I agree with Robin on this as well. The affiliate definition can cause some confusion but if you look at the explanation provided in Robin’s response, the attorney would need to meet one of the requirements in (A)(B) or (C) to qualify as an “affiliate”. If he is a “major stockholder” as stated above, he may fit that definition.
Unless one of those is met, then the attorney may be considered under an Affiliated Business Arrangement under RESPA, which is defined as:
Affiliate relationship means the relationship among business entities where one entity has effective control over the other by virtue of a partnership or other agreement or is under common control with the other by a third entity or where an entity is a corporation related to another corporation as parent to subsidiary by an identity of stock ownership.
“Control”, (under RESPA) as used in the definitions of “associate” and “affiliate relationship,” means that a person:
(i) Is a general partner, officer, director, or employer of another person;
(ii) Directly or indirectly or acting in concert with others, or through one or more subsidiaries, owns, holds with power to vote, or holds proxies representing, more than 20 percent of the voting interests of another person;
(iii) Affirmatively influences in any manner the election of a majority of the directors of another person; or
(iv) Has contributed more than 20 percent of the capital of the other person.
If this definition is met, an Affiliated Business Arrangement Disclosure must be provided to the borrower under RESPA.