Home > Mortgages > Did Bank Kickback Scam Increase Your Mortgage Bill?

Comments 0 Comments

Major American banks engaged in a decade-long kickback scheme that allegedly netted them $6 billion in fraudulent profits, and increased the cost of homeownership for millions of families, according to an investigation by federal regulators.

The investigation has not been made public, and a spokesman with the department of Housing and Urban Development declined to comment. Details of the scheme were leaked to American Banker.

According to the publication’s report, lenders including Citigroup, Wells Fargo and Countrywide allegedly ran the kickback scheme. In return for referring new mortgages to insurance companies, the lenders demanded a cut of the profits. Such a pay-to-play scheme is illegal under the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA).

Federal officials expressed outrage that the scheme had lasted so long, and that the Department of Justice has so far failed to prosecuted anyone associated.

“(T)his thing has been going on for too damn long,” Michael Stephens, HUD’s acting inspector general, told American Banker.

[Article: In First Public Speech, Consumer Watchdog Lays Out His Plans]

During the housing boom, many people bought homes with downpayments of less than 20%. These borrowers were required to buy mortgage insurance to protect the lender in case they defaulted. Beginning in the mid-1990s, many lenders set up new subsidiaries to sell reinsurance on those homes.

There’s nothing illegal about reinsurance. If done properly, a second insurance policy simply offers more protection for all the parties involved, at little extra cost to the buyer.

But federal regulators soon noticed something fishy about these reinsurance arrangements. The contracts gave most of the upfront profits to the banks, while sticking the insurance companies with most of the risk in cases where the borrowers defaulted. Since mortgage insurance companies’ entire business depended on referrals from lenders, they were forced to go along. Such kickback schemes in return for business referrals are illegal under RESPA.

[Featured Product: Looking for credit cards for bad credit?]

And since banks were now making money from insuring their own mortgages, they forced most borrowers to pay more for insurance than they should have.

“Nearly all loan files reviewed show borrowers with excessive coverage placed on their loan,” according to a presentation by HUD’s inspector general to the Department of Justice, which was leaked to American Banker.

While most of the banks alleged to have been involved in the scam did not comment, Wells Fargo told American Banker, “It is simply not true that Wells Fargo has ever been the subject of a HUD investigation involving either our captive reinsurance programs or our relationships with any private mortgage insurance company.”

Meanwhile, Bank of America took another hit recently concerning allegations of widespread fraud during the mortgage boom. The company bought Countrywide Financial in 2008. Shortly thereafter, Bank of America fired a whistleblower in Countrywide’s Los Angeles office who had led internal investigations into pervasive wire, mail and bank fraud by Countrywide employees.

[Featured Tool: Get your free Credit Report Card from Credit.com]

Firing whistleblowers is a big no-no under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. The Labor Department ordered Bank of America to rehire the employee, and pay the employee $930,000 in back wages, attorneys fees and damages.

“It’s clear from our investigation that Bank of America used illegal retaliatory tactics against this employee,” David Michaels, assistant secretary of the labor department’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration, said in a press release. “This employee showed great courage reporting potential fraud and standing up for the rights of other employees to do the same.”

The employee’s name and gender were not revealed. Bank of America said it plans to challenge the order to rehire, as its firing of the worker was “solely based on issues with the employee’s management style and in no way related to the employee’s complaints and the allegations made in the complaint,” the company said in a statement.

Image: Steven Tom, 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.

Certain credit cards and other financial products mentioned in this and other sponsored content on Credit.com are Partners with Credit.com. Credit.com receives compensation if our users apply for and ultimately sign up for any financial products or cards offered.

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.

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