Home > Personal Loans > H&R Block Reaches $125 Million Settlement Over Loan Probe

Comments 3 Comments

H&R Block will pay $125 million to settle claims of unfair and discriminatory lending practices, with most of the money going toward repayment to borrowers who took out loans likely destined for failure, according to an announcement Tuesday by the Massachusetts attorney general.

H&R Block’s subsidiary, Option One, “made loans that it knew were likely to fail and it discriminated against African-American and Latino borrowers,” Attorney General Martha Coakley said at a press conference.  ”Like our other cases against mortgage lenders and their Wall Street facilitators, this case holds this corporation accountable and provides much needed relief to homeowners.”

Approximately 4,300 Black and Latino borrowers took out loans from Option One between 2004 and 2007, according to a fact sheet from the AG’s office. On average, black borrowers paid $396 more in broker fees than “similarly situated” white borrowers. Likewise, Latino borrowers paid $497 more in broker fees than white counterparts.

The company insists it did not violate any laws.

“The settlement does not constitute any admission of wrongdoing,” Gene King, a spokesman for H&R Block, said in a statement emailed to Credit.com.

[Free Tool: Obtain your Identity Risk Score from Credit.com]

As part of the deal, H&R Block agreed to spend $115 million to rewrite the loans of 5,500 people in Massachusetts who were sold predatory mortgages. The loans included “excessive and unjustified” fees for mortgage brokers, high debt-to-income ratios, very low down payments, and no documentation of borrowers’ incomes or assets, according to the attorney general’s office.

Also, the company made sure that borrowers could afford low “teaser” rates during the first few years of the loans, but didn’t bother to see whether the buyers could afford later payments as interest rates and balloon payments ratcheted up.

Added together, all of these risky elements made the loans “unfair because they posed an excessive risk of default and foreclosure, as evidenced by their very high loan default rate,” according to a press release by the attorney general’s office.

Many lenders sold loans with similar risky features during the housing boom. But many of those companies are depository institutions governed by federal regulators, who have been far less aggressive than some state officials, including Coakley, in enforcing fair lending laws.

H&R Block and its subsidiary Option One (which later became Sand Canyon Corp.) knew their mortgages were designed to fail, but kept selling them anyway because they were making significant profits on the secondary loan market, where they packaged the risky loans together and sold them to investors, Coakley said.

In addition to the $115 million designated for borrowers, H&R Block and Sand Canyon will pay the state a $9.8 million fine.

[Featured Product: Shop for Prepaid Debit Cards]

Image: walknboston, via Flickr.com




Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

  • Pingback: H&R Block Reaches $125 Million Settlement Over Loan Probe | Credit … « firlife.com()

  • melinda henderson

    how do i obtain information or request to be a part of this lawsuit?

  • Chris Maag

    Hi Melinda,

    If you’re a resident of Massachusetts, the best way is to contact Attorney General Coakley’s office. She has two offices in Boston:

    One Ashburton Place
    Boston, MA 02108 -1518
    Phone: (617) 727-2200

    100 Cambridge Street
    Boston, MA 02114 -2509
    Phone: (617) 727-2200

  • gersldine palacio

    How do I find out if I’m one of thise clients cause I filled out a paper about the law suit

Certain credit cards and other financial products mentioned in this and other articles on Credit.com News & Advice may also be offered through Credit.com product pages, and Credit.com will be compensated if our users apply for and ultimately sign up for any of these cards or products. However, this relationship does not result in any preferential editorial treatment.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Our Owners

Credit.com is owned by Progrexion Holdings Inc. which is the owner and administrator of a number of business related to credit and credit repair, including CreditRepair.com, and eFolks. In addition, Progrexion also provides services to Lexington Law Firm as a third party provider. Despite being owned by Progrexion, it is not the role of the Credit.com editorial team to advocate the use of the company’s other services. In articles, reporters may mention credit repair as an option, for example, but we’ll also be sure to note the various alternatives to that service. Furthermore, you may see ads for credit repair services on Credit.com, but the editorial team isn’t responsible for the creation or implementation of those ads, anymore than reporters for the New York Times or Washington Post are responsible for the ads on their sites.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team