In some cases, our bank pulls an Automated Underwriting System (AUS) report, but ultimately not used in making the credit decision. Instead, the application is manually underwritten, and those results are used to make the credit decision. For HMDA purposes, do we still have to report the AUS that was pulled?
If the bank used the AUS results to evaluate the application, even if it was not used in the underwriting to make the credit decision, the bank should still report the AUS.
1. Automated underwriting system data - general. Except for purchased covered loans
i. A financial institution that uses an AUS, as defined in § 1003.4(a)(35)(ii), to evaluate an application, must report the name of the AUS used by the financial institution to evaluate the application and the result generated by that system, regardless of whether the AUS was used in its underwriting process. For example, if a financial institution uses an AUS to evaluate an application prior to submitting the application through its underwriting process, the financial institution complies with § 1003.4(a)(35) by reporting the name of the AUS it used to evaluate the application and the result generated by that system.
Our bank is trying to find the law or regulation that states what period of time the bank must give a customer to stop conducting excessive transactions before the savings account is converted or closed.
Reg. D discusses the requirement to monitor transfers in a footnote in the regulation, however, it does not specify a precise number of months which the customer has to "continue to violate those limits", in order for the Bank to close the account or take away the transfer and draft capacities. As a best practice recommendation, a three-month time frame is common among members as well as from regulators, but again, the regulation doesn't specifically set out a number.
...In order to ensure that no more than the permitted number of withdrawals or transfers are made, for an account to come within the definition of “savings deposit,” a depository institution must either:
(a) Prevent withdrawals or transfers of funds from this account that are in excess of the limits established by paragraph (d)(2) of this section, or
(b) Adopt procedures to monitor those transfers on an ex post basis and contact customers who exceed the established limits on more than occasional basis. For customers who continue to violate those limits after they have been contacted by the depository institution, the depository institution must either close the account and place the funds in another account that the depositor is eligible to maintain or take away the transfer and draft capacities of the account. An account that authorizes withdrawals or transfers in excess of the permitted number is a transaction account regardless of whether the authorized number of transactions is actually made. For accounts described in paragraph (d)(2) of this section, the institution at its option may use, on a consistent basis, either the date on the check, draft, or similar item, or the date the item is paid in applying the limits imposed by that section....
12 CFR 204.2(d)(2) FN 4: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=4cfab07594dfb576e5e767d0261cb1a4&mc=true&node=se12.2.204_12&rgn=div8
In regards to the six-transaction limit imposed in Regulation D, can a bank reduce this limit to only two transactions?
Yes, the bank may set stricter limits than required under Reg. D. There is not a prohibition in doing using a stricter limit as long as it is disclosed in the bank's account agreement to avoid any potential UDAAP issues.
Regarding CTRs, when there is an aggregated transaction, what are the requirements in order for the transaction to be considered an aggregated transaction?
The bank would report as an aggregated transaction only if, 1) the financial institution did not identify any of the individuals conducting the related transactions, 2) of all the transactions were below the reporting requirement, and 3) at least one of the aggregated transactions was a teller transaction. All three requirements must be met.
27. When do you check the “Aggregated transactions” box (Item 24)?
Filers should check box 24e “Aggregated transactions” (along with any other box applicable in Item 24) only in the following circumstance: 1) the financial institution did not identify any of the individuals conducting the related transactions, 2) all of the transactions were below the reporting requirement, and 3) at least one of the aggregated transactions was a teller transaction. If the aggregated transactions being reported included only deposits made via a night depository, the financial institution would not check “Aggregated transactions” as none of the aggregated transactions were a teller transaction; instead, the financial institution would check Item 24 “Night Deposit.” A “teller transaction” would include, but would not be limited to: the deposit or withdrawal of currency by an individual at the teller window, an individual making a loan payment with currency at the teller window or, an individual exchanging currency at the teller window. The option “Aggregated transactions” is not the same as Item 3 “Multiple transactions,” which can involve transactions that are above the reporting requirement.
Frequently Asked Questions Regarding the FinCen Currency Transaction Report (CTR) #27: https://www.fincen.gov/frequently-asked-questions-regarding-fincen-currency-transaction-report-ctr
Our bank has a question for CRA reporting. When we have a start-up businesses, do we report the revenue as "unknown" since there is no real revenue information (only projections)?
For start-ups, the bank should use $0 if the business is pre-revenue. The bank will not use any pro-forma or projected revenue figures.
For a start-up business, the institution should use the actual gross annual revenue to date (including $0 if a new business has had no revenue to date). Although start-up businesses will provide the institution with pro forma projected revenue figures, these figures may not accurately reflect actual gross revenue and therefore should not be used.
A Guide to CRA Data Collection and Reporting (Page 14 of 2015 version): https://www.ffiec.gov/cra/pdf/2015_CRA_Guide.pdf
Can I use proof of disclosing the Closing Disclosure to the borrower from the Title Company, or does the proof have to be from us the Lender?
As far as specific evidence of delivery for the Closing Disclosure, Reg. Z doesn't specifically require any one type of evidence. The Bank, however, would want to have documentation showing that it complied with TRID's delivery/timing requirements. Additionally, the regulation does permit settlement agents to provide the CD. Ultimately, however, the creditor remains responsible for ensuring compliance with applicable regulatory provisions.
(1) Provision of disclosures --
(i) Scope. In a transaction subject to paragraph (e)(1)(i) of this section, the creditor shall provide the consumer with the disclosures required under § 1026.38 reflecting the actual terms of the transaction.
(iii) Receipt of disclosures. If any disclosures required under paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this section are not provided to the consumer in person, the consumer is considered to have received the disclosures three business days after they are delivered or placed in the mail.
12 CFR 1026.19(f)(1)(iii): https://www.consumerfinance.gov/policy-compliance/rulemaking/regulations/1026/19/#f-1-iii
(v) Settlement agent. A settlement agent may provide a consumer with the disclosures required under paragraph (f)(1)(i) of this section, provided the settlement agent complies with all relevant requirements of this paragraph (f). The creditor shall ensure that such disclosures are provided in accordance with all requirements of this paragraph (f). Disclosures provided by a settlement agent in accordance with the requirements of this paragraph (f) satisfy the creditor's obligation under this paragraph (f).
12 CFR 1026.19(f)(1)(v)(i): https://www.consumerfinance.gov/policy-compliance/rulemaking/regulations/1026/19/#f-1-v
We have a few questions about mortgage payments. Our core is set up so that mortgage payments are applied in the following order:
1. The monthly escrow is put into the escrow account.
2. The remainder is applied to interest.
3. If anything remains after interest is paid, it is put toward the principle.
Are we allowed to apply mortgage payments this way? Is there anything in regulation that dictates how to apply mortgage payments?
There is not a prohibition in doing that under the federal regulations. It would be up to the bank's loan agreement regarding how payments are applied. As long as the bank's loan agreement does not state otherwise, there should not be an issue with applying payments in that way.
We do business in a state with dower rights. I just want to make sure that a spouse who is not on the title to real estate but uses the home as a primary residence does not receive the right to rescind—is this correct?
That is correct. For purposes of the rescission rules, dower does not constitute an ownership interest.
An ownership interest does not include, for example, leaseholds or inchoate rights, such as dower.
Comment 2 to §1026.2(a)(11): https://www.consumerfinance.gov/policy-compliance/rulemaking/regulations/1026/2/#2-a-11-Interp-2
We have a loan application which will be secured by our borrowers’ primary residence. It will additionally be secured by 40 acres of agricultural real estate that is owned by one of the borrowers’ father. My question is, do I have to provide a copy of the Loan Estimate to the father who is only pledging security?
There is not a requirement to give a copy of the Loan Estimate to the father in this case, under the TRID requirements. If the loan is subject to the right of rescission, the bank would need to give a Closing Disclosure to anyone with the right to rescind though, which may include the father. As always, be sure to check any internal policy requirements or investor guidelines, if applicable, since these often include additional disclosure requirements.
…When two consumers are joint obligors with primary liability on an obligation, the early disclosures required by § 1026.19(a), (e), or (g), as applicable, may be provided to any one of them. In rescindable transactions, the disclosures required by § 1026.19(f) must be given separately to each consumer who has the right to rescind under § 1026.23. In transactions that are not rescindable, the disclosures required by § 1026.19(f) may be provided to any consumer with primary liability on the obligation. …
We send disclosures electronically and can be notified when the borrower has not accessed them by the Loan Estimate (LE) due date. Are we required to mail the disclosures on that day if the borrower hasn’t accessed the electronic docs? They are telling us they are having a problem once we are past the LE due date so we are mailing them then but it is past the due date. If our system logs that we sent it by the due date and the borrower had e-consented, are we okay?
The customer is considered to have received the LE three business days after the bank sends it, even if the customer has not opened it. There is not a regulatory requirement to then send the disclosures in paper form as well. However, doing so may be required under the bank's internal policy, or an investor's guidelines (if applicable).
2. Electronic delivery. The three-business-day period provided in § 1026.19(e)(1)(iv) applies to methods of electronic delivery, such as email. For example, if a creditor sends the disclosures required under § 1026.19(e) via email on Monday, pursuant to § 1026.19(e)(1)(iv) the consumer is considered to have received the disclosures on Thursday, three business days later.
Compliance Alliance offers a comprehensive suite of compliance management solutions.
To learn how to put them to work for your bank, call (888) 353-3933 or email email@example.com.