On June 6, 2017, a federal district court in Menichino
v. CitiBank1 rejected an interpretation of the
RESPA Section 8 statute of limitations espoused by the CFPB in
captive reinsurance cases, instead concluding that RESPA's
limitations period runs from the date of the occurrence of the
claimed violation, which is the date of the loan closing. The
Menichino decision is a welcome development because
although the CFPB has asserted its "continuing
violations" theory in the closely-watched PHH case, that issue is not among those
taken up by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals as part of its en banc review in PHH.
An issue in need of resolution.
PHH and Menichino are part of a series of CFPB
enforcement and private class action cases that have attempted to
assert violations of RESPA's anti-kickback provision based on
captive reinsurance arrangements in the mortgage industry. Mortgage
insurance ("MI") is insurance that protects a lender from
the risk that a borrower will
