Great Web site for info on Maryland Laws and Federal Laws
http://www.kramerslaw.com/real_estate_statutes.htm

TILA

“It is the purpose of this subchapter to assure a meaningful disclosure of credit terms so that the consumer will be able to compare more readily the various credit terms available to him and avoid the uninformed use of credit, and to protect the consumer against inaccurate and unfair credit billing and credit card practices.” 15 U.S.C. 1601(a) 1.
Truth in Lending Act was passed to prevent unsophisticated consumer from being misled as to total cost of financing. Truth in Lending Act, Section 102, 15 U.S.C. Section 1601. Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount. 680 F.2d 927, certiorari granted, vacated 103 S.Ct. 400, 459 U.S. 56, 74 L.Ed.2d 225, on remand 699 F.2d 642.

2. Purpose of Truth in Lending Act is for customers to be able to make informed decisions. Truth in Lending Act Section 102, 15 U.S.C. Section 1601. Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co. 680 F.2d 927, certiorari granted, vacated 103 S.Ct. 400, 459 U.S. 56, 74 L.Ed,2d 225, on remand 699 F,2d 642,

3. Truth in Lending Act is strictly a liability statute liberally construed in favor of consumers. Truth in Lending Act Section 102 et seq., 15 U.S.C. Section 1601 et seq. Brophv v. Chase Manhattan Mortgage Co, 947 F.Supp. 879.

4. Truth in Lending Act should be construed liberally to ensure achievement of goal of aiding unsophisticated consumers so that consumers are not easily misled as to total costs of financing. Truth in Lending Act, Sections 102 et seq, 102(a), 105 as amended, I5 U.S.C. Sections 1601 et seq., 1601(a), 1604; Truth in Lending Regulations, Regulation Z, Sections 226.1 et seq., 226.18, 15 U.S.C. Section 1700, Basile v. H&R Block. Jlt(L. 897 F.Supp. 194.

5. Truth in Lending Act must be strictly construed and liability imposed for any violation, no matter how technical. Truth in Lending Act Section 102 et seq., as amended, 15 U.S.C. Section 1601 et seq, Abele v. Mid-Penn Consumer Discount. 77 B.R. 460, affirmed S45 F.2d 1009.

6. To qualify for protection of Truth in Lending Act [15 U.S.C. Section 1601 et seq.], plaintiff must show that disputed transaction was a consumer credit transaction not a business transaction, Truth b Lending Act, Section 102 et seq., 15 U.S.C. Section 1601 et seq. Quino v. A-I CreditCom. 635 F.Supp. 151

7. Requirements of Truth in Lending Act are highly technical, but full compliance is required; even minor violations of Act cannot be ignored, Truth in Lending Act, Section 102 et seq. as amended, 15 U.S.C. Section 1601 et seq.; Truth in Lending Act Regulations, Regulation Z Section 226.1 et seq., 15 U.S.C. foil. Section 1700. Griggs v. Providence Consumer Discount Co. 503 F.Supp. 246, appeal dismissed 672 F2d 903, appeal after remand 680 F.2d 927, certiorari granted, vacated 103 S.Ct, 400, 459 U.S. 56, 74 L.Ed.2d 225, on remand 699 F,2d 642.

8. Under truth in lending regulation providing that disclosure of consumer credit loan shall not be "stated, utilized or placed so as to mislead or confuse" consumer, placement of disclosures is to be considered along with their statement and use. TILA Regulation Z, Section 226.6(c), 15 U.S.C. following section 1700 .Geimuso v. Commercial Bank & Trust Co. 566 F.2d 437.

9. Any violation of the Truth in Lending Act, regardless of technical nature, must result in finding of liability against lender. TILA Regulation Z Section 226.1 et seq., 15 U.S.C. Section 1700; Truth in Lending Act Section 130 (a, e), IS U.S.C. Section 1640 (a, e). In Re Steinbrecher. 110 BR. 155, 116 A.L.R. Fed. 881.

10. Question of whether lender's Truth in Lending Act disclosures are inaccurate, misleading or confusing ordinarily will be for fact finder; however, where confusing, misleading and inaccurate character of disputed disclosure is so clear that it cannot reasonably be disputed, summary judgment for plaintiff is appropriate. TILA Section 102 et seq; Truth in Lending Regulations, Regulation Z, Section 226.1 et seq., 15 U.S.C. Section 1700. Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co. 503 F, Supp 246, appeal dismissed 672 F.2d 903, appeal after remand 680 F.2d 927, certiorari granted, vacated 103 S.Ct, 400, 459 U.S. 56, 74 L.Ed.2d 225, on remand 699 E2d 642.

11. Pursuant to regulations promulgated under Truth in Lending Act, violator of disclosure requirements is held to standard of strict liability, and therefore, borrower need not show that creditor in fact deceived by making substandard disclosures. TILA, Sections 102-186, as amended, 15 U.S.C. Section 1601-1667(e); Truth in Lending Regulations, Regulation Z, Section 226,8(b-d), 15 U.S.C. Section 1700 Soils v. Fidelity Consumer Discount Co., 58 B.R. 983,

12. Once a creditor violates the Truth In Lending Act, no matter how technical violation appears, unless one of statutory defenses applies, Court has no discretion in imposing liability. Truth in Lending Act, Sections 102-186 as amended, 15 U.S.C. Section 1601-1667e. Solis v. Fidelity Consumer Discount Co. 58 BR, 983.

Under the facts at hand the Plaintiff Bank has patently violated the Truth in Lending Act, At all relevant times the Bank misled and attempted to confuse Defendant. The Bank did not provide appropriate disclosure as required by the Truth in Lending Act in a substantive and technical manner.
 
“It is not necessary for recession of a contract that the party making the misrepresentation should have known that it was false, but recovery is allowed even though misrepresentation is innocently made, because it would be unjust to allow one who made false representations, even innocently, to retain the fruits of a bargain induced by such representations.” Whipp v. Iverson, 43 Wis 2d 166.

“If any part of the consideration for a promise be illegal, or if there are several considerations for an unseverable promise one of which is illegal, the promise, whether written or oral, is wholly void, as it is impossible to say what part or which one of the considerations induced the promise.” Menominee River Co. v. Augustus Spies L & C Co., 147 Wis 559, 572; 132 NW 1122

"When an instrument [note] lacks an unconditional promise to pay a sum certain at a fixed and determined time, it is only an acknowledgement of the debt and statutory presumptions like the presence of a valuable consideration, are not applicable." Bader vs. Williams, 61 A 2d 637

“Any false representation of material facts made with knowledge of falsity and with intent that it shall be acted on by another in entering into contract, and which is so acted upon, constitutes ‘fraud,’ and entitles party deceived to avoid contract or recover damages.” Barnsdall Refining Corn. v. Birnam wood Oil Co., 92 F 2d 817.

Sources of law: 15 USC 1601 et seq Regulation Z ( 12C.F.R. 226) The Federal Board Reserve Board’s Official Staff Commentary on Regulation Z ( 12 C.F.R. 226.36, Supplement I) Ford Motor Credit v Milhollin, 444 U.S. 555, 565 (1980) (“Unless demonstrably irrational, the Federal Reserve Board staff opinions construing the Act or Regulation should be dispositive.”)

TILA Substantive requirements: 
Clear, conspicuous, and accurate disclosures of loan terms set forth in 12 C.F.R. 226.18 (“Content of Disclosures”) In re Ralls, 230 B.R. 508 ( Bankr E.D. Pa. 1999); In re Cook, 76 B.R. 661 ( Bankr C.D. Ill. 1987) 

Every loan charge must be properly disclosed as either part of the “amount financed” which represents “the amount of credit provided to you or on your behalf,” 12 C.F.R. 226.18(b), or as part of 

The finance charge is computed according to the rules set forth 12 C.F.R. 226.4 and includes; any charge paid directly or indirectly by the creditor as an incident to or a condition of the extension of credit. Exclusions, “if reasonable and and bona fide in amount” are, title fees, document prep, credit report, appraisal, and escrow fees. ” Find fair market rate for title insurance, the court should look to Fair market rate, and a refi rate should be cheaper then a purchase-money mortgage. Where information as to reasonability of the rate is more likely to be in the control of the lender, the lender has the burden of proof on that issue.

The difference, or “upcharge” is considered a finance charge. To be included in finance charge- Fees which are paid prescribed by law or paid to public officials like release of liens. If you had an overcharge in these fees as I did then it would be included in the finance charge.

Relief requested: Due to failure to make clear consistent, conspicuously made and accurate material disclosures full loan recission meaning the security interest is void minus all the payment made on the loan.

Material disclosures are: Incorrect APR, interest rate, and amount financed.

The difference in finance charge is more then $100 difference ($35 if borrower is in foreclosure) request recission and statutory damgages. CFR 226.18(d)(1) Statutory damages of $2000

The extended right of recission lasts for 3 years from the date of closing the loan. 12 CFR 226.23 (a)(3) Semar v Platte Valley Fed. S&L Assn. 791 F. 2d 699 ( 9th Cir. 1986) The recission remendy runs against any assignee:

“ Any consumer who the right to rescind a transaction under section 1635 of this title may rescind the transaction against any assignee of the obligation. “ 15 USC 1641 (c) Mount v La Salle Bank Lake View 926 F. Supp. 759 (N.D. Ill. 1996)

Relief Requested: Actual damages, and statutory damages $2000, and Attorneys fees and costs. 15U.S.C. 1640

(a) 1. To fulfill the congressional purpose of TILA, material violations, as set forth above are to be “strictly construed; ”there is no such thing as a mere”technical” violation which does not give rise to liability. “The Seventh Circuit, like most courts interpreting TILA, maintains that disclosures made pursuant to the statute should be viewed from the vantage point of an ordinary consumer as opposed to that of a skilled or informed business person. TILA is aimed at deceptive practices by lenders, not the subjective beliefs or actions of borrowers. Moreover, a plaintiff need not show actual harm to recover from a technical violations of TILA., as they are strict liability offenses. Adams v Nationscredit Financial Services Corp. 351 F. Supp. 2d 829 (N.D. Ill. 2004) ( citations ommited). Statute 1 year for affirmative claims 15 USC 1640 3 Years for Recission

Unlimited as a defense to foreclosure in the nature or a recoupment or set off. 735 ILC 5/13-207 Bank of New York c Heath, 2001 WL 1771825, at *1 ( Ill. Cir. Oct. 26, 2001) 

TILA RECISSION PROCEDURE
It is crucial to comply with the technical TILA rescisssion procedures in full.

First, the notice of rescission must be sent within 3 years of the loan closing. – no exceptions.

Second, you should send the notice of recisssion both (1) to the original creditor whose name is on the 3-Day Right to Rescind, and (2) to the current holder of the loan or to its attorney, if you’re in foreclosure or to the loan servicer (the current holder’s servicing agent) if you don’t know who the holder is).

Upon recission,” the security interest giving rise the right of recission becomes void and the consumer shall not be liable for any amount, including any finance charge”( step one)” CFR226.23(d)

(1) Within 20 days the creditor must take action required to cancel the security interest and must return any money paid on the loan. (step two) 12CFR226.23(d)

(2) If and when the creditor does so, the consumer must tender to the creditor the value of the money or property received. (step three) 12CFR 226.23 (d) The tender amount is reduced by any amount paid on the loan. (unless previously returned) White v WMC Mortgage 2201 US District . LEXIS 15907, at * 5 (E.D. Pa. July 31, 2001): Williams v Gelt, 237 B.R. 590, 598-99 ( E.D. Pa. 1999) Once the right to rescind is affirmed by the court and the amount owed (the “tender”) is determined, borrower must pay tender within timeframe set by the court.

All loan payments previously made by the borrower will reduce the tender amount. The more payments made the better the case. Because tender is inevitable “( the borrower doesn’t get to just walk away from the loan)” you have to start working on your proposed tender strategy from the very beginning of the case. 

Failure to respond to the recission notice as spelled out above results in another violation and an additional award of statutory damages. $2000 White v WMC Mortgage 2001 US District . LEXIS 15907, at * 5 (E.D. Pa. July 31, 2001 Mayfield v Vanguard Savings & Loan, 710 F. Supp. 143, 145 ( E.D. Pa. 1989)

STATUTORY LIABILITY UNDER TILA

1. The Truth-in-Lending Act (TILA) As envisioned, TILA was intended to enable a borrower to compare the cost of a cash versus credit transaction and to discover the difference in the cost of credit among different lenders. The regulation requires a maximum interest rate to be stated in any variable rate contract secured by the borrower's dwelling, imposes limitations on home equity plans that are subject to the requirements of certain sections of the Act, and requires a maximum interest that may apply during the term of a mortgage loan. TILA also establishes disclosure standards for advertisements that refer to certain credit terms. In addition to financial disclosure, TILA provides borrowers with substantive rights in connection with certain types of credit transactions to which it relates, including a right of rescission in certain real estate lending transactions.

Our discussion will be limited to those provisions of TILA that relate specifically to the mortgage lending process, namely: (1) Early and Final Regulation Z Disclosure Requirements (Part B); (2) Right of Rescission (Part B); and (3) TILA’s Enforcement Provisions. b. TILA’s Disclosure Requirements TILA requires lenders to make certain "material disclosures" on loans subject to the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) within three business days after their receipt of a written application. This early disclosure statement is partially based on the initial information provided by the consumer.

The term "material disclosures" means the disclosure of the annual percentage rate, the method of determining the finance charge and the balance upon which a finance charge will be imposed, the amount of the finance charge, the amount to be financed, the total of payments, the number and amount of payments, the due dates or periods of payments scheduled to repay the indebtedness, and the disclosures required by Section 1639(a) of this title. A final disclosure statement is provided at the time of loan closing. The disclosure is required to be in a specific format.

While the "annual percentage rate" and the "finance charge" are to be disclosed more conspicuously than other terms, the Disclosure typically includes much information concerning the lender, the loan and its terms. TILA’s Enforcement Provisions (1) Civil Remedies

Any consumer harmed by a violation of TILA may bring a civil suit against the lender. Generally, TILA provides for the following civil remedies:
(1) actual damages;
(2) damages twice the amount of any finance charge in connection with the transaction;
(3) damages not less than $200 or greater than $2,000; and
(4) Reasonable Attorney Fees. 15 U.S.C. § 1640(a). 

Correction of Errors A lender or assignee has no criminal, administrative, or civil liability under TILA for any failure to comply with its requirements, if within sixty days after discovering an error, whether pursuant to a final written examination report, or a notice issued by a federal agency under section 1607(e)(1) that the annual percentage rate or finance charge was inaccurately disclosed to the borrower, or through the lender’s or assignee’s own procedures, and prior to the institution of an action under this section or the receipt of written notice of the error from the obligor, the lender or the assignee notifies the person concerned of the error and makes whatever adjustments in the appropriate account are necessary to assure that the person will not be required to pay an amount in excess of the charge actually disclosed, or the dollar equivalent of the annual percentage rate actually disclosed, whichever is lower. 15 U.S.C. § 1640(b). 

Defenses: Unintentional Violations; Bona Fide Errors A lender or assignee may not be held liable in any action for inadequate disclosure or defect in the right of recision if the lender or assignee shows by a preponderance of evidence that the violation was not intentional and resulted from a bona fide error notwithstanding the maintenance of procedures reasonably adapted to avoid any such error. Examples of a bona fide error include, but are not limited to, clerical, calculation, computer malfunction and programing, and printing errors. However, an error of legal judgment with respect to a person's TILA obligations is not considered a bona fide error. 

The Real Estate and Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA)
a. In General The Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), 12 U.S.C. §§ 1261 et seq. is a consumer protection statute, first passed in 1974. RESPA was enacted in order to
(1) help consumers become better shoppers for settlement services and
(2) eliminate kickbacks and referral fees that unnecessarily increase the costs of certain settlement services.

To accomplish these ends, RESPA requires that borrowers receive disclosures at various times. In addition, RESPA prohibits certain practices that increase the cost of settlement services. It also prohibits home sellers from requiring home buyers to purchase title insurance from a particular company. 

What transactions are covered and not covered under RESPA?
Transactions which involve a "federally related mortgage loan" fall under RESPA and must comply with those rules. As a practical matter, "federally related mortgage loans" include virtually all loans which are secured by a lien on residential property, regardless of lien position.Examples include a refinance, equity lines of credit, reverse mortgages, and home improvement loans. [For a full definition of "federally related mortgage loan," see 12 U.S.C. § 2602(1) and 24 C.F.R. 3500.2]. 

What is a "title company"?
Under RESPA, the term "‘title company’ means any institution which is qualified to issue title insurance, directly or through its agents, and also refers to any duly authorized agent of a title company." 12 U.S.C. § 2602(4).
 
What Are "Settlement Services"?
RESPA defines "settlement services" broadly. The term "includes any service provided in connection with a real estate settlement including, but not limited to, the following: title searches, title examinations, the provision of title certificates, title insurance, services rendered by an attorney, the preparation of documents, property surveys, the rendering of credit reports or appraisals, pest and fungus inspections, services rendered by a real estate agent or broker, the origination of a federally related mortgage loan (including, but not limited to, the taking of loan applications, loan processing, and the underwriting and funding of loans), and the handling of the processing, and closing or settlement." 12 U.S.C. § 2602(3). b. RESPA Disclosures (1) Disclosure At The Time Of Loan Application: Good Faith Estimate of Settlement Costs. 

When borrowers apply for a mortgage loan, RESPA requires mortgage brokers and/or lenders to give the borrowers:
A Good Faith Estimate (GFE) of settlement costs, which lists the charges the buyer is likely to pay at settlement. This is only an estimate and the actual charges may differ. If a lender requires the borrower to use a particular settlement provider, then the lender must disclose this requirement on the GFE.

A Mortgage Servicing Disclosure Statement, which discloses to the borrower whether the lender intends to service the loan or transfer it to another lender. This Statement also provides information about complaint resolution. 

Unless the borrower’s loan application is turned down within three days, a lender must mail these documents to the borrowers if they did not receive them at the time of their application. 

Disclosures Before Settlement (Closing) Occurs
 (a) Disclosure of Controlled/Affiliated Business Arrangements Whenever a settlement service provider involved in a RESPA-covered transaction refers the borrower to a provider with whom the referring party has an ownership or other beneficial interest, a Controlled Business Arrangement (CBA) Disclosure is required. 12 U.S.C. § 2607(c)(4).
The referring party must give the CBA Disclosure to the borrower at or prior to the time of referral. The Disclosure must describe the business arrangement that exists between the two providers and give the borrower an estimate of the second provider's charges.

Except in cases where a lender refers a borrower to an attorney, credit reporting agency or real estate appraiser to represent the lender's interest in the transaction, the referring party may not require the consumer to use the particular provider being referred.

(b) HUD-1 Settlement Statement RESPA permits the borrower to request a copy of the HUD-1 Statement one day before the actual settlement. The settlement agent must then provide the borrowers with a completed HUD-1 Settlement Statement based on information known to the agent at that time. 

Disclosure After Settlement:
Annual Escrow Statement Loan servicers must deliver to borrowers an Annual Escrow Statement once a year which summarizes all escrow account payments during the past year. If the loan servicer sells or assigns the servicing right to a borrower’s loan to another loan servicer, the loan servicer must notify the borrower of the same in accordance with the statute.
 
c. RESPA’s Prohibition Against "Kickbacks" and Unearned Fees 
"Kickbacks" and Unearned Fees RESPA prohibits anyone from giving or accepting a fee, kickback or any "thing of value" in exchange for referrals of settlement service business involving a "federally related mortgage loan." 12 U.S.C. § 2607(a). In addition, RESPA prohibits fee splitting and receiving unearned fees for settlement services not actually performed. 12 U.S.C. § 2607(b).

(a) "Thing of Value" The term "thing of value" includes any payment, advance, funds, loan, service, or other consideration. 12 U.S.C. § 2602(2).

(b) "Payment" While prohibiting kickbacks, fee splitting, and unearned fees, RESPA does not prohibit: 
The payment of a fee to attorneys at law for services actually rendered; or
The payment of a fee by a title company to its duly appointed agent for services actually performed in the issuance of a policy of title insurance; or
The payment of a fee by a lender to its duly appointed agent for services actually performed in the making of a loan; or
The payment of a bona fide salary or compensation or other payment for goods or facilities actually furnished or for services actually performed; or

The payment to a Controlled Business Arrangement provided:
* the CBA Disclosure is made; and
* the borrower is not required to use any particular provider of settlement services;and
* the only thing of value that is received from the arrangement, other than the payments permitted, is a return on the ownership interest or franchise relationship. 12 U.S.C. § 2607(c). 

Examples: Appendix B to Part 3500 of 24 C.F.R. XX contains several illustrations which provide additional guidance on the meaning and coverage of RESPA’s prohibition against kickbacks and unearned fees.

1. Facts: A, a provider of settlement services, provides settlement services at abnormally low rates or at no charge at all to B, a builder, in connection with a subdivision being developed by B. B agrees to refer purchasers of the completed homes in the subdivision to A for the purchase of settlement services in connection with the sale of individual lots by B. Comments: The rendering of services by A to B at little or no charge constitutes a thing of value given by A to B in return for the referral of settlement services business and both A and B are in violation of section 8 of RESPA.

2. Facts: B, a lender, encourages persons who receive federally-related mortgage loans from it to employ A, an attorney, to perform title searches and related settlement services in connection with their transaction. B and A have an understanding that in return for the referral of this business A provides legal services to B or B's officers or employees at abnormally low rates or for no charge. Comments: Both A and B are in violation of section 8 of RESPA. Similarly, if an attorney gives a portion of his or her fees to another attorney, a lender, a real estate broker or any other provider of settlement services, who had referred prospective clients to the attorney, section 8 would be violated by both persons.

3. Facts: A, a real estate broker, obtains all necessary licenses under state law to act as a title insurance agent. A refers individuals who are purchasing homes in transactions in which A participates as a broker to B, an unaffiliated title company, for the purchase of title insurance services. A performs minimal, if any, title services in connection with the issuance of the title insurance policy (such as placing an application with the title company). B pays a commission to A (or A retains a portion of the title insurance premium) for the transactions or alternatively B receives a portion of the premium paid directly from the purchaser. Comments: The payment of a commission or portion of the title insurance premium by B to A, or receipt of a portion of the payment for title insurance under circumstances where no substantial services are being performed by A is a violation of section 8 of RESPA. It makes no difference whether the payment comes from B or the purchaser. The amount of the payment must bear a reasonable relationship to the services rendered. Here A really is being compensated for a referral of business to B. * * *

4. Facts: A, a credit reporting company, places a facsimile transmission machine (FAX) in the office of B, a mortgage lender, so that B can easily transmit requests for credit reports and A can respond. A supplies the FAX machine at no cost or at a reduced rental rate based on the number of credit reports ordered. Comments: Either situation violates section 8 of RESPA. The FAX machine is a thing of value that A provides in exchange for the referral of business from B. Copying machines, computer terminals, printers, or other like items which have general use to the recipient and which are given in exchange for referrals of business also violate RESPA.

5. Facts: A, a real estate broker, refers title business to B, a company that is a licensed title agent for C, a title insurance company. A owns more than 1% of B. B performs the title search and examination, makes determinations of insurability, issues the commitment, clears underwriting objections, and issues a policy of title insurance on behalf of C, for which C pays B a commission. B pays annual dividends to its owners, including A, based on the relative amount of business each of its owners refers to B. Comments: The facts involve an affiliated business arrangement. The payments of a commission by C to B is not a violation of section 8 of RESPA if the amount of the commission constitutes reasonable compensation for the services performed by B for C. The payment of a dividend or the giving of any other thing of value by B to A that is based on the amount of business referred to B by A does not meet the affiliated business agreement exemption provisions and such actions violate section

6. Similarly, if the amount of stock held by A in B (or, if B were a partnership, the distribution of partnership profits by B to A) varies based on the amount of business referred or expected to be referred, or if B retained any funds for subsequent distribution to A where such funds were generally in proportion to the amount of business A referred to B relative to the amount referred by other owners such arrangements would violate section 8. The exemption for controlled business arrangements would not be available because the payments here would not be considered returns on ownership interests. Further, the required disclosure of the affiliated business arrangement and estimated charges have not been provided.

Enforcement and Penalties Violations of RESPA’s anti-kickback, referral fees and unearned fees provisions are subject to criminal and civil penalties. In a criminal case, a settlement agent who violates Section 2607 may be fined up to $10,000 and imprisoned up to one year. In a private law suit, a settlement agent who violates this Section may be liable to the person charged for the settlement service an amount equal to three times ( treble damages) the amount of the charge paid for the service.

The statute does enumerate one defense to the failure to provide the CBA Disclosure. If the failure to provide the Disclosure was not intentional and resulted from a bona fide error, notwithstanding maintenance of procedures that are reasonably adapted to avoid such error, that person is not liable under the Act. 

RESPA’s Prohibition Against Seller-Required Title Insurance
RESPA also prohibits a seller from requiring the home buyer to use a particular title insurance company, either directly or indirectly, as a condition of sale. 12 U.S.C. § 2608(a).

d. Enforcement and Penalties Violations of RESPA’s anti-kickback, referral fees and unearned fees provisions are subject to criminal and civil penalties. In a criminal case, a settlement agent who violates Section 2607 may be fined up to $10,000 and imprisoned up to one year. 12 U.S.C. § 2607(d)(1). In a private law suit, any person who violates this Section may be liable to the person charged for the settlement service an amount equal to three times the amount of the charge paid for the service. 12 U.S.C. § 2607(d)(2). Buyers may sue a seller who violates the provision prohibiting seller-required title insurance for an amount equal to three times all charges made for the title insurance. 12 U.S.C. § 2608(b).