Learn. Share. Connect. (54,649 Members)  - Join
 

Site Tools

Join Now or Sign In
for Full Access to All Features
Mortgage Rates
30 Yr FRM 5.01% 0.03%
15 Yr FRM 4.40% 0.01%
1 Yr ARM 4.22% -0.07%
5/1 Yr ARM 4.27% 0.02%
30 YR Tres 4.53% 0.03%
Fed Prime 3.25% 0.00%

Recent Video

President Obama is hosting Democratic and Republican...
A look at the health of the American consumer, with...
Receive Free Email Alerts
Stay up to date on breaking news and blog posts with our free News Alert Service

Mortgage Licensing System Embraced By Some Slammed By Others

by Glenn Setzer on
 Email Page   |     Print   |     Bookmark

Recently we reported on a new nationwide system for licensing and regulating mortgage lenders on the state level.

The system, a joint project of the Conference of State Banking Supervisors (CSBS) and the American Association of Residential Mortgage Regulators (AARMR) will include an Internet based central mortgage licensing system which will allow applicants to complete one set of forms and submit them to all states in which they do or wish to do business. According to CBSB/AARMR, not only will the new system streamline the licensing process but it will also allow state regulators to more easily share information about enforcement actions against individuals and companies with their counterparts in other states.

At the time the new system was announced seven states had already adopted the forms and the joint CBSB/AARMR group expected 12 states to utilize the on-line system as soon as it is operative.

Late last week CBSB/AARMR announced that 28 states and the District of Columbia had signed a Statement of Intent indicating they will be participating in the Residential Mortgage Licensing System by the end of 2008.

In signing the statement the 29 state agencies asserted the reasons for state participation:

  • To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of state supervision of the U.S. mortgage market;
  • To fight mortgage fraud and predatory lending that costs consumers and the mortgage industry hundreds of millions of dollars in losses each year;
  • To increase accountability among mortgage industry professionals;
  • To unify and streamline state license processes for mortgage lenders and mortgage brokers.

The state agencies are expected to begin using the system over 2008 and 2009 as the systems full functionality is realized. Additional states have expressed interest in joining the system but are still determining a timeframe.

According to George Kinsel, President of AARMR, "The importance of this initiative is underscored by the number of state agencies indicating their intent to come on the System during the initial phase of development. These states are creating the critical mass necessary for state supervision of the mortgage industry to become more uniform, more efficient, and more effective"

But, also last week the National Association of Mortgage Brokers (NAMB), the national trade association representing the mortgage brokerage industry, released a statement condemning the initiative. NAMB, which claims to represent 27,000 members in 50 states, claimed that the nationwide licensing system is too narrowly focused to effectively protect consumers because it intentionally exempts more than 60 percent of mortgage originators from the proposed registry system.

The president of NAMB, Harry Dinham said that this exemption is a public policy concern because the largest and most recent fines and settlements for abuses within the lending industry have involved lenders and banks. He cited as examples Ameriquest's $325 million settlement in 2005 and Household Bank and Beneficial Finance's $484 million settlement in 2003.

Dinham said "If the goal of this registry is to protect consumers by standardizing license requirements and tracking bad behavior then it should apply to all mortgage originators. As it stands today, thousands of loan originators who work at banks and other financial institutions would not be required to register. This approach puts consumers at risk"

"This flawed system will create a false sense of security for consumers and government agencies because many bad actors will continue to be able to move freely from bank to lender and back again without fear of being detected by the proposed registry."

NAMB stressed that it supports stronger licensing requirements and background checks for all originators. "It is disappointing that the regulatory agencies continue to exempt many in our industry from meeting the requirements advanced by CSBS and AARMR."

He said that NAMB has long-advocated a national licensing standard that is evenly applied to government-regulated banks, credit unions, mortgage bankers, lenders, brokers and all employees of these entities.

In response, Bill Matthews, senior vice president of CSBS said that his organization and AARMR are not excluding anyone from the new licensing system. The new system, he said, will function as a back office outsourcing service for state agencies. It will not make policy for the states but will handle licensing for whomever they wish to regulate. Currently 70 percent of originators are licensed or otherwise regulated by the various states, however, he said that states are precluded by federal law from regulatory activities relating to any federally chartered bank, thrift, or credit union so states cannot license or otherwise regulate mortgage activity by such institutions or their subsidiaries.

44 of the 50 states are licensing through paper applications, Mr. Matthews said, and the new system will allow regulators to upgrade their technology more efficiently and at lower cost.


Comments

Join Now or Login to Post Comments

Tim Cornelison
on
I agree completely with the position held by the NAMB even though I am one of the lenders who is exempt as a direct employee of a lender. Clearly the same standard should apply to all mortgage originators regardless of who employs them.
REIBroker
on
I have long been opposed to exemption of anyone who originates mortgages from being subjected to the same licensing requirements as those with which other companies are required to comply. Citing Homeowners Loan Corp. and The Laredo National Bank. I have an employee who was once an employee at HLC and tells stories about originators there who got as much as 5% origination and 7% YSP. If you're going to regulate, regulate EVERYONE ... no exemptions.
M in JAX,FL
on
Those agencies that are exempt must follow tighter "internal" corporate policies. They answer to federal audits for compliance. They have a larger reputational risk to manage(and deeper pocket) from potential lawsuits. The broker can lose his license but the Bank, Thrift or CU can lose millions. Having worked with both brokers and larger banks I support the licensing exemption. Anyone can sit for a broker license test. Banks put their people through more thorough training.
Dave Weaver
on
Geez, No wonder Countrywide has applied to become a federally chartered bank. Nice little exemption for all their originators. Makes you question motives.
Janet Serna
on
Being a NM loan originator, I feel it is imperative that we be licensed, however it must apply to everyone!! I have many clients that have been "swindled" by brokerage firms, banks, credit unions, etc. We are dealing with people's livelihoods, and all of us should be licensed and regulated at the same level. Realtors and Escrow officers are required to be licensed, we should follow their example.
John
on
Actually, Countrywide is looking to go under a Federal Bank Charter because the various state agencies are a nightmare to work with, especially considering the size of their origination staff. It isn't exactly cloak and dagger to want one single regulator to answer to.
mortgage loan expert
on
Anyone who sells a mortgage, wholesale or retail, should be licensed by their state dept. To be able to be employed by any broker, mtg. banker, or direct lender.
Tom
on
I agree that all loan officers should be licensed, but NAMB is totally inconsistent: they call for all originators to be licensed but then are pushing a "State Model Licensing Statute" that by definition will not address loan officers of federal banks. I'm tired of the bad apples making the rest of us have to deal with more regulation. NONE of the national trade groups are working towards any concrete solutions. At least the Coalition of State Bank Superintendents is trying to do something.
Rush
on
Having been one of the "clean-up" people working files during the S&L and Banking crash of the late 80's...all of the people involved in the fraud and over charging were "exempt" federally regulated employees. I feel anyone who signs a 1003 as the originator should be licensed or "tracked" as a public service. If the originator does not have "skin in the game", they will do what is expedient or most profitable.
LoanChatLive.com
on
I am a huge proponent of National Licensing. As a mattter of fact our company is developing a network of "Licensed Only" mortgage professionals where Mortgage Broker Questions can be answered in real time.
LoanChatLive.com
on
I agree that anyone handling a mortgage loan HAS to be licensed. Especially now with how damaged the loan industry has been with unethical lenders. Even a simple mortgage broker question from a consumer should be handled by a licensed broker only!
Don
on
All mortgage loan originators should be licensed and tracked through a nationwide system. IF our esteemed representatives on the Hill are serious about protecting the public from unscrupulous lending practices, then mandate originators employed by banks, credit unions, etc. to be registered as well. Its time for Chuck Schummer and the rest of his cohorts to make a change to protect borrowers from bad originators in every sector in the mortgage industry. Why are only mortgage brokers being singled out?