Browse cases by category
- Attorneys & Legal Services
- Bankruptcy
- Civil Procedure & Administrative Law
- Civil Rights
- Consumer
- Criminal
- Disability
- Economic Development
- Education
- Elections
- Employment
- Environmental Justice
- Evidence
- Family Law
- Food Programs
- Government and Governmental Services
- Guardianship & Conservatorship
- Health
- Housing
- Immigration
- Juveniles
- License (Auto & Others)
- Mental Health
- Migrants
- Native Americans
- Other
- Prisons
- Public Utilities & Energy
- Rural Issues
- Senior Citizens
- Social Security & SSI
- Taxation
- Torts
- Unemployment Compensation & Unemployment Insurance
- Veterans & Military
- Welfare
- Wills & Estates
- Workforce Development
Culpepper v. Irwin Mortgage
253 F.3d 1324 (11th Cir. 2001) ; Clearinghouse Number: 53892
Description
Eleventh Circuit Affirms Class Certification of Plaintiffs Who Obtained Federal Housing Administration Mortgage Loans with “Yield Spread Premiums” for Brokers
Abstract
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s
certification of the plaintiff class, persons who obtained Federal
Housing Administration home mortgage loans for which defendant paid
a “yield spread premium” to the mortgage broker.
Defendant pays brokers a fee for referrals, known as a “yield
spread premium,” for loans a broker originates at an interest
rate above a “par rate.” The Real Estate Settlement
Practices Act prohibits lenders from paying fees to mortgage
brokers for referrals, unless those fees are compensation for the
broker’s actual services in making the loan. A U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulation
defines a legal yield spread premium as one where the payment is
reasonably related to the value of the service the broker performs.
Appealing the district court’s certification of the plaintiff
class, defendant contended that the HUD test for legality of the
yield spread premium must necessarily apply to each individual case
because the broker’s services vary from loan to loan. The
Eleventh Circuit rejected this argument; it found no evidence that
defendant negotiated yield spread premiums with the brokers loan by
loan but rather paid them in accordance with a formula common to
all loans.
