The Lead Generation Company: Managing the Risk

Jonathan Foxx

President & Managing Director

Generating leads is an important way to reach consumers. It is also fraught with regulatory risk. A lead is consumer information that signals consumer interest or inquiry into products or services offered by a business, such as residential mortgage lenders and originators. There are several factors to be considered, not just licensing. I will list some rudimentary guidelines in this article, specifically with respect to contact with the consumer. Caution is urged to consult with a risk management professional to ensure compliance with federal and state guidelines required by a marketing campaign to generate leads. Although my focus is primarily on the online lead generation process, virtually all the guidelines provided herein may be extrapolated for use in offline lead generation campaigns.

My firm often is requested by clients to vet a lead generator, which I will call a Lead Generation Company. Careful risk management advice should be considered when developing and managing leads, whether obtained from an outsourced entity or a loan originator’s own website, in-house, or through online lead generation advertisements. Certainly, any loan originator that uses leads must have an internal compliance function that accounts for proper licensing of the Lead Generation Company (where required), monitoring of the data integrity derived therefrom, testing conformance with the originator’s policies, and training of staff in the appropriate use of lead generated, consumer data.

Banking departments these days are not just looking at licensing qua licensing. They are looking for loan originator compensation violations that are triggered by lead generation. For instance, they know that loans may have different cost structures depending on how the loans were initially received by the lender. A lead generated by the loan originator may be compensated differently than those generated by the creditor. As long as this doesn’t constitute a proxy for a loan term or condition, it is generally acceptable; that is, the loan officer may also be reimbursed for lead generation and other legitimate business costs, but the creditor must beware of how this may serve as a proxy for terms and conditions. It is up to the lender to make this determination (and properly document it).

Four Rules

In any lead generating marketing, the following four rules should be implemented:

1.  Complete, accessible, and straightforward disclosure of all parties’ intent regarding data collection and usage is essential;

2.  Data should not be brokered or sold without consent (or notice and choice) of all parties involved, including the consumer and the loan originator;

3.  Both the consumer, Lead Generation Company, and the loan originator should be made aware, through clear notices, of all parties involved in data collection and sharing; and,

4.  All parties should be educated and aware of current regulations regarding consumer protection and privacy.

These four rules become the bases of the policies, procedures, contractual arrangements, and protocols that ensure a viable marketing campaign that relies, in whole or in part, on lead generation.

Regulatory Focus

The regulators involved in enforcement of compliance with lead generation rules include, but are not limited to, state banking departments, state Attorneys General, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”),[i] and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“Bureau”). We already know that the Bureau examines for whether the lead generator is a third-party provider and reviews the terms and appropriateness of the relationship. The Bureau reviews advertisements and advertising sources. It will review TV, radio, print media, Internet, scripts, recordings, and so forth. It will determine if there was proper consumer disclosure all along the way, from point of contact with the consumer to point of contact with the lender, including any intimation of fees and other terms and conditions. Plus, a review is conducted for online data security and sharing of consumer information.

Although the new loan originator qualification standards do not impose licensing requirements, every lender must ensure that each loan originator in its employ is licensed and registered in compliance with laws related to Secure and Fair Enforcement for Mortgage Licensing Act (SAFE), if applicable. Further, entities engaged in lead generation and marketing activities, as well as the companies that do business with such entities, need to pay particular attention to their activities to ensure that they do not inadvertently engage in loan originator activity. If they do, they’ll need to make sure that they meet the new loan originator qualification standards, including licensing requirements. Failure to meet these standards will give rise to severe civil liability that could impair the collectability of the loan.

The Bureau has stated that anytime a consumer gives out sensitive personal and financial information on the Internet there are risks involved to the consumer. In the context of Pay Day Loans, for instance, the Bureau has already warned consumers that if a consumer applies for a loan online, the consumer could be increasing risk significantly.

The Bureau has expressed concern that an online application or form that consumers fill out could be sold to a loan originator that offers to originate a loan on behalf of the consumer. Indeed, the Bureau also has indicated it has concerns that multiple lenders or other settlement service providers could pay for this information, thereby causing them to contact or email the consumer.

CFPB’s Mortgage Rules for Readiness

The just released 2013 CFPB Dodd-Frank Mortgage Rules Readiness Guide (Guide) from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) provides, finally, a set of criteria and preparation procedures for residential mortgage lenders and originators. It is Version 1.0 and, like previously issued guides and manuals, the CFPB will update the Guide periodically, using the results from its field examinations to further enhance the audit methodologies.

Note that it is called a “Readiness Guide.” Such documents are not meant to be, and are not, conclusive. Such guides are expected to be sign posts leading the way, a means by which a company may learn of the priorities and exigencies of a regulator’s oversight functions. In other words, as the Guide itself declaims: “The Guide summarizes the mortgage rules finalized by the CFPB in January 2013, but it is not a substitute for the rules.”

To put a finer point on the use of the Guide, please always remember that only the rules and their official interpretations can provide complete and definitive information regarding their requirements.*
 
These rules can be found at http://www.consumerfinance.gov/regulatory-implementation/.

Each rule in the Guide also includes a hyperlink with additional information, which includes Small Entity Compliance Guides that may make the rule easier to digest. There are links to videos outlining the main elements of the rule. Furthermore, a convenient hyperlink compendium structure is embedded in the Guide, so that the rule headings are themselves hyperlinks directing the reader to the rule-specific CFPB website page.

_________________________________________________________________

IN THIS ARTICLE

Sections of the Guide

Summary of the Rules

Questionnaire

Library

___________________________________________________________________

SECTIONS OF THE GUIDE

The Guide consists of the following sections:

Part I: Summary of the Rules
Part II: Readiness Questionnaire
Part III: Frequently Asked Questions
Part IV: Tools

Part I (Summary of the Rules) contains an outline of the eight final rules issued in January 2013 concerning mortgage markets in the United States pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act) Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010) (2013 Title XIV Final Rules).

The rules amend several existing regulations, including Regulation Z, X, and B. Throughout the year, CFPB expects to provide updates to the rules where necessary. Updates will be posted, along with summaries of the changes, on the regulatory implementation CFPB webpage.

The questionnaire in Part II (Readiness Questionnaire) is '”not intended” to encompass all details of a comprehensive compliance program. This should not be interpreted to mean that the questionnaire is a replacement for the examination procedures or regulations. It is intended to serve as a guide in preparing for implementation of the mortgage rules and in performing a self-assessment. Thus, the questionnaire should be used as a self-assessment in determining a company’s progress towards compliance with the new mortgage rules. The questionnaire contains twenty-nine self-assessment questions and numerous subsections. Do not confuse the questionnaire with a proxy examination tool: it will not be added to the Examination Manual. The CFPB views the questionnaire as a “voluntary guide” for preparation. I have no doubt that it will be used by management in their discussions with examiners. The extent of those discussions may be determined by the institution’s size, products offered, risk mitigation, risk profiles, and other factors, such as the overall strength of the compliance management system.

Part III (Frequently Asked Questions) consist of only a two-page set of questions and answers, most of them quite obvious, both in the asking and the answering. Perhaps the most interesting ‘question and answer’ set is this one:

Question: Will the CFPB coordinate and communicate supervisory activities with other regulatory agencies?

Answer: In accordance with the Dodd-Frank Act and its routine practice, the CFPB will coordinate with other regulators. Regulators will communicate examination plans and findings with each other. When appropriate, the regulators will coordinate examination efforts in order to reduce regulatory burden.

Although the CFPB gave a vaguely worded answer, let’s put it this way: the integration of information between the state banking departments and the CFPB and, where applicable, other state and federal agencies, has become (or is becoming) seamless.

Finally, Part IV (Tools) is a resource directly, commonly used on many websites to direct the reader to other website locations of interest. This section hosts many hyperlinks, seventeen in total, that cover most of the rules and regulations that the CFPB has promulgated relating to mortgage compliance.

___________________________________________________________________

CFPB: Mortgage Originator Violations

Yesterday, I outlined for you the features of the CFPB's requisites of a Compliance Management System (CMS). My observations were based on the CFPB's newsletter, entitled Supervisory Highlights: Fall 2012, an issuance to the public and the financial services industry about its examination program, including the concerns that it finds during the course of its completed work, and the remedies that it has obtained for consumers who have suffered financial or other harm.

There are other important areas covered in the newsletter that I would now like to briefly discuss: 

Violations relating to Credit Reporting, and

Violations by Mortgage Originators

Fair Lending Compliance 

These subjects are very nuanced and complex, involving many aspects of regulatory compliance mandates. Necessarily, my remarks will be limited to the kinds of observations that the CFPB has indicated as principal concerns with respect to these matters.

_____________________________________________________

IN THIS ARTICLE

Violations relating to Credit Reporting

Violations by Mortgage Originators

Fair Lending Compliance

Library

_____________________________________________________

Violations relating to Credit Reporting

The Fair Credit Reporting Act (the FCRA) regulates the collection, use, and dissemination of consumer report information, and promotes the accuracy, fairness, and privacy of information held by the nation’s credit bureaus.

As you many know, the CFPB examines financial institutions for their compliance with the FCRA’s requirements for handling consumers’ credit information. Among other things, the FCRA and its implementing regulation, Regulation V, generally require entities that provide consumer information to credit bureaus to establish and implement reasonable written policies and procedures regarding the accuracy and integrity of the consumer information they furnish to these entities.

A party’s failure to comply with the FCRA may cause significant consumer harm.

According to the CFPB's most recent announcement on its examination findings, its examiners have discovered one or more instances in which a financial institution’s employees did not have sufficient training or familiarity with the requirements of the FCRA to implement it properly.

Such deficiencies resulted in a failure implement the following actions:

- Communicate appropriate and accurate account information to the credit bureaus.

- Indicate when account information had been disputed by consumers.

- Determine whether disputes had been fully investigated.

Findings by the CFPB noted that companies were unaware of the potential and actual violations of the FCRA, and, therefore, they repeatedly failed to respond to communications from consumers about their accounts.

The remedial actions mandated by the CFPB included (1) implementing procedures for properly reporting consumer credit disputes to all credit bureaus, (2) taking action on all disputes reported directly to the financial institution and correcting errors where appropriate, and (3) deleting information regarding customers, as appropriate, upon completion of their credit dispute investigations.

_________________________________

Violations by Mortgage Originators

CFPB examiners have found significant violations of Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) and Truth in Lending Act (TILA).

Violations under RESPA have included failures to make proper and complete disclosures to consumers of costs and other terms of a transaction due to inadequate or improper completion of the Good Faith Estimate and the HUD-1 settlement statement.

Violations under TILA have included failures to provide accurate interest rate disclosures, and payment amounts and schedules, as well as disclosures regarding late payments, security interests, and assumption policies.

One aspect of the CFPB's examination, it should be mentioned, is to review a company's policies and procedures with respect to RESPA and TILA. Those financial institutions that do not maintain an accurate and current set of such policy statements should expect to receive an adverse finding.

Specifically, where financial institutions have violated RESPA and/or TILA, they have been directed to implement appropriate policies, procedures, and monitoring to prevent recurrence of the violations, and to ensure that any third-party vendors, including mortgage brokers, are identified and included in the company’s oversight program. The relevant policies and procedures should provide guidelines to ensure that proper Good Faith Estimate and HUD-1 disclosures are provided to consumers, and that consumers are not improperly charged. In fact, where appropriate, the CFPB has actually directed that consumers receive a corrected HUD-1, and, just as in state banking examinations, where customers are improperly charged, a financial institution will be directed to provide reimbursement to the consumer.

_________________________________

Fair Lending Compliance

Another area of concern is compliance with the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), and its implementing regulation, Regulation C.

In our newsletter yesterday, I discussed deficiencies of fair lending compliance programs and some "common features" of well developed programs. The CFPB utilizes HMDA data in the course of its review of such programs, and it may seek corrective action or relief, as appropriate, in cases that demonstrate fair lending violations.

Ability-to-Repay: Regulating or Underwriting?

EXCERPT # 1 

It seems to me that the imposition of an ability-to-repay requirement as a regulatory mandate is an admission that market forces cannot discipline lenders or incentivize lenders to act in their own self-interest.

This is an obvious shift in liabilities, because this mandate shifts the burden of compliance to the lenders in order to assure that their contractually bound borrowers can pay back their loans. Parties to any contract can become adversaries!

In other words, the relationship between the creditor and the borrower is innately affected and extensively undermined by this Rule, inasmuch as it imposes a new kind of theory for a regulatory framework and, in my estimation, infantilizes lenders by making them comply with a regulator's ad hoc way of rationing the extension of credit. 

ABILITY-TO-REPAY: REGULATING OR UNDERWRITING? (Part II)

EXCERPT # 2

If the rationing of credit is meted out through this regulatory construct, it can be legitimately asserted as well that lenders are not arms-length, contractual counterparties; that is, lenders now will have a duty to assess a prospective borrower's ability to repay, irrespective of collateral value and securitization.

This change in the dynamics between and the inherent, due diligence tension among the parties to a residential mortgage transaction raise serious issues about the systemic consequences soon to be engendered. 

ABILITY-TO-REPAY: REGULATING OR UNDERWRITING? (Part II)