Relating to requirements for disclosures and recordkeeping, reinforcing state law regarding late fees, and clarifying that a state-specific closing disclosure is not required as long as federal closing disclosures are given accurately
House Bill 4792 amends West Virginia’s Residential Mortgage Lender, Broker and Servicer Act, specifically the section governing disclosures, closing statements, and recordkeeping for primary and subordinate mortgage loans. The bill keeps the existing requirement that borrowers receive a detailed closing statement at closing, but it clarifies that a lender, broker, or closing representative may satisfy that requirement by providing a properly completed federal closing disclosure under TRID/TILA-RESPA rules, so long as it includes the loan details and late-payment penalty language required by state law. In other words, the bill confirms that a separate West Virginia-specific closing disclosure is not necessary when the federal disclosure already contains all required information.
The bill also preserves and restates related borrower protections and lender duties. It requires holders of mortgage instruments to provide account statements within 10 business days of a written request, to promptly release liens once the loan is paid in full, and to provide payoff statements within three business days after a borrower’s written request or authorization. It also maintains the rule that payoff statements are generally free, except for actual third-party courier or expedited mail costs when those delivery methods are requested by the borrower. Finally, it continues the requirement that licensees retain residential mortgage business records for 36 months after final entry.
HB4792 would primarily affect mortgage lenders, brokers, servicers, and closing agents operating in West Virginia by aligning state disclosure practice more closely with federal mortgage disclosure forms. It would reduce duplication in closing paperwork by allowing the federal Closing Disclosure to satisfy state closing-statement requirements when it contains all required information, while leaving intact the state’s substantive disclosure, payoff, lien-release, and recordkeeping obligations under the mortgage lending code and related consumer protection statutes.
The available context suggests the bill is largely administrative and technical in nature, with a generally neutral-to-supportive posture. The stated purpose is to clarify existing law rather than to make major policy changes, and the bill was introduced by request of the West Virginia Division of Financial Institutions, which suggests agency support for the clarification. No committee debate or recorded votes were provided, so there is no evidence of organized opposition in the available materials.
The main point of potential contention is whether West Virginia should continue requiring any state-specific closing disclosure at all, or instead rely entirely on federal TRID/TILA-RESPA disclosures when they are accurate and complete. Consumer advocates or compliance-focused stakeholders could also focus on whether the bill preserves all state-level borrower protections, especially the late-fee language, payoff statement timing, and recordkeeping requirements. However, the bill text indicates those protections remain in place, and the change is framed as a clarification and simplification rather than a rollback of borrower rights.