- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 2 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
IF the bank provides an LE, the LE has been received by the customer in the mail, the LE expires, and no intent to proceed has been received, would it be correct to say that any fee then at that point could be increased because there would be no tolerance set point/no fees to adhere to at that point? In other words, we could then provide a revised/2nd LE with potentially all new fees because the first one expired?
If yes, then is there a requirement or expectation for the lenders to educate the consumer on the expiration of the LE?
Is there an issue if ITPs are frequently given late in the process? Is there a requirement or expectation of TRID/UDAAP that the ITPs should be obtained closer to the receipt of the LE?
We have had an issue with a lender not getting ITPs very timely, and in some cases this has benefitted the bank because the LE expired. What risk do we have here?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.