|
Annual Foreclosure Mediation Exemption Certification Due in Washington and Oregon by End of January
Credit unions with properties secured in both Washington and Oregon have until the end of January to renew the certifications to avoid the mandatory mediation clauses in the foreclosure statutes.
What do I certify?
For properties located in Washington, credit unions first need to certify that they were not the beneficiary of deeds of trust in more than 250 trustee sales of residential real estate of up to four units in 2024 to be exempt from the mandatory mediation requirements. Secondly, they need to certify that they issued fewer than 250 notices of default in 2024 to be exempt from mandatory fee on every notice of default you file in Washington state. The Washington State Department of Commerce has separate forms depending on what is being certified.
In Washington State, credit unions will want to complete and return the 2025 Exemption from Fees and the Foreclosure Mediation Exemption Templates that are available on the Department of Commerce’s Website in the Financial Institutions expandable towards the bottom of the page. As of Dec. 30, 2024, the Department of Commerce has updated the forms on the website.
For properties located in Oregon, credit unions need to certify that they did not commence or cause an affiliate or agent to commence more than 30 actions to foreclose on residential trust deed by advertisement and sale under ORS 86.752 or by suit under ORS 86.010 during the prior calendar year. The certification should go to the Attorney General’s office to exempt credit unions from the mandatory mediation requirements.
In Oregon, credit unions will want to complete and return the Beneficiary Exemption Affidavit – Form 300 which is available on the bottom of Oregon DOJ’s website.
Properties located in Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, and Wyoming do not have mandatory mediation requirements,
Does this apply to federal credit unions? What about credit unions chartered in a different state?
Yes, the certification requirements apply to properties located in the two states. No matter the charter or location of the financial institution, the laws apply to collection activities on said properties.
When do I need to submit the completed certification form to the state?
In Washington, you need to mail the signed original certification form to the Washington State Department of Commerce, so it is received no later than Jan. 31, 2025.
In Oregon, credit unions need to claim the exemption with the Attorney General’s office no later than January 31st, or at the time the credit union files a notice of default under ORS 86.735.
What happens if I do not certify in time?
Because Oregon allows you to claim the exemption at the time you file a notice of default, you do have a few options.
In Washington, if you fail to certify, your credit union will owe a fee of $250 per notice of default on residential real property issued in 2025 and will be subject to mandatory mediation on all foreclosures this year.
I did not issue any notices of default in 2024, do I need to certify?
Yes. The fee and mandatory mediation will apply to all notices of default or foreclosures in 2025. To avoid these requirements, you must certify.
_________________________________________________________________________
National Credit Union Administration (NCUA)
NCUA Board Approves Non-Registered Investment Fund Pilot Program
The NCUA approved an investment pilot program which will permit up to 30 complex federal credit unions to engage in investment activities prohibited under part 703 but permitted by the Federal Credit Union Act. The requested pilot program would allow complex federal credit unions to invest in a series of non-registered investment funds comprised of consumer loans, as follows:
_________________________________________________________________________
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)
CFPB Sues JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, and Wells Fargo for Allowing Fraud to Fester on Zelle
The CFPB sued the operator of Zelle and three of the nation’s largest banks for failing to protect consumers from widespread fraud on America’s most widely available peer-to-peer payment network. Early Warning Services, which operates Zelle, along with three of its owner banks Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, and Wells Fargo rushed the network to market to compete against growing payment apps such as Venmo and CashApp, without implementing effective consumer safeguards. Customers of the three banks named in today’s lawsuit have lost more than $870 million over the network’s seven-year existence due to these failures. The
CFPB’s lawsuit describes how hundreds of thousands of consumers filed fraud complaints and were largely denied assistance, with some being told to contact the fraudsters directly to recover their money. Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, and Wells Fargo also allegedly failed to properly investigate complaints or provide consumers with legally required reimbursement for fraud and errors.
The CFPB alleges widespread consumer losses since Zelle’s 2017 launch due to the platform’s and the defendant banks’ failure to implement appropriate fraud prevention and detection safeguards. The CFPB alleges that Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, and Early Warning Services violated federal law through critical failures including:
-
Leaving the door open to scammers: Zelle’s limited identity verification methods have allowed bad actors to quickly create accounts and target Zelle users. For example, criminals often exploited Zelle’s design and features to link a victim’s token to the fraudster’s deposit account, which caused payments intended for the consumer’s account to instead flow to the fraudster account.
-
Allowing repeat offenders to hop between banks: Early Warning Services and the defendant banks were too slow to restrict and track criminals as they exploited multiple accounts across the network. Banks did not share information about known fraudulent transactions with other banks on the network. As a result, bad actors could carry out repeated fraud schemes across multiple institutions before being detected, if they were detected at all.
-
Ignoring red flags that could prevent fraud: Despite receiving hundreds of thousands of fraud complaints, the defendant banks have failed to use this information to prevent further fraud. They also allegedly violated the Zelle Network’s own rules by not reporting fraud incidents consistently or on time.
CFPB Sues Walmart and Branch Messenger for Improperly Opening Deposit Accounts for More Than One Million Delivery Drivers
The CFPB sued Walmart and Branch Messenger for forcing delivery drivers to use costly deposit accounts to get paid and for deceiving workers “last mile” drivers in Walmart’s Spark Driver program about how they could access their earnings. The CFPB’s lawsuit alleges that Walmart and Branch opened Branch accounts for Spark Drivers, and Walmart then deposited drivers’ pay into these accounts, without the drivers’ consent. Walmart told Spark Drivers that they were required to use Branch to get paid and that they would terminate workers who did not want to use these accounts.
CFPB Files Lawsuit to Stop Kickback Scheme to Steer Borrowers to Rocket Mortgage
The CPFB filed a lawsuit against Rocket Home for providing incentives to real estate brokers and agents in violation of RESPA. Specifically, the CFPB alleges that Rocket Homes violated the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act by:
-
Providing kickbacks in exchange for referrals: Rocket Homes gave incentives, such as home-buyer referrals and priority for future homebuyer referrals from the network, in exchange for brokers’ and agents’ mortgage lending and settlement service referrals.
-
Requiring brokers and agents to steer consumers toward Rocket Mortgage: Rocket Homes required that the brokers and agents receiving its referrals “preserve and protect” the relationship between the consumer and Rocket Mortgage by steering clients away from other competing lenders and preventing brokers and agents from sharing valuable information with their clients concerning products not offered by Rocket Mortgage, including the availability of programs that provide assistance for a borrower’s down payment.
The CFPB further alleges that The Mitchell Group and Jason Mitchell also violated the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act through its participation in Rocket’s kickback and steering scheme. The Mitchell Group encouraged its network of real estate brokers and agents to engage in coercive tactics to get consumers to use Rocket Mortgage for their home loans. Agents were trained to suggest that house settlements could fall through if the homebuyer wanted to comparison shop with Rocket Mortgage’s competitors.
_________________________________________________________________________
NACHA
Nacha Issues ACH Operations Bulletin #4-2024 – Importance of Maintaining Up-to-Date Routing Transit Numbers
The ACH Network is a payment system that reaches all U.S. bank and credit union accounts. ACH payments are routed utilizing the routing transit number (“routing number” or “RTN”) of the Receiving Depository Financial Institution (RDFI). For accurate routing of ACH payments, it is important for parties involved in the origination of ACH payments to keep the routing information they use or access up to date. Using outdated routing information can result in failed payments, causing significant customer dissatisfaction and additional exceptions and expense, as well as reputational risk for organizations and financial institutions.
The ACH Operations Bulletin serves as an aid in educating financial institutions, service providers and their ACH customers on the importance of keeping and maintaining, or having access to, accurate routing number information. All parties involved in the origination of ACH payments should incorporate regular routing number updates as part of their ACH origination practices.
__________________________________________________________________________
Buyer beware: Warning of Potential Vehicle and Dealership Scams
The Oregon DMV issued a warning about a new scam using fake Manufacture Certificates of Origin to obtain titles for stolen vehicles. An MCO is a document that certifies the original ownership of a vehicle. It's issued by the manufacturer when a vehicle is produced and contains information like the make, model, year and vehicle identification number.
Crooks are creating fake VINs that appear to be legitimate and adding them to counterfeit Manufacturer Certificates of Origin created by either altering printed information on a genuine certificate or by creating a completely fake version downloaded from the internet. A fake certificate often lists the manufacturer’s name and an out-of-state dealer or distributor as the first buyer.
To determine if a VIN is legitimate:
-
Run the VIN through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration recall site. This will show if the VIN on the certificate is one issued by the manufacturer. If no VIN is found, an error message will be received, meaning the VIN was not issued by that manufacturer. This search is free.
-
Research the vehicle history through the National Motor Vehicle Title Information System, a consumer protection database that provides title information from states across the country. Only use an approved National Motor Vehicle Title Information System data provider. These sites will generally charge a nominal fee.
|
