It has been a busy week in the fair lending space. Last week, the CFPB issued a white paper describing its proxying methodology for imputing race and ethnicity when analyzing fair lending compliance on non-mortgage credit products along with a proposed rule to oversee nonbank auto finance companies.
The CFPB proposed a new rule on September 17, 2014, that would enable the Bureau to oversee nonbank auto finance companies.
The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act requires residential mortgage lenders to collect race and ethnicity information about loan applicants, and lenders, regulators and others routinely use this information to statistically evaluate whether there is a risk that a lender has discriminated against borrowers on a prohibited basis.
By: Melanie Brody, Anjali Garg*
*Ms. Garg is a Law Clerk and is not admitted to practice law.
CFPB (the “Bureau”) released a report to Congress on its fair lending activities on April 30, 2014. The report highlights the activities of the Office of Fair Lending and Equal Opportunity from July 21, 2012 through December 31, 2013. It provides an overview of the Bureau’s supervision activities and highlights the data collection activities of the Bureau in the areas of mortgage lending, auto finance, and other credit markets.
On May 4-7, 2014 the Mortgage Bankers Association will hold its annual Legal Issues and Regulatory Compliance Conference in San Diego, CA. Several K&L Gates partners from the Consumer Financial Services Group will be presenting at the conference.
By: Melanie Brody, Anjali Garg*
*Ms. Garg is a law clerk and is not admitted to practice law.
On March 24, 2014, the Fifth Circuit issued an opinion in Inclusive Communities Project, Inc. v. Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs applying HUD’s discriminatory effects rule and burden-shifting analysis to a Fair Housing Act claim.
Recognizing that many creditors will be inclined to originate only “qualified mortgages” (“QM loans”) when the CFPB’s ability-to-repay rule takes effect in January, five federal regulators yesterday announced that a creditor’s decision to offer only QM loans will not elevate the creditor’s fair lending risk, absent other factors.
On September 3, 2013, K&L Gates LLP filed a brief as amici curiae before the United States Supreme Court in Township of Mount Holly v. Mt. Holly Gardens Citizens in Action, Inc., a case in which the Court will consider whether the Fair Housing Act recognizes a disparate-impact theory of liability.
Today, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in the appeal titled Township of Mount Holly, New Jersey v. Mt. Holly Gardens Citizens in Action, Inc., et al., No. 11-1507, agreeing to consider whether the Fair Housing Act allows claims under the disparate impact theory of discrimination.
In an increasingly complex battle among the branches of the federal government, the Solicitor General recently urged the Supreme Court to deny certiorari in the appeal titled Township of Mount Holly, New Jersey v. Mt. Holly Gardens Citizens in Action, Inc., et al., No. 11-1507.
On Thursday, May 9, K&L Gates and Ernst & Young co-sponsored a Fair and Responsible Banking symposium in New York City.
In an effort to reach more consumers, HUD’s Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity launched a new mobile app for iPhone and iPad today.
Last week, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the “CFPB”) released its first Supervisory Highlights report, featuring issues that CFPB examiners discovered in the supervision period between July 21, 2011 and September 30, 2012.
This week the Non-Discrimination Working Group of the Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force sponsored a webinar highlighting emerging fair lending issues and hot topics that financial institutions should be aware of as regulatory agencies continue to focus their attention on discrimination in the housing and finance markets.
The Department of Justice recently announced a $21 million settlement with SunTrust Mortgage over allegations that SunTrust’s neutral and non-discriminatory policy of granting loan originators discretionary pricing authority somehow resulted in loans to minority borrowers to be priced higher than loans to White borrowers
In a rare and unexpected move, the City of St. Paul last Friday agreed to dismiss its appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court challenging whether a violation under the Fair Housing Act may be proved under a disparate impact legal theory, or whether proof of intentional discrimination is required.
On January 17, 2012, K&L Gates LLP submitted the comments of six financial services trade associations to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) on the proposed rule to implement a disparate-impact legal standard under the Fair Housing Act.
Payday lenders recently received their first peek at what life will be like under the CFPB’s watch, and it’s not a pretty picture.
The CFPB wants to get to know you – well. But it’s not a prelude to a kiss.
On January 12, 2012, the CFPB released its new Mortgage Origination Examination Procedures Governing Banks and Nonbanks (the “Procedures”).
By: David A. Tallman
Adding to its already full plate, the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (the “CFPB” or the “Bureau”) recently requested public comment on its review of the various consumer financial protection regulations it has inherited from other agencies.
On November 16, 2011 the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) released a proposed rule to establish that proof of intentional discrimination is not necessary to establish a violation of the Fair Housing Act, and that a violation may be established under a disparate impact approach.
Those who have been concerned about the expansive powers of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB” or the “Bureau”) should ready themselves for the risk assessment reviews that the Bureau is about to initiate.