Profile:
anne.hart.5070

This is anne.hart.5070's Profile page. Use it to view anne.hart.5070's comments, other users' replies to these comments, and comments anne.hart.5070 has endorsed.

What's Happening Now

September 19, 2012 1:10 pm

I agree Britt, This information belongs to the consumer. Forcing a querant into discovery is unfair, expensive and very often a lengthy process. The burden should NOT be on the consumer to retrieve ALL information in their mortgage file. To do less not only harms the consumer it harms the public records. Stop negotiating with these banks, force the banks to organize their records and reconcile them with the registries. ENOUGH ALREADY.

September 26, 2012 7:36 pm

I agree Britt. I believe the intent of the consumer is to retrieve all internal comments (servicer, bank, GSE, Trust Documents and any other miscellaneous information as any other clear and transparent Discovery would uncover; electronic or written). All of this information belongs to the consumer. Oral testimony mean zip, zilch, nothing in the context of servicer abuse. Less than zero.

September 21, 2012 4:11 pm

Hi anne.hart.5070. Welcome to Regulation Room and thank you for your comment.

The CFPB with these new rules is looking to expand requirements for servicers to provide information. Today servicers are only required to respond to “qualified written requests” related specifically to “servicing” as defined in legislation. The new rules would obligate servicers to reply to both oral and written requests. The new rules would also obligate servicers to disclose information that is generally found in a borrowers mortgage loan file and not just information related to servicing.

However, the CFPB does not want want to place unmanageable burdens on servicers. One… more »

…example the agency gives is a request that a diligent servicer would need more than 45 days to answer.

Is there a specific type of information you are worried might be excluded by these rules and that you think is important for consumers to have? How would you modify these rules to achieve the results you might seek? « less


No comments