12 U.S.C. § 2617

Authority of Bureau

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 12 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Issuance of regulations; exemptions

The Bureau is authorized to prescribe such rules and regulations, to make such interpretations, and to grant such reasonable exemptions for classes of transactions, as may be necessary to achieve the purposes of this chapter.

(b) Liability for acts done in good faith in conformity with rule, regulation, or interpretation

No provision of this chapter or the laws of any State imposing any liability shall apply to any act done or omitted in good faith in conformity with any rule, regulation, or interpretation thereof by the Bureau or the Attorney General, notwithstanding that after such act or omission has occurred, such rule, regulation, or interpretation is amended, rescinded, or determined by judicial or other authority to be invalid for any reason.

(c) Investigations; hearings; failure to obey order; contempt(1) The Secretary 11 Probably should be “The Bureau”. may investigate any facts, conditions, practices, or matters that may be deemed necessary or proper to aid in the enforcement of the provisions of this chapter, in prescribing of rules and regulations thereunder, or in securing information to serve as a basis for recommending further legislation concerning real estate settlement practices. To aid in the investigations, the Bureau is authorized to hold such hearings, administer such oaths, and require by subpena the attendance and testimony of such witnesses and production of such documents as the Bureau deems advisable.(2) Any district court of the United States within the jurisdiction of which an inquiry is carried on may, in the case of contumacy or refusal to obey a subpena of the Bureau issued under this section, issue an order requiring compliance therewith; and any failure to obey such order of the court may be punished by such court as a contempt thereof.(d) Delay of effectiveness of recent final regulation relating to payments to employees(1) In generalThe amendment to part 3500 of title 24 of the Code of Federal Regulations contained in the final regulation prescribed by the Secretary and published in the Federal Register on June 7, 1996, which will, as of the effective date of such amendment—(A) eliminate the exemption for payments by an employer to employees of such employer for referral activities which is currently codified as section 3500.14(g)(1)(vii) of such title 24; and(B) replace such exemption with a more limited exemption in new clauses (vii), (viii), and (ix) of section 3500.14 of such title 24,shall not take effect before July 31, 1997.(2) Continuation of prior rule

The regulation codified as section 3500.14(g)(1)(vii) of title 24 of the Code of Federal Regulations, relating to employer-employee payments, as in effect on May 1, 1996, shall remain in effect until the date the amendment referred to in paragraph (1) takes effect in accordance with such paragraph.

(3) Public notice of effective date

The Secretary shall provide public notice of the date on which the amendment referred to in paragraph (1) will take effect in accordance with such paragraph not less than 90 days and not more than 180 days before such effective date.

(Pub. L. 93–533, § 19, as added Pub. L. 94–205, § 10, Jan. 2, 1976, 89 Stat. 1159; amended Pub. L. 98–181, title I [title IV, § 461(e)], Nov. 30, 1983, 97 Stat. 1232; Pub. L. 104–208, div. A, title II, § 2103(f), Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009–401; Pub. L. 111–203, title X, § 1098(11), July 21, 2010, 124 Stat. 2104.)Editorial NotesAmendments

2010—Pub. L. 111–203, § 1098(11)(A), substituted “Bureau” for “Secretary” in section catchline.

Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 111–203, § 1098(11)(B), substituted “Bureau” for “Secretary”.

Subsecs. (b), (c). Pub. L. 111–203, § 1098(11)(C), substituted “the Bureau” for “the Secretary” wherever appearing.

1996—Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 104–208 added subsec. (d).

1983—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 98–181 added subsec. (c).

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2010 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 111–203 effective on the designated transfer date, see section 1100H of Pub. L. 111–203, set out as a note under section 552a of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.

Effective Date of 1983 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 98–181 effective Jan. 1, 1984, see section 461(f) of Pub. L. 98–181, set out as a note under section 2602 of this title.

Effective Date

Section effective Jan. 2, 1976, see section 12 of Pub. L. 94–205, set out as an Effective Date of 1976 Amendment note under section 2602 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 75 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1982–2026 · leading case: Bettina J. Schuetz v. Banc One Mortg. Corp., 292 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Bettina J. Schuetz v. Banc One Mortg. Corp., 292 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2002). · cites it 4× “12 U.S.C. § 2617 (a). HUD has issued regulations pursuant to this authority.”

Stewart Title Guar. Co. v. Am. Abstract & Title Co., 215 S.W.3d 596 (Ark. 2005). · cites it 4× “2001), Article 2, Section 19 of the Arkansas Constitution, and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, codified at 12 U.S.C. § 2617 (a) (1994). Specifically, Abstract alleged that Guaranty entered into "sham transactions," or alleged kickback schemes, involving Real Estate…”

Nedzad Krzalic & Danijela Krzalic v. Repub. Title Co., 314 F.3d 875 (7th Cir. 2002). · cites it 3× “But in response to our decision, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, which Congress has authorized to “prescribe such regulations, to make such interpretations, and to grant such reasonable exemptions for classes of transactions, as may be necessary to achieve the…”

Weatherman v. Gary-Wheaton Bank of Fox Valley, N.A., 713 N.E.2d 543 (Ill. 1999). · cites it 4× “(1998)), the regulation prescribed by HUD to interpret and implement RESPA, provides further support for the conclusion that a lender is not required to itemize all charges relating to settlement in the good-faith estimate.”

Cohen v. JP Morgan Chase & Co., 498 F.3d 111 (2d Cir. 2007). · cites it 2× “12 U.S.C. § 2617 . In these circumstances, Pension Benefit does not permit us to conclude, merely from the absence of an example of undivided charges in RESPA’s legislative history, that Congress thereby expressed its clear intent that § 8(b) not protect consumers from any…”

Michael Wease v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, L.L.C., et, 915 F.3d 987 (5th Cir. 2019). “" 12 U.S.C. § 2617 (repealed 2011). With that authority, HUD issued the cited regulation.”

McKell v. Washington Mut., Inc., 49 Cal. Rptr. 3d 227 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 2× “' 12 U.S.C. § 2617 (a)." ( Kruse v. Wells Fargo Home Mortg.”

Francisco J. Echevarria, Barbara Echevarria & Bobbie L. Hall v. Chicago Title & Trust Co., 256 F.3d 623 (7th Cir. 2001). · cites it 2× “12 U.S.C. § 2617 (a) bestows upon HUD broad power to “prescribe such rules and regulations, [and] to make such interpretations .”

Johnson v. Matrix Fin. Servs. Corp., 820 N.E.2d 1094 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). · cites it 2× “2002), quoting 12 U.S.C. § 2617 (a) (2000)), have gone back and forth on the proper standard for assessing the legality of a particular YSP See Dominguez v.”

Block v. Seneca Mortg. Servicing, 221 F. Supp. 3d 559 (D.N.J. 2016). “See 12 U.S.C. § 2617 (a). These rules are codified at 12 C.”

Berneike v. CitiMortgage, Inc., 708 F.3d 1141 (10th Cir. 2013). “21 , pursuant to notice and comment rulemaking, which granted servicers the authority to designate an exclusive address for receipt of QWRs under (e)(1) of the implementing regulations of RESPA.”

Lage v. Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC, 145 F. Supp. 3d 1172 (S.D. Fla. 2015). · cites it 2× “See 12 U.S.C. § 2617 (a). One such implementing' regulation, Regulation X, places various obligations on mortgage servicers when a borrower submits a loss mitigation application.”

Show all 75 citing cases →

— 12 U.S.C. § 2617(a) — 2 cases

Rhonda J. Clark v. HSBC Bank USA, Nat'l Ass'n, 664 F. App'x 810 (11th Cir. 2016).

Yeh Ho v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (S.D. Fla. 2020).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.