LENDERS COMPLIANCE GROUP®

AARMR | ABA | ACAMS | ALTA | ARMCP | IAPP | IIA | MBA | MERSCORP | MISMO | NAMB

GENIUS Act: Fool's Gold

Loading the Elevenlabs Text to Speech AudioNative Player...
Showing posts with label Record Retention. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Record Retention. Show all posts

Thursday, September 21, 2023

A New Quality Control Program

QUESTION 

We are a lender in the southwest. I am the VP of mortgage lending. Our loans are only conventional on 1-4 single family residential property. Our primary investor is Fannie Mae. We do not originate government loans or investor loans. 

Recently, we ended the relationship with our quality control auditor. So, we're now looking around to replace them. We went to a conference where several lenders highly recommended your firm. So, our compliance manager will be contacting you soon. 

Now, we're updating our quality control plan. We need to start over with a new quality control plan. We need guidance about the areas we should outline in the QC plan. I realize this is a big subject, so maybe you can provide an overview of the basic elements. 

What are the basic requirements of a QC Plan? 

ANSWER 

There are essentially six parts to a basic Quality Control Plan ("Plan" or "Program"). More about that shortly. Depending on the company's size, risk profile, complexity, loan products, and investor conduits, to name a few factors, the Plan's purpose is central to controlling a mortgage lender's originating environment. 

Thank you for contacting us to handle your quality control auditing. We can accommodate any production size and audit virtually all loan products. We have an entire group devoted to quality control, headed by an Executive Director, and staffed with an accomplished audit staff. 

Please contact us here. We'll see that you speak directly with our audit management team. 

I would add that it is critical to ensure that the Plan and the QC auditing are aligned. When regulators and investors review your QC reports, they want to see that you are implementing the requirements of your specific Program. When LCG conducts QC, we can provide a Plan that properly reflects your auditing needs. Be sure to discuss the Plan requirements when you speak to us. 

You should consider establishing a baseline review of your quality control compliance. To effectuate this assessment, many company's use our QC Tune-up. This mini-audit provides substantive evaluation of your quality control function and provides a risk rating. It's cost-effective, hands-on, and quick. If interested, contact us here for information about the QC Tune-up.

Because you originate only conventional loans and your primary investor is Fannie Mae (“Fannie”), my response will address the QC requirements for conventional generally and Fannie in particular.[i]

Your QC Plan must define your lending standards for loan quality, establish processes designed to achieve those standards and mitigate risks associated with the loan origination processes. In that regard, Fannie requires the lender to develop and implement a QC program that provides a structure for identifying the deficiencies in the loan manufacturing process and implementing plans to remediate those deficiencies and underlying issues quickly. 

Six Parts of a Quality Control Program 

I mentioned above that there are six parts to a basic Quality Control Plan. I am going to provide a brief description of each part. I urge you to contact us if you want a more detailed discussion. 

The six parts of a QC Program are: 

1.     Overview; 

2.     Contents; 

3.     Standards and Measures; 

4.     File Reviews; and 

5.     Reporting and Remediation. 

Overview 

Put simply, the Program must include a documented QC Plan that outlines requirements for validating that loans are originated under its established policies and procedures. 

The Overview must provide guidelines to ensure that: 

·     the loans comply with applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations; 

·     the loans comply with investors' guidelines, such as Fannie Mae's Selling Guide, all related contractual terms and agreements, and are in all respects eligible for delivery to Fannie; and 

·     the Plan must guard against fraud, negligence, errors, and omissions by officers, employees, contractors (whether or not involved in the origination of the mortgage loans), brokers, borrowers, marketing partners, and others involved in the mortgage process. 

Contents 

The Plan must include documented QC procedures that establish standards for quality and incorporate systems and processes for achieving those standards. At a minimum, the Plan must contain the following categories.

 

·     Quality standards and measures, including:

 

o   a general overview and description of the QC philosophy;

 

o   the plan objectives;

 

o   specific risks to be measured, monitored, and managed; and

 

o   the methods used to ensure the Program is an independent and unbiased function, including program governance (targets, sampling) and transaction execution.

 

·     Procedures involving detailed operating and reporting methods for all employees affected by the QC process.

 

·     QC file review process: a process for performing prefunding and post-closing QC file reviews, including, at a minimum, a method for

 

o   confirming compliance with the investors’ guidelines, all related contractual terms and agreements, and that the loans are in all respects eligible for delivery to Fannie; and

 

o   confirming compliance with applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations.

 

·     Sample selection process: the procedures and metrics for identifying a representative sample of loans for QC file reviews using both random and discretionary selection methodologies, as applicable, that include loans

 

o   originated through each applicable production channel (for example, retail, correspondent, and third-party originators);

 

o   originated under all mortgage products (for instance, fixed, ARM, and special or niche programs); and

 

o   originated using all underwriting methods (manual and AUS).

 

·     Reporting: written procedures for reporting the results of the QC file reviews, including the method of monthly reporting of review findings, including

 

o   the method of monthly reporting of review findings;

 

o   identifying critical components included in the reports;

 

o   distributing summary-level findings to senior management;

 

o   distributing loan-level findings to the business unit(s), specifically to parties within the business unit(s) responsible for resolution;

 

o   requiring a timely response to and resolution – or resolution plan – of findings identified in the QC review process; and

 

o   maintaining accurate and detailed records of the QC reviews’ results.

 

·     Vendor review: a process for reviewing the QC work performed by the third-party auditors.

 

·     File retention: procedures for maintaining for three years records of the QC findings and reports, loan files reviewed, and all related documentation, including chronicling the location of such records.

 

·     Audit: an audit process to ensure that the lender’s QC processes and procedures are followed by the QC staff and that its assessments and conclusions are recorded and consistently applied. 

Quality Standards and Measures 

This is a somewhat complicated area, often leading to confusion. So, I will offer a high-level description. A lender is responsible for the development and maintenance of standards for loan quality and the establishment of processes designed to achieve those standards. 

To evaluate and measure loan quality standards effectively, the lender must establish a methodology for identifying, categorizing, and measuring defects and trends against an established target defect rate. 

At a minimum, the lender must identify any loans with a defect; specifically, these are loans not in compliance with investor guidelines or other related contractual terms and agreements. A methodology must be established by which all loans with identified defects can be categorized based on the severity of the defect. The lender must define the severity levels appropriate to its organization and reporting needs; however, the highest severity level must be assigned to those loans with defects resulting in the loan not being eligible as delivered to Fannie. 

The lender must also establish target defect rates for its organization, reflecting its quality standards and goals. Establishing a target defect rate is based on a lender’s post-closing random QC sample. It enables the lender to regularly evaluate and measure progress in meeting loan quality standards. 

Different target defect rates may be established for different severity levels; however, at a minimum, a target defect rate must be established for the lender’s highest level of severity. 

Here’s an suggestion: a target defect rate that is as reasonably low as possible should be established. Once the targets are set, performance against the targets must be measured at least quarterly and reported to management. It is also essential that the target defect rate(s) be evaluated and, if necessary, reset at least annually. The lender must document the rationale for establishing the target rate(s). During a Fannie review, consideration may be given to how the lender’s chosen target defect rate affects the investor’s risk. Sometimes, this leads to the investor requiring a more realistic target.

Thursday, April 7, 2022

ECOA Self-Tests

QUESTION

Our regulator suggested that we do a self-test of our ECOA Regulation B compliance. 

We originate loans in 24 states. Also, we have a multi-billion dollar servicing portfolio. 

As the Compliance Officer and General Counsel, I believe there are legal privileges relating to the work product derived from a self-test. However, I can’t find much information about such privilege or whether it also applies to self-correction too. 

We are voluntarily conducting the ECOA self-test to ensure compliance with fair lending requirements, among other things. We have done fair lending reviews previously; however, we believe that conducting ECOA self-test and self-correction reviews would provide additional legal protection. 

What is the legal privilege provided by conducting ECOA self-tests? 

ANSWER

In 1996, amendments were made to the ECOA and the Fair Housing Act (FHA) as part of the Economic Growth and Regulatory Paperwork Reduction Act of 1996. These provisions create a legal privilege for information developed by creditors through voluntary self-tests conducted to determine the level or effectiveness of their compliance with the ECOA and the FHA, provided that appropriate corrective action is taken to address any possible violations discovered. 

To elucidate further, a government agency may not obtain privileged information for use in an examination or investigation relating to compliance with the ECOA or the FHA, or by a government agency or credit applicant in any proceeding in which a violation of the ECOA or the FHA is alleged. The 1996 act also provides a challenge to a creditor’s claim of privilege may be filed in any court or administrative law proceeding with appropriate jurisdiction. 

The privilege, therefore, serves as an incentive by assuring that evidence of discrimination voluntarily produced by a self-test will not be used against a creditor, provided the creditor takes appropriate corrective actions for any discrimination that is found. 

Consider using our ECOA Tune-up as a tool to review your Regulation B compliance. It will help you gain an overall readout of your ECOA implementation. 

Regulations implementing the self-test privilege were adopted under the ECOA as section 1002.15 of Regulation B,[i] and the same was done for the FHA provisions. The rules are virtually the same for both, with the primary difference being the scope of the two laws. 

Under the rules, a self-test is defined as 

any program, practice, or study designed and specifically used to determine the extent or effectiveness of a creditor’s compliance with the ECOA or the FHA, if that program, practice, or study creates data or factual information that cannot be derived from loan or application files or other records related to credit transactions. 

This definition of self-test includes, but is not limited to, the practice of using fictitious applicants for credit (i.e., testers). 

A creditor also may develop and use other methods of generating information that is not available in loan and application files, for example, by surveying mortgage loan applicants to assess whether applications were processed appropriately. 

However, there is a fundamental distinction: the definition does not include creditor reviews and evaluations of loan and application files, either with or without statistical analysis. Therefore, the self-test privilege does not protect any analysis or review of loan and application files. 

Appropriate corrective action is required for the privilege to apply when the self-test shows that it is more likely than not that a violation occurred – even though no violation has been formally adjudicated. That said, taking corrective action is not an admission that a violation occurred. 

The lender must take corrective action that is reasonably likely to remedy the cause and effect of a likely violation by:

·       Identifying the policies or practices that are the likely cause of the violation; and 

·       Assessing the extent and scope of any violation. 

Appropriate corrective action may include both prospective and remedial relief, except that to establish a privilege, the lender: 

·       Is not required to provide remedial relief to a tester used in a self-test;

·       Is only required to provide remedial relief to an applicant identified by the self-test as to one whose rights were more likely than not violated; and

·       Is not required to provide remedial relief to a particular applicant if the statute of limitations applicable to the violation expired before the creditor obtained the self-test results or the applicant is otherwise ineligible for such relief. 

The report or results of a self-test are not privileged if the lender or a person with lawful access to the report or results: 

·        Voluntarily discloses any part of the report or results, or any other information privileged under this section, to an applicant, government agency, or the public;

·        Discloses any part of the report or results, or any other information privileged under the self-test rules, as a defense to charges that the creditor has violated the act or regulation; or

·        Fails or is unable to produce written or recorded information about the self-test that must be retained under the rules when the information is needed to determine whether the privilege applies. (In general, self-tests and results must be retained for 25 months after completion.)

Jonathan Foxx, Ph.D., MBA
Chairman & Managing Director 
Lenders Compliance Group


[i] 12 CFR 1002.15, § 6.14 Incentives for Self-Testing and Self-Correction

Thursday, July 20, 2017

Record Retention: Evidence of Compliance under TILA

QUESTION
We are going paperless, but we are unsure about retaining documents under the Truth in Lending Act, since we know that regulatory enforcement requirements may cause us to hold on to evidence. That goes along with our concerns about retaining paper copies, too. You may have answered a question like this one before, but we are still unsure of what evidence we need to retain to show compliance. So, we want to know what is the timeline for retaining documents beyond the required time required in case of regulatory enforcement against us? Also, must we keep paper copies as evidence of compliance?

ANSWER
You have asked a complicated question about regulatory enforcement parameters, with respect to record retention. Because you have framed your question in the context of the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), this response will be narrowed to Regulation Z, the implementing regulation of TILA.

Except with respect to advertising, creditors must retain evidence of compliance with Regulation Z for a period of two years after the date the disclosures are required to be made or action is required to be taken. Enforcement of TILA, however, may require the creditor to retain records for longer periods necessary to carry out enforcement responsibilities and administrative actions.

In effect, this means that administrative agencies responsible for enforcing a subject regulation may require creditors under their jurisdictions to retain records for a longer period, if necessary to perform their enforcement responsibilities. [12 CFR § 226.25(a)]

As to paper retention, in terms of adequate evidence of compliance, actual paper copies of disclosures or other business records are not absolutely necessary to be retained. Evidence may be retained on microfilm, microfiche, computer programs, or by any other method that reproduces records accurately.

As a matter of fact, the creditor needs to retain only enough information to reconstruct the required disclosures or other records. By way of example, the creditor does not need to retain each open-end, periodic statement for purposes of complying with record retention of a home-equity plan's periodic statement, as long as the specific information on each statement can be retrieved. In other words, written procedures for compliance with the disclosure requirements and a sample periodic statement represent adequate evidence of compliance. [12 CFR Supplement I to 226, Official Staff Interpretations, § 226.25(a)-2]

Jonathan Foxx 
Managing Director

Thursday, April 28, 2016

Record Retention for Prescreened Credit Solicitations

QUESTION
Last year we had a prescreened credit campaign. Earlier this year, we had a banking examination and were scored down because we did not have all the record retention requirements for prescreened credit solicitations. In the case of the prescreened credit, what are the record retention requirements?

ANSWER
For specific information about prescreened solicitations, please consult the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

Under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, for a period of twenty-five months after the date on which an offer of credit is made to potential customers in connection with a prescreened credit solicitation, the creditor must retain:
  1. The text of any prescreened solicitation;
  2. The list of criteria the creditor used to select potential recipients of the solicitation; and
  3. Any formal or informal correspondence related to complaints about the solicitation. [12 CFR § 202.12(b)(7); 12 CFR Supplement I to Part 202 – Official Staff Interpretations § 202.12(b)(7)-1] 
Regarding the requirement to retain information on any prescreened solicitation, a creditor complies with the record retention requirement if it retains a copy of each solicitation mailing that contains different terms, such as the amount of credit offered, annual percentage rate or annual fee. [12 CFR Supplement I to Part 202 – Official Staff Interpretations § 202.12(b)(7)-1]

In order to satisfy the requirement to retain the criteria used to select potential recipients, a creditor must retain the criteria used to determine the potential recipients of the particular solicitation, and the criteria to determine who actually will be offered credit. [12 CFR Supplement I to Part 202 – Official Staff Interpretations § 202.12(b)(7)-2]

With respect to the requirement to retain correspondence, a creditor may retain correspondence relating to complaints of consumers about prescreened solicitations in any manner that is reasonably accessible and is understandable to examiners. There is no requirement to establish a separate database or set of files for such correspondence, or to match consumer complaints with specific solicitation programs. [12 CFR Supplement I to Part 202 – Official Staff Interpretations § 202.12(b)(7)-3]

Jonathan Foxx
President & Managing Director 
Lenders Compliance Group

Thursday, August 21, 2014

Record Retention



QUESTION
Are we required to keep hard copies of records? Specifically, how long do we need to retain records relating to Regulation Z (TILA) compliance and periodic statements?

ANSWER
Generally, evidence of compliance does not need to be kept in hard copy. It is permissible to retain documents in any method that faithfully reproduces the documents, such as microfilm, microfiche, or computer programs (i.e., PDFs). Some lenders keep the entire loan transaction file indefinitely in electronic media; however, the creditor’s primary obligation is to keep sufficient records to reconstruct the compliance documents and disclosures.

For instance, a creditor is not required to retain each open-end periodic statement for a home equity plan, as long as specific information associated with each statement can be accessed. [12 CFR Supplement I, Part 226, Official Staff Commentary § 226.25(a)-2]

With the exception of advertising, Regulation Z sets forth a record retention period of two years after the date disclosures are required to be made or action is required to be taken. But an agency involved in supervising and enforcing TILA compliance, such as the CFPB, has the authority to extend the record retention period for longer than the statutorily mandated timeframe. [12 CFR § 226.25(a)]

Jonathan Foxx
President & Managing Director
Lenders Compliance Group