Companies
3 Questions for Gate House Compliance’s Dror Oppenheimer
Nationally Recognized Credit and Underwriting Expert Speaks on CFPB’s Reg X Proposal:
“Having this draft language available gives mortgage servicers the opportunity to begin preparing now for a final rule.”
Question: We’re about a month away from the current deadline for public comments on the CFPB’s recently proposed rules implementing changes to Reg X. The proposal that came out earlier this month focuses on default servicing requirements and the framework for regulating how the mortgage servicing industry handles loss mitigation. Major industry groups already have responded pretty favorably to what the Bureau announced. Do mortgage servicers have anything to worry about here?
Oppenheimer: Keep in mind the trade associations have asked for an extension to the comment period. But I think that’s driven by their perspective that a relatively short 60-day comment window just isn’t practical in the summer season. Otherwise, you should expect to see a generally favorable response from industry, because this announcement essentially boils down to the CFPB memorializing changes that it made on an interim basis in 2022 during COVID. Those changes were viewed back then as positive for both the consumer and for servicers.
Question: What were those changes about?
Oppenheimer: They went largely to the streamlining of the loss mitigation process and protecting borrowers from preventable foreclosures. And ever since the pandemic, servicers have become accustomed to what was instituted then only temporarily. In fact, changes of this nature first appeared in 2014 when the CFPB standardized the foreclosure and loss mitigation rules for mortgage servicers following the financial crisis. Before then, there was a lack of standardization of loss mitigation rules across the mortgage industry. The industry has already been operating in this particular regulatory environment for the better part of a decade now. What the bureau is saying is, “How you’ve been dealing with Reg X over the past several years is the way of the future as well.”
Question: So, servicers have nothing to worry about?
Oppenheimer: I wouldn’t say it quite like that. This is certainly not an onerous, nor surprising, proposal. At the same time, no one should ignore the task at hand ahead. Having this draft language available gives servicers the opportunity to begin preparing for a final rule, which is almost inevitable. I’d recommend they take a deep dive into the proposed language today to focus on any language that maybe overly onerous, and prepare their systems, policies and procedures accordingly. In other words, now is the time to make sure their operations, especially processes related to loss mitigation, line up with what the CFPB has signaled will ultimately be in place for the future.
Executives and board members in financial services are increasingly held accountable for the actions of their firms. Among their many responsibilities, they are required in particular to be engaged in their company’s efforts to adhere to the letter and spirit of laws that seek to ensure consumer protection.
As the regulatory landscape facing executives in the financial services industry has grown increasingly complex – and integral to their enterprises and their firms’ reputations – so too has the need to demonstrate and document the actions taken by their firms.
Gate House Chairman and Partner Brian Montgomery recently outlined the challenges facing executives in a piece for HousingWire. As he argued, even with the best of intentions, there are often inconsistencies and conflicting interpretations of what firms need or ought to do — and what executives need or ought to in order to stay apprised of their firm’s efforts. One thing we know it that it will require vigilance and a lot of hard work to get it right.
Recognizing the important need in C-suites and executive board rooms, Gate House Strategies has launched a new subsidiary, Gate House Compliance, LLC, to provide fair lending and compliance management services. The firm, comprised of veterans in financial services and specialists in fair lending and consumer protection law and regulation (and support from CrossCheck Compliance’s deep bench of experts), will advise and support compliance regimes across multiple asset classes, including mortgage, student loan, credit card, and other secured and unsecured credit products.
The addition of Gate House Compliance is a timely and critical expansion of the firm’s ability to serve the growing needs of the industry. After careful examination, clients can choose services that complement their current compliance program, or on a subscription basis, they may utilize Gate House Compliance 365, a comprehensive system of ongoing support of fundamental services and a coordinated, dynamic approach to the management of regulatory risk.
The important policy goals our country require executives to be engaged. They need experience, perspective, and insight in order to do what is right and, and – when the path is made unclear by conflicting policies or interpretations – what is prudent for business.
The goal for Gate House Compliance is to put executives and firms ahead of the curve and ahead of the scrutiny that characterizes the current environment and road ahead. Vigilance and a team of experts with a steady hand will be a must.
Gate House Partner and Chairman Brian Montgomery shared his perspective on the regulatory landscape facing executives in the financial service industry — the need to act responsibly with respect to fair lending laws and to understand the complexity of it all – in a piece for Housing Wire.
“[M]ultiple agencies pursuing the same general goals sometimes creates inconsistencies or conflicting interpretations of policy, making it difficult for financial institutions to navigate uncharted waters, even with the best of intentions.” Montgomery wrote.
Montgomery, who served as Deputy Secretary of HUD and FHA Commissioner twice, emphasized the risks, particularly in the areas of lending and loan servicing: “Recent regulatory actions have targeted marketing practices, credit allocation and product offerings,” he said, with top executives more often being held accountable for their “company policies, procedures, operations, and culture.”
With risk to the firm not only financially but reputationally, the need to “identify gaps that may exist in their knowledge and experience and structure management teams accordingly” is paramount if they are to demonstrate to overseers that they possess a comprehensive approach to their compliance obligations.
Private industry participants have their work cut out for them as they go about the critical work of upholding the letter and spirit of our country’s fair lending laws, Montgomery said. Both private firms and government must work together at times, with private industry willing to serve as partners to government and the government for their part providing “transparency, open dialogue and technology improvements” to make our system work.