The Bureau filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit arguing that Regulation X requires a mortgage loan servicer to respond to a borrower’s request for information regarding the borrower’s loan, including when the information requested does not relate specifically to servicing.
Amicus briefs filed by the CFPB are available on this page, including amicus briefs concerning federal consumer financial protection law filed in the U.S. Supreme Court by the Office of the Solicitor General.
Use the filters below to browse by date, statute, and the court in which the brief was filed.
In response to the court’s invitation, the Bureau filed an amicus brief addressing how to interpret a servicer’s obligation under RESPA and its implementing regulation to respond to errors relating to the servicing of a borrower’s mortgage loan.
The Bureau filed an amicus brief addressing how to interpret the term “servicer,” as defined in RESPA and its implementing regulation, in the common event that the right to service a consumer’s mortgage loan is sold or transferred between companies.
This case concerns the types of evidence a private plaintiff needs to put forward to demonstrate that a defendant paid for a referral in violation of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA).
This case concerns a provision of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act that prohibits the payment or receipt of “any portion, split, or percentage” of a charge for a real estate settlement service other than for a service actually performed, 12 U.S.C. § 2607(b).
The case concerns the provisions of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act that prohibit the payment or receipt of a kickback for the referral of settlement services business and provide a cause of action for damages equal to three times the amount of any fee paid for a settlement service involving such a kickback, 12 U.S.C. § 2607(a) & (d)(2).