Monday, September 17, 2012

Trades to CFPB: Support Safe Harbor for Qualified Mortgages

Ten trade groups, including the ABA, CUNA, and NAFCU, on Friday wrote to the Consumer Financial Protection Agency reiterating their position on the “qualified mortgage” -- or QM -- standard under the pending ability-to-repay rule. We “want to express our continued strong support for a QM that meets three critical requirements,” they said in a letter to CFPB Director Richard Cordray.

Those requirements are: the QM must be broadly defined to include the vast majority of very high quality loans originated in today’s market; its product, documentation and underwriting requirements must be based on objective, bright-line standards; and lenders and investors must be granted a clearly defined legal safe harbor from ability-to-repay litigation when they originate loans that meet the QM standards.

“We believe a broad definition of QM with bright-line standards embedded in a legal safe harbor is the only sure means to serve the widest array of qualified borrowers with affordable credit,” the trade groups said. “A legal safe harbor with such standards will reduce the uncertainty associated with QM litigation and ease the need for lenders and investors to establish conservative credit overlays.”

They added that such a safe harbor also will permit claims by borrowers when the standards have not been met. “In short, a safe harbor will result in far more mortgage borrowers obtaining sustainable credit than a QM rule with a rebuttable presumption,” the trade groups said.

Read the letter.

No comments:

Post a Comment

 

The content is provided for educational purposes only, with the understanding that neither the authors, contributors, nor the publishers of this site are engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other expert or professional services. If legal or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.

Comments appearing in response to articles appearing on this site do not necessarily reflect the views of the ABA. ABA makes no representations regarding the truth or accuracy of commentary or opinions that may be posted in response to the articles that appear on this website.

The inclusion herein of any link to a website, either in the text of an article or in a comment, does not denote any approval, sponsorship, or endorsement by the ABA, and ABA is not responsible for the content or opinions expressed on those linked websites or related commentary. This content is not licensed to third parties sites and is not affiliated with any third party site. Any reference to the author or this content on any third party site on the Internet is not authorized by the ABA.

It is the policy of the American Bankers Association to comply fully with all antitrust laws. Certain discussions should be considered off-limits, including those that contain competitively sensitive data such as price and cost information, or statements that could be construed as reflecting an attempt or desire to control or influence a particular market or markets. Future pricing or other prospective competitive information should never be shared.