The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Bureau) Friday filed a petition in the closely-watched
PHH case, seeking to undo a ruling by a panel of judges
for the D.C. Circuit Court that was highly critical of the
Bureau's interpretation of the Real Estate Settlement
Procedures Act (RESPA). The Bureau also seeks to challenge a ruling
in the case that the Bureau's unusual structure is
unconstitutional.
Key Issues
At issue is a June 2015 order by the director of the Bureau
(Director) on an appeal of the Bureau's RESPA enforcement
action against mortgage lender PHH Corp. (PHH). The Director ruled
that PHH's "captive reinsurance" arrangements
violated Section 8(a)'s prohibition on kickbacks because the
mortgage insurers' payments were compensation for referrals and
that such a violation could not be saved by RESPA Section 8(c)(2),
which has long been understood to be a statutory exemption
expressly authorizing payments for goods or services provided. The
Director
