Apr 7, 2011 | Legislation, Mortgage Lenders, News, Realtors
The Federal Reserve Board’s regulations governing loan originator compensation went into effect April 6 after a federal appeals court dissolved a stay suspending implementation of the rule.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued an order March 30 to stay the implementation of the Board’s loan originator compensation regulations. However, on April 5, the appeals court on Tuesday ruled National Association of Mortgage Brokers and (NAMB) the National Association of Independent Housing Professionals (NAIHP) had not “satisfied the stringent standards required for a stay pending appeal,” and dissolved its administrative stay of the rule.
The Associations filed a lawsuit March 9 against The Federal Reserve System seeking to restrain implementation of a section of the Fed’s loan originator compensation rule. On March 30, Judge Beryl Howell denied NAMB’s request although she found the rule could cause irreparable harm. NAMB then appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals, which then issued the stay on March 31, preventing the rules from going into effect April 1. The Federal Court then dissolved the stay after both NAMB and the Federal Reserve filed replies.
The three-judge appeals court panel also denied an emergency motion to stay implementation of the rule pending appeal, and denied a motion for expedited relief that sought to fast-track the appeal process.
Read more about this on HousingWire.
Mar 10, 2011 | Buying Real Estate, Interesting Stuff, Legislation, News, Realtors
In Massachus
etts an estate of homestead protects a homeowner’s primary residence from the claims of certain creditors. Prior to the change in the law the declaration of homestead protected the equity in the home for up to $500,000 of its equity in the event the home owner is sued. That is, if a homeowner is successfully sued in court, $500,000 of the home’s equity could not be touched by an attachment and or execution of sale by the judgment creditor. To acquire the homestead a homeowner would need to file a written declaration and record it with the county Registry of Deeds.
The Massachusetts Legislature has recently passed long awaited revisions to the Massachusetts Homestead Act. The revised law now provides automatic protection up to $125,000 on a homeowner’s primary residence, and a written homestead can also be filed to increase the protection up to $500.000. The act also provides homeowners additional protection: (more…)
Jun 29, 2010 | Buying Real Estate, Legislation, Realtors
Today the House of Representatives voted 409 to 5 to give home buyers three more months to close on their purchases and still qualify for the $8,000 or $6,500 federal income tax credit.
The House bill extends the closing deadline to September 30, 2010.
Now the Senate must approve the new, stand-alone House bill. But the Senate has already shown support and approval of the measure by having passed their own version of the bill last week.
The House bill doesn’t help anyone currently shopping for a home. Buyers must have signed a purchase contact by April 30 to qualify for the tax break. The issues currently is that many who now qualify for the credit may not be able to close their transaction in time. That is by July 1, 2010.
Read more on Inman News.
Jun 24, 2010 | Interesting Stuff, Legislation
The debate over the unauthorized practice of law in Massachusetts took a new twist this week.
A 2009 ruling in favor of National Real Estate Information Services Inc. (NREIS) in an unauthorized practice of law case brought by the Real Estate Bar Association for Massachusetts Inc. (REBA) has been vacated by the First Circuit Court of Appeals.
According to the June 21 order to vacate, the appeals court said it would let the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decide what constitutes the practice of law in the state encompassing all the interconnected activities of a real estate conveyance and the issuance of title insurance, and whether or not non-attorneys can conduct “witness” or “notary” closings. The appeals court said the district court construed the sparse state case law and declared the practices at issue did not constitute the unauthorized practice of law.
This decision will impact who can capture title insurance premiums in Massachusetts. Last year, $198 million in title premiums were generated in the state.
In 2009, United States District Judge Joseph L. Tauro entered an order of summary judgment in favor of NREIS, enjoining REBA from enforcing its interpretation of the practice of law.
In the court’s decision, Tauro agreed with NREIS’ position that the definition of the practice of law as set forth by REBA was a violation of the Dormant Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution. The order to vacate also reverses the district court’s decision on NREIS’s dormant Commerce Clause counterclaim. NREIS claimed that requiring attorneys to conduct closings was an unconstitutional restraint on trade that would result in higher closing costs.
REBA had filed the original lawsuit in 2006 in an attempt to restrict the provision of title, settlement and closing services by Massachusetts attorneys only. The decision marked the first time a Federal District Court has ruled on the issue of unauthorized practice of law as it relates to settlement services.
(more…)
Apr 21, 2010 | Buying Real Estate, Legislation, Realtors, Selling Real Estate, Short Sales
The Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives (HAFA) program is a part of the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP), and offers a streamlined process for short sales and deeds-in-lieu of foreclosure. HAFA will allow homeowners to discharge their first mortgage debt without the credit-destroying step of foreclosure. The program also offers a $1,000 incentive to banks to permit short sales and a $1,500 bonus to homeowners for the purpose of relocation.
The HAFA program has eligibility guidelines:
• The property must be the owner’s principal residence
• The first mortgage must have originated before 2009
• The unpaid principal must be less than $729,750 for a single-family dwelling
• The borrower’s monthly payment must exceed 31% of their gross income
• The mortgage must either be delinquent or a default be reasonably foreseeable.
If borrowers meet the program requirements they will receive pre-approved short sale terms from their lender, which will include a minimum acceptable proceeds figure for the sale. The homeowner will be required to list the property for sale with a Realtor® and close within 120 day, extensions may be permitted up to a total of 12 months.
Based on the short sale agreement with the lender, HAFA requires property owners to be fully released from any future liability on their first mortgage debt, and in some cases, subordinate debts, so that when the home is sold, the borrower is free and clear of their mortgage.
The program ends on December 31, 2012. HAFA does not apply to FHA or VA loans. There is an extensive amount of paperwork to be completed to participate in the program, Homeowners wishing to take advantage of the relief offered are encouraged to work with a experienced Realtor®.
Apr 18, 2010 | Interesting Stuff, Legislation, Realtors
Massachusetts privacy law requires businesses to implement security controls to protect systems containing Massachusetts resident’s personal information from data loss.
What is Mass 201 CMR 17?
In an effort to protect Massachusetts residents from the rising incidence of fraud and identity theft from data loss, the State of Massachusetts has implemented aggressive regulatory requirements to protect personal information. The state now requires mandatory compliance with 201 CMR 17.00 – Standards for the Protection of Personal Information of Residents of the Commonwealth (also known as just 201 CMR 17, or the Massachusetts Privacy Law). Building on California’s landmark security regulation SB-1386, Massachusetts Privacy Law establishes a minimum standard to be met for the protection of Massachusetts resident’s personal information (PI) contained in both paper and electronic records. For the purpose of being compliant with the new Massachusetts data privacy law, PI is defined as a resident’s first name and last name or first initial and last name in combination with any one or more of the following data elements that relate to the resident:
- Social Security number;
- Driver’s license number or Massachusetts identification card number;
- Financial account number, or credit or debit card number, with or without any required security code, access code, personal identification number or password that would permit access to a resident’s financial account; or
- A biometric indicator (finger prints, DNA, voice prints, etc.).
The Massachusetts data privacy law has set a new level in state security laws by regulating both private and public sector entities that handle Massachusetts resident’s sensitive data, regardless of where that entity is located. The law is intended to bring entities into alignment with both federal and industry security laws, including the Safeguards Rule under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) enforced by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Payment Card Industry Data Security Standards (PCI-DSS) security standards overseen by the PCI Security Standards Council. Its process and technical controls are aimed at preventing criminal activity from causing data breaches of either paper or electronic records containing PI. The requirement of securing electronic records includes PI on databases, laptops, applications, portable devices, and just about any other system in which electronic PI data can be either in transit or at rest.
Who needs Mass 201 CMR 17?
All persons, corporations, associations, partnerships or other legal entities with systems containing Massachusetts resident’s personal information in transit or at rest are responsible for complying with the 201 CMR 17 regulations by March 1, 2010. However, the regulations alsor equire businesses to complete internal and external security risk assessments prior to the effective date. The regulation applies regardless of whether the entities or the data is either inside or outside state borders, and applies equally to private and public sector organizations.
(more…)
