Dodd Frank News Oct 22, 2014 - CFPB Finalizes Qualified Mortgage Points & Fees Cure

Dodd Frank News Oct 22, 2014 - CFPB Finalizes Qualified Mortgage Points & Fees Cure

Investor · Sherman Oaks, CA · Member since 2008 · 6k+ posts · 3k+ votes

On October 22, the CFPB finalized targeted amendments to the Dodd-Frank Act mortgage rules that took effect in January 2014. The amendments include:

  • Points and fees cure. Under the Ability-to-Repay/Qualified Mortgage Rule, loans must meet certain requirements to receive “qualified mortgage” or “QM” status. In particular, the points and fees charged to a consumer on a QM generally cannot exceed 3 percent of the loan amount. The amendments permit a lender or secondary market purchaser that discovers, after the loan has closed, that the 3 percent cap was exceeded to retain QM status by refunding the excess amount to the consumer with interest. However, the refund must occur within 210 days after consummation and before the consumer files suit, provides written notice to the lender that the cap has been exceeded, or becomes 60 days past due. In addition, the creditor must maintain and follow policies and procedures for reviewing points and fees and providing refunds to consumers. Although the CFPB stated that this amendment is intended to encourage lenders to provide access to credit to consumers seeking loans that are at or near the points and fees limit, the provision will expire on January 10, 2021.
  • Debt-to-income cure. In the April proposal, the Bureau requested comment on the need for a cure for loans that inadvertently exceed the 43% debt-to-income requirement for QMs made under Appendix Q. The Bureau deferred action on this issue, stating that it is considering the comments and whether to address the issue in a future rulemaking.
  • Ability-to-Repay exemption for non-profits expanded. Certain 501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations that lend to low- and moderate-income consumers are already exempt from the Ability-to-Repay rule if the organization makes no more than 200 mortgages a year, among other limitations. The CFPB has amended this provision to allow certain non-profit groups to continue extending interest-free, forgivable loans, also known as “soft seconds,” without regard to the 200-mortgage loan limit.
  • Small servicer exemption expanded. Certain small servicers are exempt from some of the CFPB’s new mortgage servicing rules, so long as they (and their affiliates) service 5,000 or fewer mortgage loans and they (or their affiliate) are the creditor or assignee for all of the loans. However, some non-profit organizations do not meet this exemption because they service loans, for a fee, from other associated non-profit lenders that are not considered “affiliates,” even though they operate under mutual contractual obligations to serve the same charitable mission, and use a common name, trademark, or servicemark. Because of this unique corporate structure, these non-profit organizations did not qualify for the small servicer exemption, unlike their for-profit counterparts with similar arrangements. The final rule expands the small servicer exemption to include these non-profit organizations, so long as they are 501(c)(3) non-profits that service loans on behalf of other non-profits within a common network or group of nonprofit entities, and meet other requirements.
1Reply
35 views

Most Popular Reply

Investor · Central America, Panama · Member since 2010 · 423 posts · 293 votes
11y

I hired an attorney who is knowledgeable about mobile home investing and Dodd-Frank to write a detailed report about selling mobile homes so you comply with Dodd-Frank.  

Some are promoting buying in a personal property trust then selling the beneficial interest of the trust (instead of selling the mobile homes itself), the report explains why you CANNOT do that.

The other important thing to take in to consideration with mobile homes, is that you need to comply with Dodd-Frank and the SAFE Act rules for your state, but you also need to comply with any mobile home dealer's rules in your state too.  

I got my mobile home dealer's license in Texas. It is a boring 3 day class.  Showing up on time in the morning and after lunch are the most important acpect for passing.  

If you're going to do mobile home deals, understand that there are rules beyond what you read in some slick course.  And the rules are state specific. 

You don't want to be the first one caught breaking the rules in your state.  

See this reply in the discussion

25 Replies

Jump to latestLatest
  • Real Estate Investor · Las Vegas, NV · Member since 2014 · 12 posts · 3 votes
    11y

    Hey Brian,

    Can you be specific on exactly how Dodd Frank affects professional investors who sell vacant Residential Land using Seller Finance and what Dodd Frank rules (if any) apply to their businesses that may finance many block of vacant residential land per year.

  • Investor · Central America, Panama · Member since 2010 · 423 posts · 293 votes
    11y

    I hired an attorney who is knowledgeable about mobile home investing and Dodd-Frank to write a detailed report about selling mobile homes so you comply with Dodd-Frank.  

    Some are promoting buying in a personal property trust then selling the beneficial interest of the trust (instead of selling the mobile homes itself), the report explains why you CANNOT do that.

    The other important thing to take in to consideration with mobile homes, is that you need to comply with Dodd-Frank and the SAFE Act rules for your state, but you also need to comply with any mobile home dealer's rules in your state too.  

    I got my mobile home dealer's license in Texas. It is a boring 3 day class.  Showing up on time in the morning and after lunch are the most important acpect for passing.  

    If you're going to do mobile home deals, understand that there are rules beyond what you read in some slick course.  And the rules are state specific. 

    You don't want to be the first one caught breaking the rules in your state.  

  • Investor · Sherman Oaks, CA · Member since 2008 · 6k+ posts · 3k+ votes
    11y

    Hi @John C. 

    4 lawyers that I recommend about Dodd Frank for Real Estate Investors are

    https://clintcoons.wordpress.com/tag/dodd-frank/

    http://www.lonestarlandlaw.com/doddf.html

    http://www.texasrealestatelaw.net/links.html

    http://eckleylaw.com/article_fullstory.asp?ID=124

    I would talk to one of them and I would enlist in a RMLO (Reg Mortgage Loan Originator).

    Best wishes,

    Brian

  • Investor/Landlord · Farmington Hills, MI · Member since 2011 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    11y

    The RMLO option is not available in Michigan.  I do not know if this applies in other States but I understand in Michigan a mortgage licensee may not originate loans for anyone but themselves or their own company.

  • Investor, Entrepreneur, Educator · Springfield, MO · Member since 2009 · 21k+ posts · 12k+ votes
    11y

    There are specific exemptions to DF, federally and at the` state level.

    I see Brian posted a link to an attorney who promotes loopholes again, so again, DF specifically mentions that any method or activity that may be employed to circumvent the intent of the law will be viewed as a covered activity. That pretty much means that anything 5,000 attorneys can dream up in a round room as some ploy to evade the law will be seen as a covered matter and apply the intent of the law to that activity.

    Understand too that there are gurus in RE that have a law degree and they are selling you stuff, go figure.

    As Jackie correctly pointed out, DF is not the only law or regulation out there. I answered a loan servicing question earlier, saying you may be exempt from servicing licensing and institutional requirements, that does not mean you are exempt from usual and customary requirements or other laws and, when there is some matter what is usual and customary is what the law would require. In other words, not having to retain telephone conversations in collections and retaining those records does not mean you don't need to make any record at all concerning your collection activities and not retain some record, it becomes reasonable to do so because of the underlying reasoning, say to comply with Fair Credit Act issues to CYA. Just because you may be exempt doesn't mean it's the Wild West and you can do anything you like, your activities will still be viewed as to what is deemed prudent and what is prudent is compliance with the laws as they may be applicable.

    For example, there is no reason that an individual note holder can not comply in giving notices required within the time frames such are required, it's not an impossibility to comply with that aspect and you won't be able say "kings X, the law doesn't apply to me" in every aspect.  Not giving proper notices is not a cost prohibitive matter nor does it require exceptional compliance knowledge or a law degree, what would a reasonable person do in acting properly.

    @John C. 

    DF is pretty tough on contractors and developers selling residential lots, which are included as if a home were there, the original writing was to include any land where a residence could be built, so, if you sold 100 acres out in the country where a home was allowed, it was covered. That has been modified I believe but no so much to dealers, contractors, developers, dealing in residential lands or housing. If you're in the business then you'll not likely be viewed as some casual seller or homeowner and specific exemptions may apply as to the number of deals per year (that varies state by state).

    And, a note as to exemptions, I doubt we have investors really cranking out tons of this business, but all state exemptions are subject to determinations by HUD on a case by case basis, if any state exemption fails to adequately address the intent of the law it can be tossed out and the intentions may still be applied. We could see some exemption or state interpretation challenged and not being acceptable. I doubt an investor would get caught up in those determinations, but relying on exemptions could cause a lot of headaches trying to address some issue later on that sets up the way some investor does business. So, knowing what the feds want and why should be known and followed the best you can. :)

  • Rental Property Investor · Clarkston, GA · Member since 2012 · 2k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    11y

    @Brian Gibbons 

    Thanks Brian.. But I don't see any material changes to the steps or criteria that an investor must use to sell via seller financing. Same 3% total points and fees as before, same 43% DTI as before, nothing new that I read.

    Sounds like prescriptions for when 3% and 43% is exceeded mainly.

  • Investor, Entrepreneur, Educator · Springfield, MO · Member since 2009 · 21k+ posts · 12k+ votes
    11y
    Originally posted by @Jeff Rabinowitz:

    The RMLO option is not available in Michigan.  I do not know if this applies in other States but I understand in Michigan a mortgage licensee may not originate loans for anyone but themselves or their own company.

    Jeff, Kansas is another state that doesn't regulate mortgage brokers, but the RMLO is a federal requirement. MI has RMLOs as they are required federally for mortgage originators, so does KS. A loan officer doing residential mortgages will have the RMLO, their license number is required to be affixed to each note they originate or that of a sponsor such as a bank.

    Most institutional lenders will have that limitation to the activities of their loan officers, same thinking restricted banks from servicing loans for individuals decades ago as the bank was accepting risks associated with a loan they had no interest in. Not familiar with MI, but Cali has a mixed bag of originators as well. What you probably have will be RMLOs at institutions that are restricted by law under their sponsor/employer and another classification such as a mortgage broker who will also have the RMLO that is under different requirements, as that is what brokers do, they originate for other lenders.

    I suspect mortgage brokers in MI would have the ability to originate a seller financed note, since the RMLO is required federally aside from exemptions, or is seller financing dead in MI?  

  • John FedroPro Member
    Investor · Austin, TX · Member since 2009 · 413 posts · 295 votes
    11y

    Hi all,

    Great thread. Good info.

    @Jackie Lange  concerning the use of personal property trusts as you mentioned in a few comments above this one. Are you referring to the fact that reselling a MH inside a trust will not circumvent the need for an investor to get licensed as a Dealer if his/her state has a cap per consecutive 12 months OR is using trusts strictly forbidden under these acts?? 

    The reason I ask is that you allude (in my mind anyway) on your sales page and here to the fact that "selling beneficial interest" in itself is illegal. Without correct steps the process can be illegal or against codes for sure, however when following state and federal guidelines trusts are still very much legal. Am I correct in this thinking? 

    Thank you for clearing this up,
    John Fedro

  • Investor, Entrepreneur, Educator · Springfield, MO · Member since 2009 · 21k+ posts · 12k+ votes
    11y
    Originally posted by @Curt Smith:

    @Brian Gibbons 

    Thanks Brian.. But I don't see any material changes to the steps or criteria that an investor must use to sell via seller financing. Same 3% total points and fees as before, same 43% DTI as before, nothing new that I read.

    Sounds like prescriptions for when 3% and 43% is exceeded mainly.

    Yes, agreed, however, need to clear something up, using "points" in discussions with seller financing is not appropriate, seller financing is funded by an amount of equity based on a sale price, it is not a cash advance or purchase money loan and points can not be charged on amounts of equity (points are prepaid interest) but can be on cash advances and, points are usually only allowed for institutional lenders, regulated brokers, banks, credit unions not individuals.

    So, in DF, when we talk about points and fees, those are not applicable to the lender in a seller financed transaction but only to originators being compensated. Seller financing or installment sales are covered under the UCC as to equity being financed and termination of the sale upon default. Different than cash loans/lending. :)  

  • Investor, Entrepreneur, Educator · Springfield, MO · Member since 2009 · 21k+ posts · 12k+ votes
    11y
    Originally posted by @John Fedro:

    Hi all,

    Great thread. Good info.

    @Jackie Lange  concerning the use of personal property trusts as you mentioned in a few comments above this one. Are you referring to the fact that reselling a MH inside a trust will not circumvent the need for an investor to get licensed as a Dealer if his/her state has a cap per consecutive 12 months OR is using trusts strictly forbidden under these acts?? 

    The reason I ask is that you allude (in my mind anyway) on your sales page and here to the fact that "selling beneficial interest" in itself is illegal. Without correct steps the process can be illegal or against codes for sure, however when following state and federal guidelines trusts are still very much legal. Am I correct in this thinking? 

    Thank you for clearing this up,
    John Fedro

    Might see my post, you're correct, using a trust isn't illegal, but using a trust to circumvent the DF Act doesn't fly, as no scheme or method or innovation may be used to circumvent the intentions of the Act. This is contained in the original SAFE Act and incorporated into the DF Act. If you have exceptions use those, after that, there is nothing you can really do except to comply. Seems folks are going to continue doing what ever they like or can justify in their minds and may get away with it, unless they get caught, so, whatever.....  :)  

  • Investor/Landlord · Farmington Hills, MI · Member since 2011 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    11y

    @Bill Gulley , I have fairly frequent contact with a member of the Mi State Board and he states that RMLOs cannot originate seller financed loans.  Michigan does regulate mortgage brokers.  I don't recall the specific clause but it is something in the Michigan lending statutes that prohibits mortgage brokers from originating loans for other entities.  It has been there long before Dodd-Frankenstein. 

    Sellers can legally finance their own residence as allowed under DF.  Many hard money lenders have packed up their shops.

  • Deborah BurianPro Member
    Rental Property Investor · Oklahoma City, OK · Member since 2013 · 1k+ posts · 412 votes
    11y

    Thanks for sharing.  When we get there, we'll be glad to have an RMLO.

  • Investor · Central America, Panama · Member since 2010 · 423 posts · 293 votes
    11y
    Originally posted by @John C.:

    Hey Brian,

    Can you be specific on exactly how Dodd Frank affects professional investors who sell vacant Residential Land using Seller Finance and what Dodd Frank rules (if any) apply to their businesses that may finance many block of vacant residential land per year.

     If you sell any non-owner occupied property with seller financing is does not fall under the Dodd-Frank guidelines. 

  • Investor, Entrepreneur, Educator · Springfield, MO · Member since 2009 · 21k+ posts · 12k+ votes
    11y

    Then mortgage brokers in MI are much like unicorns? Unless they can close in their name, but then DF lumps funding at the table and closing in your name and then selling the note in the same breath. No distinction between the two.

    Then, how do investors sell their own properties with seller financing as the origination federally requires an RMLO, are they getting the license? Rather strange too as there's a bit of a conflict of interest of underwriting your own sale and note.

    Wish the feds would have kept the rules to themselves, now we have 51 aspects to look at, 50 states and the feds! :) 

  • John FedroPro Member
    Investor · Austin, TX · Member since 2009 · 413 posts · 295 votes
    11y

    Hi all,

    Thank you @Bill Gulley Understood. 

    All the best,
    John Fedro

  • Investor/Landlord · Farmington Hills, MI · Member since 2011 · 1k+ posts · 1k+ votes
    11y

    @Bill Gulley  , my understanding is that it is a bit of a problem.  It is being worked on but that has been the case for a while now.  There are people who are making business decisions and proceeding--there are others who are making business decisions and not doing anything.  I do not believe there have been any prosecutions here yet but I do not follow this extremely closely.

  • Investor · Central America, Panama · Member since 2010 · 423 posts · 293 votes
    11y

    The Dodd-Frank rules specifically state that you can sell ONE property per year if it is owned by a trust. That's any kind of trust including a land trust or a personal property trust.

    If you sell more than 1 property per year as a trust, or sell the beneficial interest of the trust more than one time in a year, you would be violating Dodd-Frank.

    You could argue that selling the beneficial interest of the trust is not a sale.  However  if the person gains occupancy and has an interest in the property because of the transaction, it falls under the rules of Dodd-Frank

    Using different trusts names to try to circumvent Dodd-Frank is illegal because it is an attempt at circumventing Dodd-Frank. This is especially true when the beneficial owner of the trust is the same person/entitity owner for all trusts. Any attempt at circumventing Dodd-Frank is considered illegal.

    There's a right way, and a wrong way to sell mobile homes with seller financing.

    Selling the beneficial interest of personal property trusts with different names is not a viable solution and would be considered illegal. The law says you can sell 1 property per year if it is owned by a trust. period.

    I got this information from TWO different lawyers. One is the lead attorney for the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs which handles all rules for buying and selling Mobile Homes. 

    The 1 property in a trust law applies nationwide, not just Texas.

    Now that is not to say you are limited to 1 mobile home deal per year. Only 1 mobile home deal per year if it is titled in a trust.

  • Investor · Central America, Panama · Member since 2010 · 423 posts · 293 votes
    11y
    Originally posted by @John Fedro:

    Hi all,

    Great thread. Good info.

    @Jackie Lange  concerning the use of personal property trusts as you mentioned in a few comments above this one. Are you referring to the fact that reselling a MH inside a trust will not circumvent the need for an investor to get licensed as a Dealer if his/her state has a cap per consecutive 12 months OR is using trusts strictly forbidden under these acts?? 

    The reason I ask is that you allude (in my mind anyway) on your sales page and here to the fact that "selling beneficial interest" in itself is illegal. Without correct steps the process can be illegal or against codes for sure, however when following state and federal guidelines trusts are still very much legal. Am I correct in this thinking? 

    Thank you for clearing this up,
    John Fedro

     Sure Trusts are legal if you ONLY do ONE deal per year.

    If you do more than one deal in a trust it is not legal.  

    If you use different trust names to try to circumvent Dodd-Frank rules it is not legal.  

  • Investor · Central America, Panama · Member since 2010 · 423 posts · 293 votes
    11y
    Originally posted by @Jeff Rabinowitz:

    @Bill Gulley  , my understanding is that it is a bit of a problem.  It is being worked on but that has been the case for a while now.  There are people who are making business decisions and proceeding--there are others who are making business decisions and not doing anything.  I do not believe there have been any prosecutions here yet but I do not follow this extremely closely.

     Just because there have not been any prosecutions yet, does not mean that there are not any in the works.  There are. 

     I certainly would not want to be the test case selling lots of mobile homes by selling the beneficial interest of personal property trusts to try to circumvent the law.  Pleading ignorance does not count.  Pleading that "the course said I could do it" does not count. 

    The courts like to set examples with stiff fines or even jail time for violators of new laws.

    And now that they offer rewards/incentives for whistleblowers who report possible Dodd-Frank violations, I would not want to venture in to the grey area.

  • John FedroPro Member
    Investor · Austin, TX · Member since 2009 · 413 posts · 295 votes
    11y

    Hi all,

    Understood Jackie. We are seeing eye to eye now. :) This what I already knew. 

    Thanks for clearing that up, 
    John Fedro

  • Investor, Entrepreneur, Educator · Springfield, MO · Member since 2009 · 21k+ posts · 12k+ votes
    11y
    Originally posted by @Jackie Lange:
    Originally posted by @John C.:

    Hey Brian,

    Can you be specific on exactly how Dodd Frank affects professional investors who sell vacant Residential Land using Seller Finance and what Dodd Frank rules (if any) apply to their businesses that may finance many block of vacant residential land per year.

     If you sell any non-owner occupied property with seller financing is does not fall under the Dodd-Frank guidelines. 

    Absolutely right! If you sell to builders or those in the business, it's a commercial transaction, sell to someone who want to build their dream home, it's a consumer loan and is covered. :)

  • Investor, Entrepreneur, Educator · Springfield, MO · Member since 2009 · 21k+ posts · 12k+ votes
    11y
    Originally posted by @Jackie Lange:
    Originally posted by @John C.:

    Hey Brian,

    Can you be specific on exactly how Dodd Frank affects professional investors who sell vacant Residential Land using Seller Finance and what Dodd Frank rules (if any) apply to their businesses that may finance many block of vacant residential land per year.

     If you sell any non-owner occupied property with seller financing is does not fall under the Dodd-Frank guidelines. 

    Excuse me Jackie, but that is not correct. it depends on who the buyer is, another investor type can be a commercial loan, to a homeowner who intends on living in the property is a consumer loan and does matter, so let's be more careful in what you post as what is applicable and what is not.

  • Joel OwensBusiness Member
    Moderator
    Real Estate Broker · Canton, GA · Member since 2010 · 15k+ posts · 11k+ votes
    11y

    So the point is now it is a real PITA to do owner finance due to Dodd Frank.

    Everyone can just drop residential and come over to commercial and buy properties through me then! ........... : )

    JK

    Seriously the BS in residential with government is one of the reasons I have always liked commercial. More freedom to set up deals as you choose.

  • Investor, Entrepreneur, Educator · Springfield, MO · Member since 2009 · 21k+ posts · 12k+ votes
    11y

    @Jackie Lange, screaming in the forums can put you on vacation off the forums for awhile.

    What you said is probably not what you meant, it can be taken as written.....

    "Selling a non-owner occupied" that would be a landlord selling his rental property and if he were to sell to someone who will occupy it later on his financing is covered under DF :)

    Buying a non-owner occupied will be commercial. :)

Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.