BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE COMMITTEE ON BANKING, FINANCE,
AND INSURANCE
Senator Ronald Calderon, Chair
SB 36 (Calderon) Hearing Date: April 1,
2009
As Amended March 17, 2009
Fiscal: Yes
Urgency: No
SUMMARY Would amend California's Real Estate Law, Finance
Lenders Law, and Residential Mortgage Lending Act, to ensure
compliance with the federal Secure and Fair Enforcement for
Mortgage Licensing Act of 2008 (the SAFE Act).
DIGEST
Existing federal law provides for the SAFE Act, pursuant to
Title V of the provisions of the Housing and Economic Recovery
Act of 2008 (HR 3221; Public Law 110-289). The provisions of
the SAFE Act are discussed in more detail below in the
Background section of this analysis.
Existing law
1. Authorizes residential mortgage lending, brokering, and
servicing under five different laws, including the Banking Law,
Credit Union Law, California Finance Lenders Law (CFLL),
California Residential Mortgage Lending Act (CRMLA), and Real
Estate Law, and the regulations that interpret those laws;
2. Generally regulates the entities that engage in mortgage
lending, brokering, and servicing under three different
departments, including the Department of Financial Institutions
(DFI), Department of Corporations (DOC), and the Department of
Real Estate (DRE).
This bill
1. Would amend California's Real Estate Law, CFLL, and CRMLA,
in compliance with the SAFE Act. Specifically, the bill
would require mortgage loan originators, as defined, to
apply for and obtain a license or license endorsement, from
SB 36 (Calderon) - 2 -
DOC or DRE, as applicable, and obtain a unique identifier,
as defined, before engaging in mortgage loan origination
activities in connection with a residential mortgage loan in
California;
2. Would require applicants for a license or license
endorsement to complete at least 20 hours of pre-licensing
education and successfully pass an examination on that
material, submit to a criminal history background check and
a credit check, and meet several requirements related to
their personal character, as a condition of being approved
to act as a mortgage loan originator;
3. Would further require licensed mortgage loan originators to
renew their licenses or license endorsements annually, by
completing at least 8 hours of continuing education, as
specified, and continuing to meet the minimum standards for
license/license endorsement approval;
4. Would provide that the Real Estate Law sections of the bill
are operative when the Commissioner of Real Estate issues a
finding that the Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System and
Registry is capable of two-way electronic communication with
the enterprise information system maintained by DRE;
5. Would provide that the CFLL and CRMLA sections of the bill
are operative January 1, 2010, but would further provide
that no person is required to hold a mortgage loan
originator license under the CFL or CRMLA, nor a mortgage
loan originator license endorsement under the Real Estate
Law, before August 1, 2010;
6. Would make other related changes, described below.
COMMENTS
1. Purpose of the bill To ensure that California is in
compliance with the SAFE Act, and, in doing so, avoid
triggering action by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to take over regulation
of California's mortgage loan originators.
2. Background On July 30, 2008, President Bush signed the
Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, whose provisions
included the SAFE Act. The SAFE Act requires all states to
SB 36 (Calderon) - 3 -
license and register their mortgage loan originators through
a nationwide organization called the Nationwide Mortgage
Licensing System and Registry (NMLSR). Any state that does
not implement a mortgage loan originator licensing system,
in compliance with the SAFE Act, by July 30, 2009, risks
direct intervention by HUD.
Under the SAFE Act, HUD is authorized to establish and maintain
a mortgage loan originator system in any state that fails to
voluntarily comply with SAFE by July 30, 2009. States
deemed by the Secretary of HUD to be making a good faith
effort to establish a state licensing law which complies
with the SAFE Act may be granted one additional year in
which to comply, before risking HUD intervention. Avoiding
HUD intervention will be critical, if California wishes to
retain its existing authority to regulate the
mortgage-related activities of its state licensees.
The provisions of the SAFE Act were sponsored by the Conference
of State Bank Supervisors (CSBS) and American Association of
Residential Mortgage Regulators (AARMR), two organizations
which represent state banking and mortgage lending
regulators nationwide. In 2003, CSBS and AARMR developed
the idea for the NMLSR. The system was officially launched
in January 2008.
Prior to enactment of the SAFE Act, participation by states in
the NMLSR was voluntary. Several of the country's smaller
states signed on, but lack of participation among the
country's larger states, including California, hampered the
registry's ability to function as a truly national registry.
In sponsoring the SAFE Act, CSBS and AARMR were seeking to
drive more states to sign on to its NMLSR. Under the SAFE
Act, participation in NMLSR remains voluntary, but states
that fail to participate will lose regulatory authority over
their mortgage loan originators, a threat so great that no
large states appear willing to risk it through
non-participation. To date, 23 states have signed on to
NMLSR, and most others are expected to sign on by July 31,
2010.
In promotional material regarding the NMLSR, CSBS and AARMR
describe the system, as follows: "Through NMLS, licensed
mortgage lenders, bankers, broker companies and loan
SB 36 (Calderon) - 4 -
officers in participating states are able to complete a
single uniform form electronically, regardless of the number
of states in which they are licensed. This information is
housed in a secure centralized repository available to
mortgage regulators. Licensees are able to access their own
record 7 days a week through the NMLS website to update,
amend and renew their licenses, or apply for new licenses?As
mortgage companies and/or individuals create a record for
themselves and submit [it] to their regulators, NMLS will
permanently assign a unique identifying number to each
record. The unique identifying number allows regulators to
definitively track companies and professionals across states
and over time."
What Does the SAFE Act Require? The SAFE Act defines the term
"mortgage loan originator" as (generally speaking) one who
takes a residential mortgage loan application or offers or
negotiates terms of a residential mortgage loan for
compensation or gain. Administrative and/or clerical
employees are not included within the definition, nor are
real estate brokers who don't broker mortgages. SAFE
creates a distinction between mortgage loan originators who
are employed by depository institutions or subsidiaries of
depository institutions, and all other mortgage loan
originators.
Under the SAFE Act, mortgage loan originators who are not
employed by a depository institution or a subsidiary of a
depository institution must be both licensed by their state
and registered on NMLSR. License applicants must undergo
background checks, submit to credit checks, complete and
successfully pass pre-licensing education courses approved
by NMLSR, meet specific personal character requirements
specified in the SAFE Act, and, once licensed, must complete
annual continuing education courses approved by NMLSR and
submit as-yet-unspecified call reports to NMLSR annually.
Mortgage loan originators employed by depository institutions
or their subsidiaries must register on NMLSR, using rules to
be established by the Federal Financial Institutions
Examination Council (FFIEC), but need not be licensed.
Registrants will have to undergo background checks, but are
not required to submit to credit checks, nor comply with the
education requirements that apply to mortgage loan
originators who are required to be licensed under the Act.
The SAFE Act allows the five federal banking agencies,
SB 36 (Calderon) - 5 -
through the FFIEC, to establish de minimis exceptions from
the rules to register. However, because the FFIEC's
regulations have not yet been released, the details of their
contents are uncertain.
How Does SB 36 Work? Under the provisions of the bill, real
estate licensees who wish to act as mortgage loan
originators must obtain a license endorsement. The license
endorsement will only be available to real estate licensees
that comply with the background check and education
requirements of the SAFE Act, and that meet the SAFE Act's
personal character requirements. Thus, under the Real
Estate Law, step 1 will be obtaining a real estate license.
Only with that real estate license may an individual obtain
a license endorsement to act as a mortgage loan originator.
The CFLL and CRMLA laws will work quite differently. Under
these laws, every mortgage loan originator employee of a
California licensed finance lender or California licensed
residential mortgage lender will be required to obtain a
mortgage loan originator license. That license will only be
available to loan originator employees who comply with the
background check and education requirements of the SAFE Act,
and who meet the SAFE Act's personal character requirements.
The mortgage loan originator license will be separate and
apart from a CFL or RML license. Every licensed CFL or RML
will have to ensure that their mortgage loan originator
licensees are licensed as such.
Consistent with the SAFE Act, SB 36 requires mortgage loan
originators to renew their licenses or license endorsements
annually. CSBS and AARMR have determined that all licenses
and license endorsements will expire on December 31st of
each year, and must be renewed, effective January 1st of
each year.
SB 36 does not contain any amendments to the Banking Law or
Credit Union Law, because DFI does not believe any changes
to these statutes are required. Instead, DFI anticipates
directing its licensees to follow the regulations that will
be issued by FFIEC, using regulatory authority the
Department already has.
How Will the SAFE Act Change The Status Quo in California? The
SAFE Act will require different types of changes under the
Real Estate Law than it will under the CFLL and CRMLA.
SB 36 (Calderon) - 6 -
Real Estate Law changes: Under existing California law,
licensed real estate salespersons and licensed real estate
brokers may engage in activities that are defined in the
SAFE Act as mortgage loan origination. Real estate licenses
may be issued to individuals or to corporations. The SAFE
Act will require these already-licensed individuals and
corporations to obtain special mortgage loan originator
license endorsements in order to continue engaging in
activities for which no special license endorsement is
currently required.
The SAFE Act requirements are similar to, but somewhat
different from, the requirements for licensure under the
Real Estate Law. For example, real estate licensees must
complete both pre-licensing education and continuing
education classes, and must undergo background checks, all
of which are required under the SAFE Act. However, the
personal character requirements under California's Real
Estate Law are different than those under the SAFE Act (more
stringent in certain places, less stringent in others), and
California's real estate license cycle is four years long,
rather than annual (thus, under existing California law,
continuing education requirements must be satisfied over a
four year period, rather than once annually).
Under the SAFE Act, licensed real estate salespersons and
brokers who wish to continue engaging in mortgage loan
origination activities must undergo brand new background
checks and take different education classes in order to
satisfy the SAFE Act mortgage loan originator licensing
requirements. They will also have to continue to meet the
SAFE Act's personal character requirements on an annual
basis, in order to remain eligible to retain their license
endorsements. Corporations engaged in mortgage loan
origination will have to register with NMLSR and obtain a
license endorsement for their company. Corporations
licensed under the Real Estate Law will also have to ensure
that each of their mortgage loan originator employees
obtains an individual mortgage loan originator license
endorsement.
CFLL and CRMLA changes: The SAFE Act will impact CFLL and
CRMLA licensees very differently than it will impact Real
Estate Law licensees. Under existing law, DOC licenses
corporations under the CFLL and CRMLA and requires
SB 36 (Calderon) - 7 -
background checks on the persons controlling these
corporations. Individual employees of these corporations
are not licensed, nor are they subject to background checks
(unless, as noted above, they are controlling persons in the
organization). Pre-licensing education and continuing
education are not required.
Under the SAFE Act, every CFLL and CRMLA employee who performs
activities that meet the SAFE Act definition of a mortgage
loan originator must be both licensed by California and
registered on NMLSR. Thus, employees who were previously
untracked by the state will now be required to undergo a
background check, submit to a credit check, complete
pre-licensing education classes, and satisfy the SAFE Act's
personal character requirements to obtain their licenses.
They will also have to comply with annual continuing
education requirements and continue to meet the SAFE Act's
personal character requirements in order to remain eligible
to retain their licenses. These requirements represent a
significant change for CFLL and CRMLA licensees, who have
not previously had to ensure that their mortgage loan
originator employees were licensed.
Is SB 36 In Compliance with the SAFE Act? CSBS staff have
reviewed SB 36 and believe the bill, as currently drafted,
is in substantial compliance with the provisions of the SAFE
Act. Although HUD has not yet reviewed the bill (and, in
fact, has not identified anyone to whom states should send
legislation for review), HUD expects to rely very heavily on
CSBS to vet state SAFE Act compliance legislation. Thus,
for all practical purposes, CSBS' sign-off on a piece of
state legislation is equivalent to HUD sign-off. A
drafting map prepared by Committee staff to aid CSBS' and
others' review of the bill for compliance with the SAFE Act
is appended to this analysis for reference.
As shown on that drafting map, the vast majority of the
provisions of SB 36 pattern the Model Law drafted by CSBS
and AARMR, to help states achieve compliance with the SAFE
Act and avoid intervention by HUD. The two sections in
which SB 36 deviates from the Model Law are the
"definitions" section and "background check" section of the
Model Law.
The definitions sections of SB 36 track SAFE Act language,
rather than the Model Law language, because the former is
SB 36 (Calderon) - 8 -
clearer as to intent and coverage. Thus, CSBS has no
concerns with this deviation.
The background check sections of SB 36 were developed through
negotiation among CSBS, California's Department of Justice
(DOJ), DRE, DOC, and Committee staff, when California's
Department of Justice (DOJ) expressed concerns with the
Model Law background check language originally amended into
SB 36. The background check language in the current version
of SB 36 is acceptable to all of the parties to the
negotiation, including CSBS.
SB 36 goes beyond the Model Law in one area, by including a
reporting requirement intended to give DRE important
information about the California-specific business
activities of its mortgage brokering, lending, and servicing
licensees. DRE currently lacks this information, and will
continue to lack it without an amendment to augment to Model
Law. The list of specific information to be requested of
licensees on an annual basis was developed, working closely
with DRE, to focus on those aspects of a licensee's business
activities of greatest interest to the Department. CSBS has
no concerns with the inclusion of this provision.
Remaining Outstanding Issues: At present, there appear to be
three outstanding issues involving SAFE Act implementation.
Two have been brought forward by industry, and one by DRE.
Amendments to address the two industry issues are being
negotiated, and are expected to be resolved shortly. These
issues generally involve questions of whether employees of
manufactured home dealers must be licensed as mortgage loan
originators, and whether individuals who help facilitate
mortgage loan modifications must be licensed as mortgage
loan originators.
The one outstanding issue on which amendments are not currently
pending involves the operative date of the Real Estate Law
sections of the bill. As currently drafted, SB 36 provides
that the operative date of the Real Estate Law sections of
the bill is the date that the Commissioner of Real Estate
issues a finding that the NMLSR is capable of two-way
electronic communication with the enterprise information
system (EIS) maintained by DRE. The bill is drafted in this
way, to draw attention to a costly problem facing DRE and
its licensees, and to encourage CSBS and AARMR to reverse
their current position on two-way electronic communications
SB 36 (Calderon) - 9 -
between the NMLSR and California's DRE.
According to CSBS, the NMLSR is not designed to allow states to
electronically upload information about its licensees to the
nationwide registry. Instead, state regulators will be
expected to manually enter data regarding license
applicants. Manual uploads may not be a significant problem
for a small state that did not previously license the
individuals required to obtain mortgage loan originator
licenses under the SAFE Act. However, California's size,
together with the fact that DRE already maintains
considerable information about most of the individuals who
will be applying to the Department for license endorsements,
are creating an enormously costly problem for the Department
and its licensees.
Although the specific details of the programming that will be
required to accomplish two-way communication are
complicated, the issue can be described simply - without a
change in CSBS' position regarding electronic uploads by
states, DRE employees will be required to manually enter
specific information into the NMLSR about an estimated
50,000 to 75,000 mortgage loan originator licensees, on an
annual basis. (This estimate is approximate and is based on
an estimated 10,000 to 15,000 real estate brokers acting as
mortgage loan originators, each of whom will supervise an
average of four real estate salespersons acting as loan
originators; all of these individuals will need mortgage
loan originator license endorsements under the provisions of
the SAFE Act).
The process of manually uploading data to NMLSR will be
time-consuming, labor-intensive, and costly, not only
because of the number of people expected to apply for
license endorsements from DRE, but also because of CSBS'
requirement that all licenses be renewed as of December 31st
of each year. Because rolling renewals will not be allowed,
California will be unable to spread out the workload
associated with license renewals across twelve months;
instead, the bulk of the work will fall toward the end of
the year, when license endorsements expire.
An estimate of the costs associated with these manual uploads
is currently being developed by DRE. Those costs will be of
particular interest to DRE licensees, because they will be
passed on to applicants for mortgage loan originator license
SB 36 (Calderon) - 10 -
endorsements. Obtaining a streamlined ability to
electronically upload licensee information to the NMLSR
could potentially save applicants for mortgage loan
originator license endorsements a considerable sum of money.
California may have some leverage on this issue, in part
because CSBS and AARMR are expecting DRE to pay $500,000
toward development of the NMLSR, and in part because the
SAFE Act was authored by Senator Feinstein, who, one would
imagine, might be receptive to ameliorating unintended
negative consequences of her bill on her home state.
3. Support . The California Association of Realtors (CAR)
believes that SB 36 takes the appropriate approach toward
SAFE Act implementation by using an additional endorsement
on the real estate license and applying similar licensing
requirements to other types of loan originators regulated
outside of DRE. CAR believes that this approach will result
in the least disruption of existing systems and minimize
compliance costs to both the state and individual licensees.
CAR also speaks to the electronic exchange issue discussed
immediately above by stating, "we hope that in your role as
Chair that you can intervene with the federal entities
involved to ensure that state costs are minimized by
allowing electronic exchanges of databases and discipline
records."
The California Mortgage Association (CMA) and the Los Angeles
District Attorney's Office support the bill, because they
believe that the state must act to implement the SAFE Act.
CMA is concerned that failing to enact the SAFE Act will
risk intervention in the state's regulatory affairs by HUD.
The Los Angeles District Attorney's Office believes that
complying with the SAFE Act will provide important consumer
protections.
Consumers Union (CU), the California Reinvestment Coalition
(CRC), and several other members of CRC's coalition are
supportive of SB 36, if it is amended to go beyond SAFE Act
compliance, to additionally enhance consumer protections and
reduce fraud in a way that they believe will be meaningful
for Californians. These organizations are requesting four
amendments, as follows: 1) include sections on prohibited
acts for real estate brokers and residential mortgage
lenders; 2) strengthen the list of prohibited acts by
SB 36 (Calderon) - 11 -
including prohibitions against steering, recommending
default on an existing mortgage, originating loans without
regard to a borrower's ability to repay, charging yield
spread premiums, charging prepayment penalties, and engaging
in bait-and-switch tactics during one-on-one communications
with a borrower; 3) increase net worth or bonding
requirements and licensing fees for real estate brokers to
the value of the loans that a broker originated during the
prior year; and 4) extend the data reporting requirements in
the bill to include borrower race, ethnicity, and income,
and the quality of loans originated, and make the data
publicly available.
4. Opposition None received.
5. Prior Legislation
a. SB 1240 (Machado), 2007-08 Legislative
Session: Would have required real estate licensees
engaged in mortgage brokering, lending, and/or
servicing activities to notify DRE about those
activities, submit an annual business activities
report, and contract for a compliance review by an
independent public accountant on an annual or biennial
basis, depending on loan volume. Vetoed by the
Governor, with a veto message requesting the
Legislature to send him a SAFE Act implementation bill
to sign;
b. SB 491 (Maldonado): Would begin the process
of amending California's mortgage lending and
brokering laws in compliance with the SAFE Act.
Pending in the Senate Banking, Finance & Insurance
Committee.
c. AB 34 (Nava): Spot bill stating the intent of
the Legislature to place California in compliance with
the SAFE Act. Pending in the Assembly Banking &
Finance Committee.
SB 36 (Calderon) - 12 -
POSITIONS
Support
California Association of Realtors
California Mortgage Association
Los Angeles District Attorney's Office
Oppose
None received
Consultant: Eileen Newhall (916) 651-4102
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| MODEL | MODEL STATE LAW | BUSINESS AND | FINANCIAL |FINANCIAL CODE | COMMENTS |
| STATE | DESCRIPTION | PROFESSIONS | CODE (CFL) | (RML) SECTION | |
| LAW | | CODE SECTION | SECTION | | |
|SECTION | | | | | |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |Title | N/A | N/A | N/A |Not needed. SB 36 amends |
|XX.XX.01| | | | |existing laws, and does |
|0 | | | | |not create a new |
| | | | | |stand-alone Act. |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |Purpose of this | N/A | N/A | N/A |Optional. Not included. |
|XX.XX.02|Act | | | | |
|0 | | | | | |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |Definitions | 10166.01, |22012, 22013, | 50003, |Definition of loan |
|XX.XX.03| | 10166.03 | 22014 | 50003.5, |processor or underwriter |
|0 | | | | 50003.6 |and clerical or support |
| | | | | |duties tracks the SAFE |
| | | | | |Act, not the Model Law. |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |License and | 10166.02 | 22100, 22014 | 50002.5, |Treatment of independent |
|XX.XX.04|registration | | | 50003.6 |contractor loan |
|0 |required | | | |processors or |
| | | | | |underwriters is handled |
| | | | | |in 22014 and 50003.6 |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |State license | 10166.04 | 22100, | 50120, 50140 | |
|XX.XX.05|and registration | | 22105.1, | | |
|0 |application and | | 22105.2 | | |
| |issuance | | | | |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |Issuance of | 10166.05 | 22109.1 | 50141 | |
|XX.XX.06|license | | | | |
|0 | | | | | |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |Pre-licensing | 10166.06 | 22109.2 | 50142 | |
|XX.XX.07|and re-licensing | | | | |
SB 36 (Calderon) - 14 -
|0 |education of | | | | |
| |loan originators | | | | |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |Testing of loan | 10166.06 | 22109.3 | 50143 | |
|XX.XX.08|originators | | | | |
|0 | | | | | |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |Standards for | 10166.09 | 22109.4 | 50144 | |
|XX.XX.09|license renewal | | | | |
|0 | | | | | |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |Continuing | 10166.1 | 22109.5 | 50145 | |
|XX.XX.10|education for | | | | |
|0 |mortgage loan | | | | |
| |originators | | | | |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |Authority to | 10166.17 | 22109.6 | 50146 | |
|XX.XX.11|require license | | | | |
|0 | | | | | |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |NMLSR | 10166.15 | 22105.2 | 50150 | |
|XX.XX.12|information | | | | |
|0 |challenge | | | | |
| |process | | | | |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |Enforcement | N/A | N/A | N/A |Duplicative of existing |
|XX.XX.13|authorities, | | | |law. The commissioners |
|0 |violations, and | | | |already contain this |
| |penalties | | | |authority under the RE |
| | | | | |Law, CFL, and RML. |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |Surety bond, net | 10474 | 22104, 22112 | 50201, 50205 |SB 36 does not amend |
|XX.XX.14|worth, or state | | | |Business and Professions |
|0 |fund requirement | | | |Code Section 10474 or |
| | | | | |Financial Code Sections |
| | | | | |22112, as no changes are |
| | | | | |required to comply with |
| | | | | |the SAFE Act. These |
| | | | | |sections are listed only |
| | | | | |to demonstrate that |
SB 36 (Calderon) - 15 -
| | | | | |California has a Real |
| | | | | |Estate Recovery Fund, and |
| | | | | |has both net worth and |
| | | | | |surety bond requirements |
| | | | | |for CFL and RML |
| | | | | |licensees, as required by |
| | | | | |the SAFE Act. |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |Confidentiality | 10166.16 | 22105.3 | 50151 | |
|XX.XX.15| | | | | |
|0 | | | | | |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |Investigation | N/A | N/A | N/A |Duplicative of existing |
|XX.XX.16|and examination | | | |law. The commissioners |
|0 |authority | | | |already contain this |
| | | | | |authority under the RE |
| | | | | |Law, CFL, and RML. |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |Prohibited acts | N/A | 22346 | N/A |B&P Code Sections 10176 |
|XX.XX.17|and practices | | | |and 10177 already cover |
|0 | | | | |this for the RE Law. |
| | | | | |Financial Code Sections |
| | | | | |50502 through 50512 |
| | | | | |already cover this for |
| | | | | |the RML. |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |Mortgage call | 10166.07, | 22159 | 50307.2 | |
|XX.XX.18|reports | 10166.08 | | | |
|0 | | | | | |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |Report to NMLSR | 10166.15 | 22105.4 | 50152 | |
|XX.XX.19| | | | | |
|0 | | | | | |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |Privately | N/A | N/A | N/A |Not needed. DFI already |
|XX.XX.20|insured credit | | | |has this authority. |
|0 |unions | | | | |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |Unique | 10140.6, | 22347 | 50209 | |
|XX.XX.21|identifier shown | 10235.5, | | | |
SB 36 (Calderon) - 16 -
|0 | | 10236.4 | | | |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |Severability | N/A | N/A | N/A |Added as an uncodified |
|XX.XX.22| | | | |section at the end of the |
|0 | | | | |bill. |
|--------+-----------------+---------------+--------------+---------------+--------------------------|
|MSL |Effective date | | | |Operative date of the RE |
|XX.XX.23| | | | |Law portions is the date |
|0 | | | | |the RE commissioner finds |
| | | | | |that NMLSR has developed |
| | | | | |the ability to |
| | | | | |electronically |
| | | | | |communicate with DRE's |
| | | | | |enterprise information |
| | | | | |system. Operative date |
| | | | | |of the CFL and RML |
| | | | | |sections is January 1, |
| | | | | |2010. However, no |
| | | | | |individual is required to |
| | | | | |be licensed as a mortgage |
| | | | | |loan originator before |
| | | | | |July 31, 2010. |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------