Training Helps Avoid Delays in Closing
A frequently stated concern before TRID implementation began in October 2015 was that a lack of familiarity with the new rules would lead to errors, with all the oversight risks and delays to closing associated with them. The good news is that lenders reported that the first loans to be completed under the new TRID requirements were error-free.
Industry insiders say that lending agents have been cognizant of the potential for delays, and have compensated by allowing sufficient time for the closing process. In particular, some officers have found that it was difficult to schedule more than one closing in a single day, but by spacing them out they can ensure total compliance.
Some companies have reported being prepared for the implementation of TRID thanks to extensive planning for the new rule, providing complete training for employees on the new systems and protocols. However, other companies claim that the training process has only been possible by designating several employees as full-time trainers.
Another TRID-related concern that was often repeated before the October 2015 implementation involved the technological response to TRID. To make certain older loans that required the old forms could be completed, two separate systems need to run simultaneously. This allows for the processing of the old forms while ensuring the applications received on or after October 3rd can be processed by the new system.
According to CFPB Director Richard Cordray, rumors of systems that failed in the wake of TRID implementation abound, with some arguing that the CFPB must turn an eye towards vendors who failed to deliver working TRID-compliant products to lenders, thus creating closing delays. However, the director argued that vendors should be granted more leeway until the difficulties of implementing TRID have faded away. He did, however, hint that the bureau might investigate those LOS systems that have shown to fail after implementation.
“Some vendors performed poorly in getting their work done in a timely manner, and they unfairly put many of you on the spot with changes at the last minute or even past the due date. It may well be that all of the financial regulators, including the Consumer Bureau, need to devote greater attention to the unsatisfactory performance of these vendors and how they are affecting the financial marketplace,” said Cordray at a recent San Diego MBA conference.
Cordray went on to explain that mortgage lenders that have already committed substantial resources to training and compliance for the rules would be treated with a slightly less stringent oversight. It seems that the remarks tend to indicate that software vendors will be under much more scrutiny to produce compliant documents. Although, some software vendors have taken these comments as less of a threat and more reassurance that the CFPB was ready to help as a partner to make implementation better.
Industry experts claim there are intricate parts of the disclosure process that have caused snags in the LOS systems. Rounding and closing cost errors seem to be the crux of the problem. The analysts point out that these are industry comparisons and interpretations that need to be adjusted, and not necessarily caused by the software.
The closing disclosures have been a concern since the cash to close table seems to vary from the final Loan Estimate calculation. There is also a concern that the new closing document version does not allow a section for the lender to represent costs of ancillary credits, principal reductions, and refunds of mortgage insurance.
It appears for now that the CFPB is taking a hands-off regulatory approach until the software vendors can spend a little more time identifying the deficiencies and then make the necessary changes to perfect the system. How long the CFPB will keep their patience, is anyone’s guess.
If you would like more information on TRID or would like to schedule a free consultation, please call Jaspreet Kaur, Esq. at Geraci Law Firm.