Tighter ControlsBy David F. Carr | Posted 2005-09-09 Email Print
Re-Thinking HR: What Every CIO Needs to Know About Tomorrow's Workforce
No mortgage loan gets made without a processor; and no processor makes a loan without running the applicant's personal and financial background through software that canin theory, if not in practicereject those borrowers who can't legitimately
But now Ameriquest is seeking greater control over how it configures and manages loan data in its system.
Ameriquest says it implemented a new software system in 2002 called SNAP, for Sales Navigation and Accelerated Production.
The program was to help enforce fair and uniform loan pricing, validate appraisals and enforce the distribution of legally required disclosure documents to consumers.
By coding rules for loan pricing into software, Ameriquest says it has limited the ability of sales representatives to raise interest rates or points arbitrarily, or to engage in what could be construed as bait-and-switch schemes.
In most cases, Ameriquest officials say, the loan pricing is set by the software, not the salesperson.
Executives describe these changes as part of a "continuous improvement" process at the company, but the new systems also helped address some of the fraudulent or unfair lending practices Ameriquest has been accused of in the past.
Bartello says the Empower system was originally configured with the minimum amount of constraints on the application and pricing portion, the fields that allow agents to input the fees and rates for a specific loan.
Then Ameriquest replaced a hodgepodge of lead and contact management applications with SNAP, which operates through a Web browser.
SNAP was created with help from Tavant Technologies, a software development consulting firm with offices in Santa Clara, Calif., and Bangalore, India, that Ameriquest uses partly for its offshore development resources.
Although Tavant is an independent private company, Ameriquest chairman Roland Arnall owns a majority of its shares and Sarago was Tavant's chief technology officer before Ameriquest hired him as CIO in 2003.
SNAP overlaps with Empower at the front end of the loan origination process and includes a complete product and pricing engine that allows agents to adjust rates and fees at their discretion, Bartello says.
Sub-prime lenders typically add a 1 percent fee to the cost of a loan because of the higher risks in extending loans to these applicants. But the original Empower system was configured to allow loan agents at Ameriquest considerable freedom in pricing loans for their clients.
"We can make it completely restrictive if a client wants, or leave it open and apply the basics to allow adjustments," Bartello says. "Ameriquest left it open to the loan officer. Our view is that once they buy the car, they can do what they want with it. They have the tools themselves."
"SNAP does everything that Empower doesn't," Sarago says. In particular, it goes beyond merely recording loan applications to helping mortgage salespeople close more business by making it easier for them to track contacts and sales leads, and then select the loan products most likely to appeal to each customer. Previously, different branches used different sales software systems.
"The goal is to have consistency throughout all the branches," Sarago says.
Former Ameriquest loan agents and mortgage software vendors who are familiar with Ameriquest's systems see SNAP as a step toward replacing Empower with a custom, Web-based system with more safeguards, such as standardized pricing. For now, Empower remains the dominant system in Ameriquest's underwriting department, while sales offices primarily use SNAP.
But Sarago says Empower could remain in place at Ameriquest for years to come. Even so, Ameriquest says it has deployed other new software systems that it maintains will cut down on problems with loans.
In interviews, Sarago confirmed or clarified information gleaned about its system by Baseline. He also denied the software was responsible for any allegations made in the class-action suits.
For example, he says Ameriquest has implemented fraud prevention systems, but would not say either what those prevention techniques are or even whether the company is working with any of the antifraud software or information services vendors that focus on the mortgage industry.
Customers, however, do care about the details.
More than 1,800 borrowers in California, Texas, Alabama and Alaska claimed in a suit originally filed in 2000 in San Mateo County, Calif., that Ameriquest agents misled them about the cost and terms of their loans and, in some cases, fraudulently misrepresented their financial information, including their annual salaries and the value of their investment portfolios and other assets. In March 2005, Ameriquest agreed to settle the San Mateo suit.
The company finalized the settlement in June, agreeing to pay up to $50 million to borrowers who allegedly were victimized by bait-and-switch tactics, such as adding prepayment fees to loans after the initial loan terms were determined.