CFPB Targets PHH Mortgage for MI Kickback Scheme – NMP Skip to main content

CFPB Targets PHH Mortgage for MI Kickback Scheme

NationalMortgageProfessional.com
Jan 30, 2014

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has initiated an administrative proceeding against PHH Corporation and its affiliates (PHH), alleging that PHH harmed consumers through a mortgage insurance (MI) kickback scheme that started as early as 1995. The CFPB is seeking a civil fine, a permanent injunction to prevent future violations, and victim restitution. The filing is against New Jersey-based PHH Corporation and its residential mortgage origination subsidiaries, PHH Mortgage Corporation and PHH Home Loans LLC, and PHH’s wholly-owned subsidiaries, Atrium Insurance Corporation and Atrium Reinsurance Corporation. A CFPB investigation showed that when PHH originated mortgages, it referred consumers to mortgage insurers with which it partnered. In exchange for this referral, these insurers purchased “reinsurance” from PHH’s subsidiaries. Reinsurance is supposed to transfer risk to help mortgage insurers cover their own risk of unexpectedly high losses. According to today’s Notice of Charges, PHH took the reinsurance fees as kickbacks, in violation of RESPA. The CFPB alleges that because of PHH’s scheme, consumers ended up paying more in mortgage insurance premiums. The notice alleges that PHH used mortgage reinsurance arrangements to solicit and collect illegal kickback payments and unearned fees—through its affiliates Atrium Insurance Corporation and Atrium Reinsurance Corporation—in exchange for the referral of private MI business. The CFPB believes that from the start of the arrangements, and continuing into at least 2009, PHH manipulated its allocation of mortgage insurance business to maximize kickback reinsurance payments for itself. PHH Corporation and its affiliates are specifically accused of: ►Kickbacks: Over the approximately 15-year scheme, the CFPB alleges that PHH set up a system whereby it received as much as 40 percent of the premiums that consumers paid to mortgage insurers, collecting hundreds of millions of dollars in kickbacks; ►Overcharging loans: In some cases, PHH charged more money for loans to consumers who did not buy mortgage insurance from one of its kickback partners. In general, they charged these consumers additional percentage points on their loans; and ►Creating higher-priced insurance: PHH pressured mortgage insurers to “purchase” its reinsurance with the understanding or agreement that the insurers would then receive borrower referrals from PHH. PHH continued to steer business to its mortgage insurance partners even when it knew the prices its partners charged were higher than competitors’ prices. A Notice of Charges initiates proceedings in an administrative forum, and is similar to a complaint filed in federal court. This case will be tried by an Administrative Law Judge from the Bureau’s Office of Administrative Adjudication, an independent adjudicatory office within the Bureau. The Administrative Law Judge will hold hearings and make a recommended decision regarding the charges, which may be appealed to the Director of the CFPB for a final decision. The CFPB’s administrative proceedings are similar to the administrative proceedings of other federal regulators, including the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, and prudential regulators like the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). The Office of Inspector General at the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) initiated the investigation of PHH’s reinsurance practices, and in July 2011, HUD’s authority over the investigation transferred to the CFPB. Since then, HUD has given the Bureau valuable assistance in this matter. This administrative proceeding follows the Bureau’s settlements in 2013 with five mortgage insurers who participated in similar schemes. The Notice of Charges is not a finding or ruling that the defendants have actually violated the law. The Bureau’s Rules of Practice for Adjudication Proceedings provide that the CFPB may publish the actual Notice of Charges ten days after the company is served. If allowed by the hearing officer, the charges will be available on the CFPB Web site after Feb. 12, 2014.
Published
Jan 30, 2014
CRA Impact May Not Be As Profound As Feared

CFPB Director Rohit Chopra tells MBA conference changes shouldn’t be difficult

Regulation and Compliance
May 17, 2022
A UDAAP Expansion

The CFPB’s new memo about consumer complaints

Regulation and Compliance
May 17, 2022
Builders, Lenders Praise Biden Plan To Improve Housing Supply

'Housing Supply Action Plan' seeks to improve affordability by increasing housing inventory over the next five years.

Regulation and Compliance
May 17, 2022
Trigger Leads Could Be Outlawed In Mortgage Industry

N.Y. congressman says selling the information increases risk of fraud, ID theft.

Regulation and Compliance
May 17, 2022
Georgia Governor Signs New Mortgage Licensing Law

Lessens impact on hiring of out-of-state employees with criminal records

Regulation and Compliance
May 10, 2022
10,000 NAHB Members Sign Letter To Biden Seeking Housing Market Help

The letter cites rapidly rising interest rates, rising home prices and rents, and the rising cost of lumber and building materials for significantly decreasing housing affordability.

Construction
May 02, 2022