CFPB – ANNOUNCES MORTGAGE ECLOSING PILOT PARTICIPANTS

Bureau to Assess Benefits of Electronic Mortgage Closings WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) today announced the selection of participants for its mortgage eClosing pilot program. The three-month pilot will begin later this year, and will explore how the increased use of technology during the mortgage closing process could affect consumer understanding…

NAILTA Weighs In on Stonebridge Title, CFPB Enforcement and the Henson Case

The question of regulation and enforcement of RESPA Sections 8 (a) and (b)have been hot-button issues for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and the federal courts.  Recently, two matters have arrived on the regulatory scene that helps to define and, perhaps, alter what was previously known about compliance and we want to make NAILTA members aware of them.

What is H.R. 4383? What Does it Do For You?

The title insurance industry is finally mobilizing itself to take positions on bills currently pending in Washington, DC.  With all the chatter recently making its way through the wires, we thought it was important to let you know how independent real estate settlement service providers and those who follow policy with NAILTA viewed the recent movements.

What is Going On?

The House Financial Services Committee (HFSC) recently convened a hearing concerning eleven (11) separate legislative bills that are each directed at the Dodd-Frank Act, and specifically the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).  This is not the first effort for the HFSC on Dodd-Frank.  Since 2011, there have been over fifty (50) such bills designed to alter, restrict or outright repeal Dodd-Frank and the CFPB.

HR 3211 – The bull-rush is on

Last week, the House Financial Services Committee (HFSC), in a surprise move, convened a full committee hearing on 15 pending bills including HR 3211 and “voice-voted” HR 3211 onto the House floor for further consideration.

The Chairman of the HFSC, Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX), ordered the voice vote on HR 3211 instead of a roll call vote, or the typical voting pattern for committee legislation because he suspected that several Republican members on the committee would vote “no” and thereby jeopardize the chances HR 3211 can move successfully in the House and the Senate.  The voice-vote was called with barely twenty members present.  It was a procedural passage of the bill.