We are a small mortgage lender in the Midwest. Our compliance department consists of only me. Our legal support is an outside attorney. Last week we received the report from our banking department about their recent examination. Their report claimed that our marketing campaign led to "material interference" and, therefore, was a UDAAP violation.
Their whole gripe is about them saying we "omitted" some details in our marketing to mislead potential borrowers. First of all, it's not true that we left out details! Secondly, even if we did omit details, it wasn't intentional, and I don't see how they can prove we intended to leave them out.
Our attorney asked me to write you. I was a little shy, but my CEO said I should write you. We hope you can shed some light on how we wound up with this violation.
How does intent get factored into a material interference violation?
What is the meaning of "material interference" in UDAAP?
