-
The $25 billion national mortgage settlement essentially allows the five largest servicers to police themselves - which has made many consumer advocates surprisingly happy.
March 15 -
More than a month after federal and state officials announced a massive $25 billion settlement with the five mortgage servicers, the Justice Department on Monday finally released the actual legal document. The document dump provided critical new details about the terms of the agreement.
March 12 -
For the moment, the job of ensuring that the nation's largest banks comply with the terms of last week's mammoth mortgage settlement falls on just one man: Joseph A. Smith, Jr., North Carolina's banking commissioner.
February 13
The terms of the national mortgage settlement overlap to some extent with existing federal consent orders against the largest servicers, which could complicate banks' compliance efforts with both — and the role of the external settlement monitor.
The 14 largest servicers are already attempting to comply with the terms of consent orders from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. Now independent monitor Joseph A. Smith, Jr., will be overseeing the five largest servicers' new efforts to comply with the terms of the $25 billion settlement with state and federal officials.
Consumer groups
"If Joe Smith started with the OCC information, he would be a significant way down the track. It's a valuable asset that I hope they're going to use," says former Arizona attorney general Terry Goddard, now a senior advisor at Treliant Risk Advisors and a senior counsel at the law firm SNR Denton.
But "I'm a little skeptical, because I haven't seen a lot of discussion between the regulatory effort and the AG effort," Goddard adds. "I don't know that many of the AGs are aware of the depth of the work on the OCC consent orders … and how comprehensive and complicated it is. As long as we have these agreements operating in isolation, the opportunity for the market to stabilize will be elusive."
There are clear distinctions between the consent orders and the national settlement, whose final terms
The consent orders
One bank lawyer described the two agreements as similar to a Venn diagram, with plenty of overlap.
"They may not fit together like hands in a glove, but they are trying to synchronize that," says the lawyer, who works for a mortgage servicer and did not want to speak publicly. "Everything in the [settlement] servicing standards is consistent with what the OCC wants, so there may not be tension between them. They share a common goal."
OCC spokesman Bryan Hubbard says the agency's consent orders and the national settlement "were independent but complementary."
"If there is one [agreement] where the standard is higher, that's the one you get held to," Hubbard says.
But there are big differences as well. The state attorneys general created specific metrics with clearly-defined error-rate thresholds in the settlement.
That differs dramatically from the OCC's consent orders. With so many third-party consultants in the mix, consensus on issues including
"One of the questions about the OCC process is why they didn't just have one independent consultant instead of allowing each servicer to hire their own, which raises questions about how they would ensure a consistent review or process," says Paul Leonard, the California director for the Center for Responsible Lending.
"The structure they created is pretty unwieldy," he adds.