ARTICLE
18 August 2015

PHH Fine On Hold, Says D.C. Circuit

B
BakerHostetler

Contributor

BakerHostetler logo
Recognized as one of the top firms for client service, BakerHostetler is a leading national law firm that helps clients around the world address their most complex and critical business and regulatory issues. With five core national practice groups — Business, Labor and Employment, Intellectual Property, Litigation, and Tax — the firm has more than 970 lawyers located in 14 offices coast to coast. BakerHostetler is widely regarded as having one of the country’s top 10 tax practices, a nationally recognized litigation practice, an award-winning data privacy practice and an industry-leading business practice. The firm is also recognized internationally for its groundbreaking work recovering more than $13 billion in the Madoff Recovery Initiative, representing the SIPA Trustee for the liquidation of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC. Visit bakerlaw.com
The case will now proceed to the D.C. Circuit for a decision on the merits, which is likely to come next year.
United States Finance and Banking

On August 3, 2015, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals entered an order staying Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Director Richard Cordray's June 4, 2015, order imposing injunctive relief and disgorgement of over $109 million for alleged Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) violations stemming from a mortgage reinsurance program PHH and certain of its affiliates operated. As we covered earlier, Director Cordray held that PHH had referred consumers to mortgage insurance companies and received reinsurance premiums in return, which he concluded constituted a kickback in violation of Section 8 of RESPA. Cordray's appellate decision also increased the amount of disgorgement from the ALJ's prior ruling of $6.4 million to $109 million by imposing fines not just on amounts paid by borrowers for mortgage insurance after the CFPB took over civil enforcement of RESPA, but for any payments received after that takeover date, regardless of when the borrower's loan closed. The case will now proceed to the D.C. Circuit for a decision on the merits, which is likely to come next year.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More