9/20/2017 RecentChangestotheLawGoverningQualifiedWrittenRequests|ConsumerFinancialServicesLegalUpdate

HOME ARCHIVES CONTACT CFS GROUP TCPA GROUP

Consumer Financial Services

Legal Update

Recent Changes to the Law Governing Qualified Written Requests

BY KALEB MCNEELY JULY 30, 2015

Introduction

Homeowners who are contemplating or

actively engaged in litigation regarding a
residential mortgage loan are increasingly
taking advantage of a provision of the Real
Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA)
whereby a borrower may request
information relating to the servicing of a
loan. Such a request for information is
termed a Qualified Written Request, or QWR, and may impose on loan servicers a duty
to respond to borrowers inquiries. Financial institutions and others involved in the
servicing of residential mortgage loans need to be aware of the duties that can be
triggered by receipt of a QWR, particularly in light of recent changes to the statutory
response times applicable to QWRs.

What is a QWR and to Whom Does It Apply?

A QWR is defined in RESPA, 12 U.S.C. 2605(e)(1)(B), as:

a written correspondence, other than notice on a payment coupon or other payment

medium supplied by the servicer that (i) includes, or otherwise enables the servicer to
identify, the name and account of the borrower; and (ii) includes a statement of the

https://consumerfinancialserviceslaw.us/recentchangestothelawgoverningqualifiedwrittenrequests/ 1/6
9/20/2017 RecentChangestotheLawGoverningQualifiedWrittenRequests|ConsumerFinancialServicesLegalUpdate

reasons for the belief of the borrower, to the extent applicable, that the account is in
error or provides suicient detail to the servicer regarding other information sought by
the borrower.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has noted, in its Oicial
Interpretations of this provision, that a QWR is not required to include both types of
requests. For example, a qualified written request may request information relating to
the servicing of a mortgage loan but not assert that an error relating to the servicing of a
loan has occurred. See 12 C.F.R. Part 1024, Supp. I, 1024.31.

Courts have held that RESPA does not require any magic language before a servicer
must construe a written communication from a borrower as a qualified written request
and respond accordingly. Catalan v. GMAC Mortg. Corp., 629 F.3d 676, 687 (7th Cir. 2011).
Thus, [a]ny reasonably stated written request for account information can be a qualified
written request. Id. At the same time, the statutory duty to respond does not arise with
respect to all inquiries or complaints from borrowers to servicers. Medrano v. Flagstar
Bank, FSB, 704 F.3d 661, 666 (9th Cir. 2012), cert. den. 133 S.Ct. 2800 (2013). In particular,
a QWR must relate to servicing and, thus, a borrowers request for loan origination
information or documents does not qualify as a QWR. See id. at 666-67.

In addition, the duty to respond to a QWR applies only to a servicer of a federally related
mortgage loan. See 12 U.S.C. 2605(e)(1)(A). For purposes of RESPA, a servicer is
defined as the person responsible for receiving any scheduled periodic payments from
a borrower pursuant to the terms of any loan . . . and making the payments of principal
and interest . . . 12 U.S.C. 2605(i)(2)-(3). A federally related mortgage loan is generally
defined, subject to certain exceptions, as a non-temporary loan, secured by a lien on
residential real property, where the lender is regulated by the federal government or the
lenders deposit accounts are insured by a federal agency. See 12 C.F.R. 1024.2(b).

What Actions Are Required upon Receipt of a QWR?

Upon receipt of a QWR, a mortgage servicer is required to take certain steps, each of
which is subject to certain deadlines.

First, the servicer must provide a written response acknowledging receipt of the
correspondence within 5 days (excluding legal public holidays, Saturdays, and Sundays)
unless the action requested is taken within such period. See 12 U.S.C. 2605(e)(1)(A).
https://consumerfinancialserviceslaw.us/recentchangestothelawgoverningqualifiedwrittenrequests/ 2/6
9/20/2017 RecentChangestotheLawGoverningQualifiedWrittenRequests|ConsumerFinancialServicesLegalUpdate

Second, within 30 days of receipt of the QWR (with a possible 15-day extension), the
servicer must provide a substantive response, the nature of which depends on the type
of QWR. Upon receipt of a notice of error (i.e., a QWR in which the borrower asserts an
error relating to the servicing of a mortgage loan, see 12 CFR 1024.35), the servicer must:
(1) make appropriate corrections in the account of the borrower, including the crediting
of any late charges or penalties, and transmit to the borrower a written notification of
such correction; or (2) aer conducting an investigation, provide the borrower with a
written explanation or clarification that includes (i) a statement of the reasons the
servicer believes the account is correct and (ii) the contact information of a servicer
employee or oice that can provide assistance to the borrower. See 12 U.S.C. 2605(e)
(2).

Where the servicer receives a request for information QWR (see 12 CFR 1024.36), the
servicer must provide: (1) the information requested by the borrower or an explanation
of why the information requested is unavailable; and (2) the contact information of a
servicer employee or oice that can provide assistance to the borrower. See 12 U.S.C.
2605(e)(2)(C). While the 30-day deadline for responding to a QWR applies to most
borrower inquires, it is important to bear in mind that certain types of notices of error
and requests for information (such as a request for the identity of the owner of the loan
under 12 U.S.C. 2605(k)(1)) may trigger separate deadlines and/or substantive
obligations. See 12 U.S.C. 2605(k)(1); 12 CFR 1024.36(d)(2); 12 CFR 1024.35(e)(3).

Third, during the 60-day period beginning on the date of receipt of a QWR, a servicer
may not provide information regarding any overdue payment, owed by such borrower
and relating to such period or qualified written request, to any consumer reporting
agency. See 12 U.S.C. 2605(e)(3).

Recent Amendments to RESPAs QWR Provisions

Section 1463 of the Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act (the Dodd-Frank Act), which took
eect in January 2014, contains several important modifications to the QWR provisions
of RESPA. First, a servicer must now acknowledge receipt of a QWR within 5 business
days (previously 20 days) and must provide a substantive response to the borrower
within business 30 days (previously 60 days), with a possible 15-day extension if the
servicer sends the borrower notice of the extension and its reason for the delay in
responding. See 12 U.S.C. 2605(e)(1)(A); 12 U.S.C. 2605(e)(2); 12 U.S.C. 2605(e)(4).
https://consumerfinancialserviceslaw.us/recentchangestothelawgoverningqualifiedwrittenrequests/ 3/6
9/20/2017 RecentChangestotheLawGoverningQualifiedWrittenRequests|ConsumerFinancialServicesLegalUpdate

Second, the Dodd-Frank Act added Section (k)(1) to RESPA, which provides in part that a
servicer shall not fail to respond within 10 business days to a request from a borrower
to provide the identity, address, and other relevant contact information about the owner
or assignee of the loan. 12 U.S.C. 2605(k)(1). While this section contains similar
requirements to Section 1641(f)(2) of the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), Section 1641(f)(2)
does not contain a specific deadline. See 12 U.S.C. 1641(f)(2). Although such inquiries
are not technically QWRs, borrowers submitting QWRs frequently include requests for
the identity of the owner or assignee of their loans, which are oen styled as requests
under TILA 1641(f)(2). As such, loan servicers need to be aware of the short 10 business
day deadline to respond to such inquiries.

Finally, the Dodd-Frank Act increased the statutory damages available to a borrower for
a violation of the RESPA QWR provisions. For individual borrowers, available statutory
damages increased from $1,000 to $2,000, while in the case of a class action lawsuit, the
maximum allowable amount of statutory damages doubled from $500,000 to $1 million.
See 12 U.S.C. 2605(f). In addition to statutory damages, borrowers may also seek to
recover actual damages they allegedly have suered as a result of a servicers failure to
provide an adequate and timely response to a QWR. However, servicers potentially can
mitigate liability pursuant to RESPAs safe harbor provision, which provides that a
transferor or transferee servicer shall not be liable for any violation of RESPAs QWR
provisions if, within 60 days of discovering an error and before the commencement of a
QWR-based action and receipt of notice of error from the borrower, the servicer notifies
the borrower of the error and makes appropriate adjustments. See 12 USC 2605(f)(4).

Recommended Practices

The above changes to RESPA, as well as the increasing use of QWRs by borrowers, make
it important for mortgage servicers to understand their obligations in responding to
QWRs and to establish procedures for acknowledging and responding to QWRs. The
following recommended practices are designed to assist mortgage servicers in dealing
with QWRs so as to minimize the risk of borrower litigation.

First, it is recommended that servicers establish an address to which QWRs must be

sent, as permitted by RESPAs implementing regulation, Regulation X. That address must
be communicated to the borrower, included in any communication in which the servicer
provides the borrower with contact information for assistance from the servicer, and
https://consumerfinancialserviceslaw.us/recentchangestothelawgoverningqualifiedwrittenrequests/ 4/6
9/20/2017 RecentChangestotheLawGoverningQualifiedWrittenRequests|ConsumerFinancialServicesLegalUpdate

included on any website maintained by the servicer if the website lists any contact
address for the servicer. 12 CFR 1024.35(c). Where a servicer has established such a QWR
contact address, borrower requests sent to other addresses are not proper QWRs. See
Roth v. CitiMortgage Inc., 2014 WL 2853549 (2nd Cir. June 24, 2014) (dismissing
borrowers RESPA claim where purported QWRs were not sent to servicers designated
QWR address). In addition to designating a QWR address, mortgage services are advised
to establish a method of determining the date of receipt of a QWR (which triggers the
applicable response deadlines) and a mechanism for alerting the appropriate
department of receipt of a QWR.

Second, mortgage servicers should set up a procedure to stop reporting the borrower to
consumer credit agencies upon receipt of a QWR in order to minimize the risk of being
deemed in violation of 12 U.S.C. 2605(e)(3), as discussed above.

Third, mortgage services are advised to establish a system for identifying the deadlines
to respond to a QWR and tracking the progress of preparing and submitting such
responses. This is particularly important in light of the recent tightening of the
timeframe for QWR responses, whereby a servicer has only 5 days to acknowledge
receipt of a QWR and 30 days or less to provide a substantive response or seek an
extension.

Finally, mortgage servicers should establish procedures for reviewing QWRs,

investigating any allegations of account error, and compiling any documents requested
by the QWR. If the account at issue is in error, servicers will need to correct such errors
and advise the borrower of any corrections that were made. If the account is determined
to be without error, servicers will need to communicate this to the QWR sender, and
send any documents requested by the QWR and within the scope of a QWR. Although
borrower requests for the identity of the owner or assignee of their loans are proper
under TILA 1641(f)(2), most courts have found that information regarding loan
origination is not properly within the scope of a QWR and servicers do not have a duty to
provide such information to borrowers. See, e.g., OConnor v. Nantucket Bank, 992
F.Supp.2d 24, 36-37 (D. Mass. 2014); Medrano v. Flagstar Bank, FSB, 704 F.3d 661, 666-67
(9th Cir. 2012); Ward v. Security Atlantic Mortg. Elec. Reg. Sys., Inc., 858 F.Supp.2d 561
(E.D.N.C. 2012); MorEquity, Inc. v. Naeem, 118 F.Supp.2d 885 (N.D.Ill. 2000).

End
https://consumerfinancialserviceslaw.us/recentchangestothelawgoverningqualifiedwrittenrequests/ 5/6
9/20/2017 RecentChangestotheLawGoverningQualifiedWrittenRequests|ConsumerFinancialServicesLegalUpdate

Share this:

Twitter LinkedIn Facebook Print

Kaleb McNeely
As an associate in the Trial Group, Kaleb practices primarily in the area of commercial
litigation, representing clients in a variety of contractual and tort-related disputes.
View all posts by Kaleb McNeely

PREVIOUS STORY NEXT STORY

When Did Education Become a Consumer Why Does the CFPB Want to Curb Auto
Financial Service? Lenders Discretion to Charge Higher or
Lower Interest Rates?

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE...

A Review of the Law

Governing Qualified Written
Requests
FEBRUARY 15, 2017

TERMS OF SERVICE

Consumer Financial Services Legal Update 2017.

All Rights Reserved.

https://consumerfinancialserviceslaw.us/recentchangestothelawgoverningqualifiedwrittenrequests/ 6/6