The CFPB Debate: Regulation, Reform, and Real Estate

Hey guys Brian Stevens here over in Northern, California with mortgage shots You know We just had on our phones a tsunami warning and a duck and cover severe earthquake warning Seems like an apropos way to get ready to end this mortgage year But we can have smoother waters and stabler ground underneath our feet in the mortgage market if we choose To work and do the right thing put your nose down and let's make this go But today I'm going to talk about something that I think is going to help everybody out You know Musk he's going to be like let's call him president light He's not exactly going to be the president But he's gonna have about as much Influence as any VP since Dick Cheney took us to war in Iraq a few years ago And all I have to say is I hope it turns out better this time, right? Anyways, Musk wants to get rid of the CFPB quick Is that good or bad good? I mean bad a little of both must sees this as his mandate under doge And that is the Department of Government efficiency, which is funny in itself Government efficiency is when George Carlin referred to in the same breath with military intelligence and jumbo shrimp Okay, so let's think about this for a second here if the CFPB goes away So goes the mortgage industry equivalent of the Spanish Inquisition Just talk to my good friends who broker loans and have a radio show over in Chicago who felt the wrath of the CFPB But here's the bigger part of it in part the mortgage industry is already governed by too many agencies We've got the government sponsored enterprises HUD the Fed the Treasury the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency And are probably missing a few more. So here's my question to you guys How many agencies do we have to have or should have jurisdiction over one? industry But the better question is this one as having all of these government bodies with jurisdiction over the mortgage industry Made things better better for who better for the consumer now It's made consumer protection more expensive for consumers in a huge way It's added to the mind-numbing amount of paperwork and forms that need to get signed by the consumers But has it actually made it any better? I certainly have my thoughts on this. I think streamlining rather than adding to Generally makes things better for consumers, but let us know what you think down below you missed the FDIC Brian another governing body Sheila bear the ex-head of the FDIC said about this topic quote. It's a head-scratcher You know that the CFPB's budget is less than 700 million That's like point zero one percent of our six point seven five trillion federal budget She goes on to say I think we've gotten a very good bang for our buck But when it comes to the CFPB it was created to fill enormous regulatory gaps and consumer protections Which frankly were a key cause of the great financial crisis and the great recession that ensued since we've had the CFPB How the hell do you have regulatory gaps when you've got seven other agencies with oversight of the same industry? How is that even possible? Oh, I think I understand this now It's kind of like for the seventh audit in a row the Department of Defense can't find 700 billion dollars every single year have no idea where it went. Anyways to join his point, which I would rightfully say the CFPB pays their employees more than any other agency more than any other civil servants working for any other agency and Significantly more and they are the only agency This is true guys with a blank check to spend as much money as they want on anything They want and they have that with the Federal Reserve. That's true and finally it hasn't always been this way of cost-cutting with a CFPB when you consider the reign of the OD the original director Richard Cordray and spent money out of agency like Imelda Marcos spent on shoes Even worse with new offices new buildings new interiors, and of course those all-important employee perks So I don't want to hear nothing about 700 million dollars. Do we get rid of them? I for one Enthusiastically say yes, so we have a deal right now. It's cash out refinance. We got a problem though They did a cash out refinance on the same house. Just a couple of months ago We didn't do the last one, but they did do one a couple of months ago You see most lenders won't allow for back-to-back cash out refinances on properties Unless in a six-month or even a 12-month period So what I did is I went to the brass and I asked for an exception and I did that because we have an extraordinary Circumstance that really requires a second cash out refinance, even though it's not part of the guidelines our team at oak tree Yes, oak tree spoke with our investors and they saw what we were looking at the same thing and they went outside of their guidelines And they agreed to make this loan happen. The point is this Especially with your non QM deals out there You're score early deals the ones that don't fit in the boxes of all your agency stuff have a company That's going to really look at exceptions. It's a difference between getting a deal closed and not having it closed It's a difference between a good and a great look And of course what a lot of you loan officers are probably thinking right now is this going to trigger an EPO and the answer Is probably yes, and I don't like to do it, but there is a little solace in saying at least it's not mine I hope this helps. Have a good day