Commitments and Contingencies | 11. Commitments and Contingencies The Company and its subsidiaries are defendants in various legal proceedings, which include private and civil litigation as well as government and regulatory examinations, investigations and inquiries or other requests for information. These matters are at varying procedural stages and the resolution of these various matters may result in adverse judgments, fines, penalties, injunctions and other relief against the Company as well as monetary payments or other agreements and obligations. Alternatively, the Company may engage in settlement discussions on certain matters in order to avoid the additional costs of engaging in litigation. Reserves are established for pending or threatened litigation, claims or assessments when it is probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount of such loss can be reasonably estimated. In light of the inherent uncertainties involved in litigation and other legal proceedings, it is not always possible to determine a reasonable estimate of the amount of a probable loss, and the Company may estimate a range of possible loss for consideration in its estimates. The estimates are based upon currently available information and involve significant judgment taking into account the varying stages and inherent uncertainties of such matters. Accordingly, the Company’s estimates may change from time to time and such changes may be material to the consolidated financial results. As of September 30, 2015 , the Company’s recorded reserves associated with legal and regulatory contingencies were $106 million and are presented in Other liabilities in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets . Given the inherent uncertainties and status of the Company’s outstanding legal proceedings, the range of reasonably possible losses cannot be estimated for all matters. For matters where the Company can estimate the range, the Company believes reasonably possible losses in excess of recorded reserves may be up to $150 million in aggregate as of September 30, 2015 . There can be no assurance that the ultimate resolution of the Company’s pending or threatened litigation, claims, examinations, investigations or assessments will not result in losses in excess of the Company’s recorded reserves, or in excess of our estimate of reasonably possible losses. As a result, the ultimate resolution of any particular legal matter, or matters, could be material to the Company’s results of operations or cash flows for the period in which such matter is resolved. The following are descriptions of the Company’s significant legal and regulatory matters, which may involve loss contingencies. CFPB Enforcement Action. In January 2014, the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (the “CFPB”) initiated an administrative proceeding alleging that the Company’s reinsurance activities, including its mortgage insurance premium ceding practices, have violated certain provisions of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (“RESPA”) and other laws enforced by the CFPB. Through its reinsurance subsidiaries, the Company assumed risk in exchange for premiums ceded from primary mortgage insurance companies. In November 2014, the Company received a recommended decision from the administrative law judge for the payment of $6.4 million to the CFPB. Both the Company and the CFPB’s enforcement counsel subsequently appealed the recommended decision to the Director of the CFPB. In June 2015, the Director of the CFPB issued a final order upholding in part, and reversing in part, the recommended decision. The final order requires the Company to pay $109 million , which is based upon the gross reinsurance premiums the Company received on or after July 21, 2008. The Company continues to believe that it has complied with RESPA and other laws applicable to its former mortgage reinsurance activities, and has filed an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals. In August 2015, the United States Court of Appeals stayed the CFPB's order pending the appeal, and as a result, the Company was not required to post the judgment amount in escrow or comply with injunctive relief provided for in the order. The Company continues to vigorously defend against the CFPB’s allegations and the Director’s judgment through the appellate process, although there can be no assurances as to the final outcome of any such appeal. As of September 30, 2015 , the Company’s recorded estimate for probable losses in connection with this matter is not material, and is substantially less than the amount reflected in the final order. MMC and NYDFS Examinations. The Company has undergone a regulatory examination by a multistate coalition of certain mortgage banking regulators (the “MMC”) and such regulators have alleged various violations of federal and state laws related to the Company’s legacy mortgage servicing practices. In July 2015, the Company received a settlement proposal from the MMC, proposing payments to certain borrowers nationwide where foreclosure proceedings were either referred or completed during 2009 through 2012, as well as other consumer relief and administrative penalties. In addition, the proposal would require that the Company comply with national servicing standards, submit its servicing activities to monitoring for compliance, and other injunctive relief. In October 2015, the Company met with the MMC and engaged in substantive discussions regarding the proposal. The Company believes it has meritorious explanations and defenses to the findings. In the second quarter of 2015, the New York Department of Financial Services ("NYDFS") clarified that it intends to propose that the Company enter into a consent order to close out pending examination report findings, including New York findings stemming from the MMC examination and in October 2015 the Company continued its discussions with NYDFS. While the Company believes it has meritorious explanations and defenses to the findings and has provided responses to these findings, any consent order may include fines and penalties, as well as other consumer relief or injunctive relief. As of September 30, 2015 , the Company included an estimate of probable losses in connection with the MMC and NYDFS matters in the recorded reserve. HUD Subpoenas. The Company has received document subpoenas from the Office of Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) requesting production of certain documents related to, among other things, the Company’s origination and underwriting process for loans insured by the Federal Housing Administration (“FHA”). The Company has been cooperating in this investigation since its receipt of the subpoenas in 2013, and certain current and former employees of the Company have been deposed in connection with this matter. In October 2015, the Company met with HUD and discussed the ongoing investigation. As of September 30, 2015 , the Company included an estimate of probable losses in connection with this matter in the recorded reserve. Lender-Placed Insurance. The Company is currently subject to pending litigation alleging that its servicing practices around lender-placed insurance were not in compliance with applicable laws. Through its mortgage subsidiary, the Company did have certain outsourcing arrangements for the purchase of lender-placed hazard insurance for borrowers whose coverage had lapsed. The Company believes that it has meritorious defenses to these allegations; however, the resolution of such matter may result in adverse judgments, other relief against the Company, as well as monetary payments or other agreements and obligations. Given the nature of this matter and the related allegations, the Company cannot estimate the amount of loss or a range of possible losses, if any, associated with this matter. Other Subpoenas and Investigations. The Company has received document subpoenas from the U.S. Attorney’s Offices for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York. The subpoenas requested production of certain documents related to, among other things, foreclosure expenses that we incurred in connection with the foreclosure of loans insured or guaranteed by FHA, Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac and loans sold pursuant to programs sponsored by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie Mae. There can be no assurance that claims or litigation will not arise from this inquiry, or that fines, penalties or increased legal costs will not be incurred in connection with any of these matters. In addition, in October 2014 the Company received a document subpoena from the Office of the Inspector General of the Federal Housing Financing Agency (the “FHFA”) requesting production of certain documents related to, among other things, our origination, underwriting and quality control processes for loans sold to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. While the FHFA, as regulatory and conservator for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, does not have regulatory authority over the Company or its subsidiaries, there can be no assurance that Fannie Mae and/or Freddie Mac will not assert additional claims as a result of this inquiry. In addition to the increased regulatory focus on origination and servicing practices described above, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have also had a continued focus on foreclosure practices. They have assessed compensatory fees against the Company for failing to meet certain foreclosure timelines specified in their respective servicing guides. Although such compensatory fees have not been material to date, there can be no assurance that the assessment of any such compensatory fees will not be material to the Company’s results in the future. |