ABA Banking Journal
No Result
View All Result
  • Topics
    • Ag Banking
    • Commercial Lending
    • Community Banking
    • Compliance and Risk
    • Cybersecurity
    • Economy
    • Human Resources
    • Insurance
    • Legal
    • Mortgage
    • Mutual Funds
    • Payments
    • Policy
    • Retail and Marketing
    • Tax and Accounting
    • Technology
    • Wealth Management
  • Newsbytes
  • Podcasts
  • Magazine
    • Subscribe
    • Advertise
    • Magazine Archive
    • Newsletter Archive
    • Podcast Archive
    • Sponsored Content Archive
SUBSCRIBE
ABA Banking Journal
  • Topics
    • Ag Banking
    • Commercial Lending
    • Community Banking
    • Compliance and Risk
    • Cybersecurity
    • Economy
    • Human Resources
    • Insurance
    • Legal
    • Mortgage
    • Mutual Funds
    • Payments
    • Policy
    • Retail and Marketing
    • Tax and Accounting
    • Technology
    • Wealth Management
  • Newsbytes
  • Podcasts
  • Magazine
    • Subscribe
    • Advertise
    • Magazine Archive
    • Newsletter Archive
    • Podcast Archive
    • Sponsored Content Archive
No Result
View All Result
No Result
View All Result
ADVERTISEMENT
Home Compliance and Risk

When Must Banks Refund Mortgage Escrow Surplus?

May 6, 2021
Reading Time: 4 mins read

Q: The bank recently conducted the annual escrow account analysis for a mortgage loan at which time it was determined that there was a surplus of more than $50. Per §1024.17(f)(2)(i) of Regulation X (Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act), the surplus must be refunded “within 30 days from the date of the analysis.” If the applicant has inquired about paying off or refinancing the loan, must the bank refund the surplus within 30 days, especially as the surplus was not included in the pay-off amount provided to the borrower?

A: Yes. While the borrower has inquired about refinancing or paying off the loans, there is no guarantee that either will happen. Thus, the refund must be made within the require timeframe. As for the pay-off amount provided, it may be prudent for legal counsel to review notices to ensure that they adequately disclose the pay-off amount for the loan separate from the information related to the escrow account. (Answer provided March 2021.)

Q: Under Regulation C, I know that there are certain thresholds that govern whether a bank is required to collect, record, and report Home Mortgage Disclosure Act data. This has changed a couple of times in the past few years. Can you clarify when those changes were made and what the current thresholds are for closed-end mortgages and open-end credit and if any further changes are anticipated?

A: Yes, we can. The current threshold for closed-end coverage is 100 closed-end mortgage loans in each of the two preceding calendar years. The current threshold for open-end coverage is 500 open-end lines of credit in each of the two preceding calendar years.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau provides an executive summary that explains the thresholds and associated dates:

Effective July 1, 2020, the final rule permanently raises the closed-end coverage threshold from 25 to 100 closed end mortgage loans in each of the two preceding calendar years. In 2017, the Bureau temporarily increased the open-end threshold to 500 open-end lines of credit for two years (calendar years 2018 and 2019). In October 2019, the Bureau extended the temporary threshold of 500 open-end lines of credit to January 1, 2022. Effective January 1, 2022, when the temporary threshold of 500 open-end lines of credit expires, the final rule sets the permanent open-end threshold at 200 open-end lines of credit in each of the two preceding calendar years.

(Answer provided March 2021.)

Q: My bank implemented a “negative balance fee” (sometimes called an “extended overdraft fee.”) A consumer can trigger this negative balance fee even without an overdraft: It could occur due to a service fee or other transfer that puts the account into a negative balance. It can also occur due to a one-time debit or ATM transaction, insufficient funds to pay a check, or in any number of different ways. If a consumer did not opt in to Regulation E overdrafts, and the bank charges a negative balance fee, does the bank violate Regulation E?

A: The commentary to the final rule states that any fee charged for an ATM or one-time debit card overdraft is subject to the opt-in requirement, including but not limited to a per item, per occurrence, daily, sustained overdraft, or negative balance fee (sustained overdraft fees). Moreover, in its clarification of the rule, released on May 28, 2010, Comment 17(b)-9 to §1005.17 addressed the treatment of sustained overdraft fees, stating that an institution may charge a sustained overdraft fee if a negative balance is attributable to mixed transactions—that is, check, ACH or other recurring debit card transaction and ATM or onetime debit transactions—for customers who have not opted in.

However, to be able to charge a sustained overdraft fee for mixed transactions, an institution must be operationally capable of determining whether the sustained negative balance is attributable solely to non-covered transactions. The comment also provides an alternative approach for those institutions without a deposit allocation policy or otherwise not operationally equipped to determine what is causing the continuing negative balance. In this instance, the institution may not assess sustained overdraft fees when mixed transactions have caused a continuing overdraft in an account for which a customer has not opted in. (Answer provided March 2021.)

Q: Under §1002.7(d) of Regulation B (Equal Credit Opportunity Act), with certain exceptions, creditors may not require the signature of a credit applicant’s spouse or any other person— other than a joint applicant—on any credit instrument, if the applicant independently qualifies for the loan. If a bank’s underwriting policy requires the guaranty of all owners of a small business, is evidence of the guarantor’s intent to apply for joint credit required?

A: No.  Comment 2 to §1-2.7(d)(1) indicates that a joint applicant is someone who applies at the same time as the first applicant for shared credit—and someone whose signature is required as an underwriting condition because the applicant alone cannot qualify under the creditor’s standards. Note that Comment 1 to §1002.7(d)(6) permits a bank to require the guaranty of the owner(s) of a closely held business even if the business is creditworthy on its own. However, it may not require that the guaranty of the owner’s spouse, without further analysis. (Answer provided March 2021.)

Answers are provided by Leslie Callaway, CRCM, CAFP, director of compliance outreach and development; Mark Kruhm, CRCM, CAFP, senior compliance analyst; and Rhonda Castaneda, CRCM, senior compliance analyst, ABA Regulatory Policy and Compliance. Answers do not provide, nor are they intended to substitute for, professional legal advice. Answers were current as of the response date shown at the end of each item.

ADVERTISEMENT
Tags: ECOAEscrowFair lendingHMDAOverdraft protection
ShareTweetPin

Related Posts

Powell addresses reputational risk, leverage ratios at House hearing

Powell addresses reputational risk, leverage ratios at House hearing

Compliance and Risk
June 24, 2025

The use of reputational risk by bank supervisors was a problem the Federal Reserve Board came to understand only over the past couple of years, which is why the agency decided this week to remove it from bank...

ABA Foundation seeks donations to support Mississippi tornado relief efforts

FDIC issues regulatory relief guidance for Tennessee

Compliance and Risk
June 24, 2025

The FDIC released guidance with steps intended to provide regulatory relief to financial institutions and facilitate recovery in areas of Tennessee affected by severe storms and flooding in April.

FATF updates list of jurisdictions with anti-money laundering deficiencies

FATF updates list of jurisdictions with anti-money laundering deficiencies

Compliance and Risk
June 24, 2025

The Financial Action Task Force has updated its lists of jurisdictions with strategic deficiencies in countering anti-money laundering, the financing of terrorism and the financing of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

First-party data: Smarter insights when determining creditworthiness

Volatility prompts banks to hoard cash and implement financial hedges

Compliance and Risk
June 24, 2025

Even smaller banks with only a few billion dollars in assets are using swaps and other derivatives to more proactively hedge risk.

Senate bill would remove reputational risk from bank supervision

Fed removes reputational risk from bank exams

Compliance and Risk
June 23, 2025

The Fed has started the process of removing references to reputation and reputational risk from its supervisory materials, “and, where appropriate, replacing those references with more specific discussions of financial risk.”

OCC to merge community bank, large bank supervision departments

OCC to outline process for criminal referrals

Compliance and Risk
June 23, 2025

The OCC will issue a report detailing which regulatory violations can be referred to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution, part of a larger effort to combat alleged overcriminalization of federal regulations.

NEWSBYTES

Powell addresses reputational risk, leverage ratios at House hearing

June 24, 2025

Consumer confidence falls in June

June 24, 2025

Growth in home prices slowed in April

June 24, 2025

SPONSORED CONTENT

AI Compliance and Regulation: What Financial Institutions Need to Know

Unlocking Deposit Growth: How Financial Institutions Can Activate Data for Precision Cross-Sell

June 1, 2025
Choosing the Right Account Opening Platform: 10 Key Considerations for Long-Term Success

Choosing the Right Account Opening Platform: 10 Key Considerations for Long-Term Success

April 25, 2025
Outsourcing: Getting to Go/No-Go

Outsourcing: Getting to Go/No-Go

April 5, 2025
Six Payments Trends Driving the Future of Transactions

Six Payments Trends Driving the Future of Transactions

March 15, 2025

PODCASTS

Podcast: Staying close to clients amid tariff-driven volatility

June 18, 2025

Podcast: Old National’s Jim Ryan on the things that really matter

June 12, 2025

Podcast: What bankers need to know about ‘First Amendment audits’

June 5, 2025
ADVERTISEMENT

American Bankers Association
1333 New Hampshire Ave NW
Washington, DC 20036
1-800-BANKERS (800-226-5377)
www.aba.com
About ABA
Privacy Policy
Contact ABA

ABA Banking Journal
About ABA Banking Journal
Media Kit
Advertising
Subscribe

© 2025 American Bankers Association. All rights reserved.

No Result
View All Result
  • Topics
    • Ag Banking
    • Commercial Lending
    • Community Banking
    • Compliance and Risk
    • Cybersecurity
    • Economy
    • Human Resources
    • Insurance
    • Legal
    • Mortgage
    • Mutual Funds
    • Payments
    • Policy
    • Retail and Marketing
    • Tax and Accounting
    • Technology
    • Wealth Management
  • Newsbytes
  • Podcasts
  • Magazine
    • Subscribe
    • Advertise
    • Magazine Archive
    • Newsletter Archive
    • Podcast Archive
    • Sponsored Content Archive

© 2025 American Bankers Association. All rights reserved.