’s suggestions and implement them. 

You should always be ready for a UDAAP examination, especially now that the CFPB monitors it in its examination and enforcement protocols. Contact us for information about the UDAAP Tune-up®. We’ll help you. 

If I had to whittle UDAAP down to some basic rules, I would recommend a three-part test based on a representation you make to a consumer: 

1.   The representation, omission, or practice must mislead or be likely to mislead the consumer. 

2.   The consumer’s interpretation of the representation, omission, or practice must be reasonable. 

3.   The misleading representation, omission, or practice must be material.

So what does it mean to mislead the consumer? 

Essentially, an act or practice is deceptive if it is likely to mislead consumers. I know that seems like circular reasoning, so let me be more specific. Such a representation might take the form of an express or implied claim or promise and could be either written or oral. Omission of information could also be deceptive if the omitted information is necessary to prevent consumers from being misled. 

Misleading cost or price claims, bait-and-switch sales techniques, offering services that are not available, omitting material limitations or conditions from an offer, selling products unfit for a particular purpose, and failing to provide promised services are all examples of deceptive practices. 

The FTC uses a “Four Ps” test in the evaluation of whether a representation, omission, act, or practice is likely to mislead: 

·    Is the statement prominent enough for the consumer to notice? 

·    Is the information presented in an easy-to-understand format that does not contradict other information in the package and at a time when the consumer’s attention is not distracted elsewhere? 

·    Is the placement of the information in a location where consumers can be expected to look or hear? 

·    Is the information in close proximity to the claim it qualifies? 

The consumer’s interpretation of or reaction to the representation, omission, or practice must be reasonable! 

For instance, if a representation conveys two or more meanings to reasonable consumers and one meaning is misleading, the representation may be deceptive. In determining whether a representation, omission, or practice is deceptive, regulatory agencies look at an entire advertisement, transaction, or course of dealing to determine its impact on a reasonable consumer. Written disclosures alone may be insufficient to correct a misleading statement or representation. 

A representation may be deceptive if the majority of consumers in the target class do not share the consumer’s interpretation, so long as a significant minority of such consumers is misled. So, you can see it is relatively easy to trigger a UDAAP violation. 

When a seller’s representation conveys more than one meaning to reasonable consumers, one of which is false, the seller is liable for the misleading interpretation. Exaggerated claims – what lawyers like to call “puffery” – are not deceptive if a reasonable consumer would not take the claims seriously. 

But, Dodd-Frank itself set forth a standard for UDAAP that assists regulators (and lawyers!) in determining when an act or practice is unfair, to wit, it causes or is likely to cause substantial injury to consumers, the injury is not reasonably avoidable by consumers, and countervailing benefits to consumers or competition do not outweigh the injury. 

A final word about the representation, omission, or practice being material: a representation, omission, or practice is material if it is likely to affect a consumer’s decision regarding a product or service. In general, information about costs, benefits, or restrictions on the use or availability of a product or service is material. 

We can break this down into express and implied claims, as follows: 

·     Express claims made with respect to a financial product or service are presumed material. 

·     Implied claims are presumed to be material when evidence shows that the institution intended to make the claim (even though intent to deceive is not necessary for deception to exist). 

Claims made with the knowledge that they are false are presumed to be material. Omissions are presumed to be material when the financial institution knew or should have known that the consumer needed the omitted information to evaluate the product or service.

Jonathan Foxx, Ph.D., MBA

Chairman & Managing Director

Lenders Compliance Group

UDAAP Exam: Document Review

QUESTION
I want to thank you for your FAQs. We really appreciate them.

In a few weeks, we are going to have a UDAAP examination. We are a medium-sized bank in the northwest.  Our compliance and legal staff – of which I am a member – are preparing for it. The big issue is to be sure that we are getting everything ready for the regulators to review. They already requested many documents, but we knew there was much more needed, and we wanted to anticipate as much as possible.

We plan to retain you for the UDAAP Tune-up for our mortgage lender subsidiary. So, it seems you may know about the examination requirements for the UDAAP.

What are some of the documents and information we need to get ready for the UDAAP examination?

ANSWER
We developed the UDAAP Tune-up® to emulate an examination audit. 

It takes sixty days and is inexpensive. The UDAAP Tune-up® is conducted hands-on by one of our Directors. You receive a report, with findings and a risk rating, along with actionable compliance recommendations.

Our UDAAP Tune-up® is designed to assess the quality of the institution’s compliance risk management systems, including internal controls and policies and procedures, for avoiding unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices (UDAAP).

But you are just a few days away from the UDAAP examination, so I sense the urgency and will provide some high-level guidance. Keep in mind that knowing your actual operations makes a big difference in providing more detailed advice.

During the preparation process, you should identify acts or practices that materially increase the risk of consumers being treated unfairly, deceptively, or abusively. The assessment process should also gather facts that help determine whether the institution is engaging in prohibited acts or practices when offering or providing consumer financial products or services that are likely to be unfair, deceptive, or abusive.

Based on the assessment results, management should review for potential unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices, taking into account an institution’s marketing programs, product and service mix, customer base, and other factors, as appropriate.

Even if the risk assessment has not identified potential unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices, the compliance advisors should be alert for situations that warrant further review.

Generally, we categorize preparation for a UDAAP exam into three sections: 

(1) documentation procedures, 

(2) management and policy-related procedures, and 

(3) transaction-related procedures. 

In this answer, I will offer some guidance with respect to the documentation procedures.

-   Select a group of stakeholders and task them with providing the following documents and information.

-   Then hand out the following list of documentation and information requirements.

And remember, getting the documentation together is only one of three parts to preparing for a UDAAP examination. You must be able to understand the rules, regulations, Best Practices, and applicable laws that will be invoked in the regulator’s evaluation of your UDAAP compliance, especially in light of the implications involving your specific UDAAP compliance profile based on the presented documentation and information.

UDAAP Documentation Procedures

Obtain and review copies of the following: 

·    Training materials. 

·    Lists of products and services, including descriptions, fee structure, disclosures, notices, agreements, and periodic and account statements. 

·    Procedure manuals and written policies, including those for servicing and collections. 

·    Minutes of the meetings of the Board of Directors and management committees, including those related to compliance. 

·    Internal control monitoring and auditing materials. 

·    Compensation arrangements, including incentive programs for employees and third parties. 

·    Documentation related to new product development, including relevant meeting minutes of Board of Directors, and of compliance and new product committees. 

·    Marketing programs, advertisements, and other promotional material in all forms of media (including print, radio, television, telephone, Internet, or social media advertising). 

·    Scripts and recorded calls for telemarketing and collections. 

·    Organizational charts, including those related to affiliate relationships and work processes. 

·    Agreements with affiliates and third parties that interact with consumers on behalf of the institution. 

·    Consumer complaint files. 

·    Documentation related to software development and testing, as applicable. 

If you want information about our UDAAP Tune-up®, contact us HERE.

Jonathan Foxx, Ph.D., MBA
Chairman & Managing Director 

Lenders Compliance Group

Essential Terms in RESPA Section 8

REQUEST THIS ARTICLE

QUESTION
I am involved in updating our policies for RESPA Section 8. I came on board in 2019 as the Compliance Manager. The old policy goes back almost ten years to when there was a different Compliance Manager here. 

I want to provide the basic information about Section 8, but I want it to be an overview rather than an extensive part of the RESPA policy. Since Section 8 is so vast, I wonder if it is even possible to reduce it to mere basics. 

With that in mind, and having followed your articles for years, I know you have a knack for putting complex information into a more understandable explanation. I hope you will choose my question among the many your receive. 

I am particularly interested in the meaning of “settlement services,” “thing of value,” “agreement (or understanding),” and “referral.” 

What do these terms mean under RESPA Section 8?

ANSWER
You are quite correct: Section 8 is vast. It is the subject of so many commentaries, litigations, webinars, panels, criticisms, descriptions, explanations, remarks, Best Practices, reviews, regulatory interpretations, administrative actions, rules, citations, obiter dicta, and precipitous frustration that it often seems to pose a puzzlingly reticulated intricacy beyond the reach of most mortals.   

But, despite its capacious expansiveness, you can begin to build up your Section 8 policy from these essential terms: 

(1) settlement service; 

(2) thing of value; 

(3) agreement (or understanding); and 

(4) referral. 

Section 8 of RESPA[i] (Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act) is one of its most important provisions because it attempts to achieve one of the primary congressional purposes for the statute, specifically, “the elimination of kickbacks or referral fees that tend to increase unnecessarily the costs of certain settlement services.”[ii] 

Many aspects of mortgage lending have Section 8 implications. Every mortgage lending professional should become familiar with the general requirements of Section 8. Unlike violations of the other RESPA provisions, Section 8 violations may result in criminal penalties as well as substantial civil penalties.[iii] Section 8(d) provides for fines of up to $10,000 and imprisonment for up to one year, in addition to civil liability equal to three times the amount of the settlement charge that is the subject of the violation.[iv] 

In the years preceding the transfer of RESPA authority to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, in 2011, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) left no doubt about the importance of compliance with Section 8. It was often a central facet of HUD’s enforcement initiatives. The transition from HUD to the CFPB does not diminish the importance of Section 8 in RESPA enforcement. 

Section 8(a) specifies three elements for a section 8(a) violation:[v] 

·    The payment or receipt of a thing of value. Section 8(a) is not violated if a referral occurs without any thing of value passing to the referror or elsewhere in return for the referral.[vi] 

·    An agreement or understanding. 

·    A referral of settlement service business. 

Thus, the foregoing three definitions are essential to an understanding of the scope of Section 8(a) vis-à-vis “thing of value,” “agreement,” and “referral.” 

So, let’s take a tour of these the essential terms. 

(1) Settlement Service 

Both subsections (a) and (b) of Section 8 use the term “settlement service.” 

A violation of either section must somehow involve a settlement service. Thus, a mortgage broker may be compensated for referring business to a lender that is unrelated to a real estate transaction, such as automobile loans. So long as the compensation is exclusively related to the automobile loan and does not represent, in whole or in part, compensation for the referral of real estate business, and no lien is placed on a residence to secure the auto loan, the referral would not violate RESPA. 

Under RESPA, “settlement service” has a broad meaning and includes “any service provided in connection with a prospective or actual settlement.”[vii] Section 3 of RESPA defines the term “settlement services” to include: 

“Any service provided in connection with a real estate settlement including, but not limited to, the following: title searches, title examinations, the provision of title certificates, title insurance, services rendered by an attorney, the preparation of documents, property surveys, the rendering of credit reports or appraisals, pest and fungus inspections, services rendered by a real estate agent or broker, the origination of a federally related mortgage loan (including, but not limited to, the taking of loan applications, loan processing, and the underwriting and funding of loans), and the handling of the processing, and closing or settlement.”[viii] 

Regulation X lists the following examples of settlement services:[ix] 

·    The origination of a federally related mortgage loan (including but not limited to the taking of loan applications, loan processing, and the underwriting and funding of loans);[x] 

·    The rendering of services by a mortgage broker (including counseling, taking of applications, obtaining verifications and appraisals, and other loan processing and origination services, and communicating with the borrower and lender);[xi] 

·    The provision of any services related to the origination, processing, or funding of a federally related mortgage loan; 

·    The provision of title services, including title searches, title examinations, abstract preparation, insurability determinations, and the issuance of title commitments and title insurance policies;[xii] 

Compliance Risk Ratings

QUESTION
I am the Compliance Manager of a mid-size mortgage lender in Ohio. I took this job recently, and one of the first things I found out is that the company has no risk ratings assigned to compliance requirements. Now I am developing the risk ratings and could use some guidance.

What I am looking for is a list of risks associated with compliance risk. I can work with a list and apply it to our situation if you let me know how to go about it.

My question is, what are the levels of compliance risk?

ANSWER
In assigning risk ratings, it is often a good idea to draft a checklist, the completion of which produces a rating. However, your question is more narrow. You seek guidance in forming the levels of compliance risk itself. I think this is a good place to start; however, at some point, you should create a checklist to be in a position to apply the ratings in a standardized manner regularly.

There are regulatory requirements that directly impact compliance risk categories. These requirements can be assessed for their risk by determining if they are affected by any of the risk factors that present increased compliance risk. That may seem tautological, but first you determine the risk factors that increase risk and then you evaluate how those factors affect the major risk categories.

If you do not have such procedures and checklists, we can assist you.

Please contact me HERE for more information.

Over time, as details emerge, you will further refine your risk ratings when they are entered into the checklists. You will find that not all factors carry the same amount of risk. The continuing updates to procedures and checklists would be tracked and documented. Sometimes your updates will result from an incident that triggers a re-evaluation of the risk factor.

In my view, there are six basic compliance risk categories. These basic categories will likely be expanded depending on a company’s size, products, services, complexity, risk profile, and business strategy.

Basic Compliance Risk Categories

Penalties

The regulatory agencies can impose additional penalties for violations of various regulations in addition to the general penalties the regulatory agencies can impose as part of their overall enforcement powers.

Most of these penalties are criminal and civil monetary penalties, but one exception is the Community Reinvestment Act, where the penalty for violation can involve a denial of bank applications for expansion, merger, and so forth; or the savings account/MMDA transaction limitations, where the penalty can involve the recalculation of reserve requirements. Within these areas, the penalties for noncompliance can be severe. The Bank Secrecy Act and Regulation O are two such areas.

As another example, finance-charge and annual percentage-rate calculation violations under Regulation Z, for example, require mandatory reimbursement.

Litigation

The significant risk of customer litigation is ever-present. Within these areas, violations can lead to substantial risks of civil liability to customers.

In many cases, the law provides additional damages beyond those suffered by the customer, such as specific additional money damages, attorneys’ fees, class action status, and so forth. For example, violation of the right of rescission under Regulation Z can lead to customer litigation, resulting in the loss of the security interest and income from the loan.

Examiner Scrutiny

Increased scrutiny by examiners should be a constant risk evaluation of compliance decisions. These areas currently receive increased scrutiny during regulatory examinations.

For example, BSA and Regulation O receive increased scrutiny during almost every examination.

As another example, compliance with flood insurance requirements is an area that is currently experiencing increased scrutiny by some agencies in some areas.

New Area

I define a “New Area” as compliance requirements that are relatively new, or areas in which the financial institution only recently introduced products that required compliance with that particular requirement.

To assist you in identifying new compliance requirements, I suggest a checklist or matrix (as I’ve mentioned above) because such a formatted method would include the effective date for regulations that became effective in, say, 2012.

Internal Violations

In this category, I group the previous internal review violations. These are areas where violations were found as a part of the financial institution’s own internal compliance monitoring.

Exam Violations

Previous exam violations need special attention in the form of specific remedies, monitoring, and testing. These are areas in which violations were found during a previous regulatory examination. They will be amongst the first review subjects in the subsequent examination.

Some words about compliance checklists.

Online Group’s S.A.F.E Act Violations

QUESTION
In our recent examination, the banking department cited us for S.A.F.E. Act violations. The worst offenders were in our online group. 

The way we’re set up, the online loan officers separate between those who take an application and those who just answer phones and direct the applicants to loan officers. 

It became a licensing issue based on the definition of “taking an application” and whether anyone who spoke to the applicant was licensed in the property’s state. 

Some of the things we now have to do are install a call recording service, monitor all the calls, additional training, quarterly review of all loan officer licenses, complete description of the “hand-off” procedures, and compliance with the S.A.F.E. Act’s definition of originating mortgage loans. 

The biggest problem we face is defining what the banking department calls “mortgage loan originator activities.” We want to revamp the online group, beginning with a new definition. 

What are “mortgage loan originator activities” according to the S.A.F.E. Act?

ANSWER
There are several aspects of your inquiry leading up to the question itself. I have repeatedly said that a financial institution should not go online unless it has the appropriate policies and procedures in place. It appears that your company did exactly what I have argued against doing! I understand the need to get into online sales, but it should not be at the expense of courting regulatory violations. 

If you had come to us to build an online platform, we would have had you work with our checklist and document review that guide you in establishing an online sales group. We would be interacting every step of the way until you launch the platform. 

Such requirements would include not only the items you mention but also many more features that standardize and stabilize the interaction with consumers and ensure federal and, where applicable, state banking law compliance. 

Our firm already has the policies and procedures to conform to your business model. There are several necessary policy documents. But that’s just one feature of the build. 

You need periodic call calibration. Call calibration, which we offer, is an oversight process to monitor, rate, and report on call compliance by listening to recorded calls. Ideally, this should be done by a compliance professional. 

There are numerous disclosure requirements, both oral and written. 

And the threat of being trapped in a licensing violation is real. We have worked with clients that fell into multistate licensing violations and paid millions of dollars in civil monetary penalties. When you say “hand-off procedures,” I say be careful! 

And, most important, you need to understand what constitutes “mortgage loan originator activities” as defined by the S.A.F.E. Act (“Act”),[i] whose implementing Regulation H describes specific requirements for S.A.F.E. Act-compliant state mortgage loan originator licenses and the Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System and Registry.[ii] 

To answer your question, I will treat three fundamental elements that constitute mortgage loan originator activities. The three components are (1) taking an application, (2) offering or negotiating loan terms, and (3) compensation or gain for rendering such services. 

These are not all the possible scenarios but about as comprehensive as I can provide in the space available for this article. If you want more information, please get in touch with me HERE. 

I will base my response on an appendix to the Act.[iii] This appendix is best understood as providing possible examples to aid in understanding activities that would cause an individual to fall within or outside the definition of a mortgage loan originator. Even then, they illustrate only the issue described and do not illustrate any other issues that may arise. 

Let’s begin by describing a residential mortgage loan as any loan primarily for personal, family, or household use that is secured by a mortgage, deed of trust, or other equivalent consensual security interest on a dwelling[iv] or residential real estate upon which is constructed or intended to be constructed a dwelling.[v] 

And, broadly, a loan application is a request, in any form, for an offer (or a response to a solicitation of an offer) of residential mortgage loan terms, and the information about the borrower or prospective borrower that is customary or necessary in a decision on whether to make such an offer. I know this language seems legalistic – and I guess I can’t help myself! – but in this case, every single word counts. Read it again! 

Taking an Application 

The act of taking a residential mortgage loan application means receipt by an individual for the purpose of facilitating a decision whether to extend an offer of loan terms to a borrower or prospective borrower.[vi]

Here are some examples of taking or not taking an application. 

An individual “takes a residential mortgage loan application” even if the individual: 

·    Has received the borrower or prospective borrower’s request or information indirectly, which means an individual takes an application whether they receive it “directly or indirectly” from the borrower or prospective borrower.[vii] It also means that an individual who offers or negotiates residential mortgage loan terms for compensation or gain cannot avoid licensing requirements simply by having another person physically receive the application from the prospective borrower and then pass the application to the individual; 

·    Is not responsible for verifying information. The fact that an individual who takes application information from a borrower or prospective borrower is not responsible for verifying that information – for example, the individual is a mortgage broker who collects and sends that information to a lender – does not mean that the individual is not taking an application; 

·    Only inputs the information into an online application or other automated system; or 

·    Is not involved in the approval of the loan, including determining whether the consumer qualifies for the loan. Similar to an individual who is not responsible for verification, an individual can still “take a residential mortgage loan application” even if they are not ultimately responsible for approving the loan. For instance, a mortgage broker can take a residential mortgage loan application even though it is passed on to a lender to decide whether the borrower qualifies for the loan and the ultimate loan approval. 

An individual does not take a loan application merely because the individual performs any of the following actions: 

·    Receives a loan application through the mail and forwards it, without review, to loan approval personnel. The Bureau interpreted the term “takes a residential mortgage loan application” to exclude an individual whose only role with respect to the application is physically handling a completed application form or transmitting a completed form to a lender on behalf of a borrower or prospective borrower.[viii] 

·    Assists a borrower or prospective borrower who is filling out an application by explaining the contents of the application and where particular borrower information is to be provided on the application; 

·    Generally describes for a borrower or prospective borrower the loan application process without a discussion of particular loan products; or 

·    In response to an inquiry regarding a prequalified offer that a borrower or prospective borrower has received from a lender, collects only basic identifying information about the borrower or prospective borrower on behalf of that lender. 

Offering or Negotiating Terms of a Loan 

The following examples illustrate when an individual offers or negotiates terms of a loan[ix] and, conversely, what does not constitute an offering or negotiating terms of a loan: 

Offering or negotiating the terms of a loan includes: 

·    Presenting for consideration by a borrower or prospective borrower particular loan terms, whether verbally, in writing, or otherwise, even if:

o   Further verification of information is necessary;

o   The offer is conditional;

o   Other individuals must complete the loan process;

o   The individual lacks authority to negotiate the interest rate or other loan terms; or

o   The individual lacks the authority to bind the person that is the source of the prospective financing. 

·    Communicating directly or indirectly with a borrower or prospective borrower to reach a mutual understanding about prospective residential mortgage loan terms, including responding to a borrower or prospective borrower’s request for a different rate or different fees on a pending loan application by presenting to the borrower or prospective borrower a revised loan offer, even if a mutual understanding is not subsequently achieved. 

Offering or negotiating terms of a loan does not include any of the following activities: 

·    Providing general explanations or descriptions in response to consumer queries, such as explaining loan terminology (i.e., debt-to-income ratio) or lending policies (i.e., the loan-to-value ratio policy of the lender), or describing product-related services; 

·    Arranging the loan closing or other aspects of the loan process, including by communicating with a borrower or prospective borrower about those arrangements, provided that any communication that includes a discussion about loan terms only verifies terms already agreed to by the borrower or prospective borrower; 

·    Providing a borrower or prospective borrower with information unrelated to loan terms, such as the best days of the month for scheduling loan closings at the bank; 

·    Making an underwriting decision about whether the borrower or prospective borrower qualifies for a loan; 

·    Explaining or describing the steps that a borrower or prospective borrower would need to take to obtain a loan offer, including providing general guidance about qualifications or criteria that would need to be met that is not specific to that borrower or prospective borrower’s circumstances; 

·    Communicating on behalf of a mortgage loan originator that a written offer has been sent to a borrower or prospective borrower without providing any details of that offer; or 

·    Offering or negotiating loan terms solely through a third-party licensed loan originator, so long as the non-licensed individual does not represent to the public that they can or will perform covered activities and does not communicate with the borrower or potential borrower. 

Examples:

-    A seller who provides financing to a purchaser of a dwelling owned by that seller where the offer and negotiation of loan terms with the borrower or prospective borrower are conducted exclusively by a third-party licensed loan originator.

-    An individual who works solely for a lender, when the individual offers loan terms exclusively to third-party licensed loan originators and not to borrowers or potential borrowers. 

Compensation or Gain 

An individual acts “for compensation or gain”[x] if the individual receives or expects to receive, in connection with the individual’s activities, anything of value, including, but not limited to, payment of a salary, bonus, or commission. 

Note: The concept “anything of value” is interpreted broadly and is not limited only to payments contingent upon the closing of a loan. 

An individual does not act “for compensation or gain” if the individual acts as a volunteer without receiving or expecting to receive anything of value in connection with the individual’s activities. 

Jonathan Foxx, Ph.D., MBA
Chairman & Managing Director
Lenders Compliance Group
_____________________________
[i] 12 CFR Part 1008 – S.A.F.E. Mortgage Licensing Act – State Compliance and Bureau Registration System (Regulation H)
[ii] Regulation H was issued by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to implement the Secure and Fair Enforcement for Mortgage Licensing Act of 2008, title V of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (S.A.F.E. Act) (Pub. L. 110-289, 122 Stat. 2654, 12 U.S.C. 5101 et seq.)
[iii] See Appendix A to Part 1008
[iv] As defined in section 103(w) of the Truth in Lending Act
[v] Ibid, as defined
[vi] See § 1008.103(c)(1)
[vii] Ibid
[viii] This interpretation is consistent with the definition of “loan originator” in section 1503(3) of the S.A.F.E. Act.
[ix] See § 1008.103(c)(2)
[x] See § 1008.103(c)(2)(ii)