Commitments and Contingencies | 10. Commitments and Contingencies Legal and Regulatory Matters The Company and its subsidiaries are routinely, and currently, defendants in various legal proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of PHH's business, including class actions and other private and civil litigation. These proceedings are generally based on alleged violations of consumer protection laws (including the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act ("RESPA")), employment laws and contractual obligations. Similar to other mortgage loan originators and servicers, the Company and its subsidiaries are also routinely, and currently, subject to government and regulatory examinations, investigations and inquiries or other requests for information. The resolution of these various legal and regulatory 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. In particular, legal proceedings brought under RESPA and other federal or state consumer protection laws that are ongoing, or may arise from time to time, may include the award of treble and other damages substantially in excess of actual losses, attorneys' fees, costs and disbursements, and other consumer and injunctive relief. These proceedings and matters are at varying procedural stages and the Company may engage in settlement discussions on certain matters in order to avoid the additional costs of engaging in litigation. The outcome of legal and regulatory matters is difficult to predict or estimate and the ultimate time to resolve these matters may be protracted. In addition, the outcome of any legal proceeding or governmental and regulatory matter may affect the outcome of other pending legal proceedings or governmental and regulatory matters. A liability is established for legal and regulatory contingencies 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, legal proceedings and other governmental and regulatory matters, 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 March 31, 2017 , the Company’s recorded liability associated with legal and regulatory contingencies was $121 million and is 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 the recorded liability are no t significant as of March 31, 2017 . There can be no assurance that the ultimate resolution of these matters will not result in losses in excess of the Company’s recorded liability, or in excess of the 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. 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 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 June 2015, the Director of the CFPB issued a final order requiring the Company to pay $109 million , based upon the gross reinsurance premiums the Company received on or after July 21, 2008. Subsequently, the Company filed an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (the “Court of Appeals”). In October 2016, the Court of Appeals issued its decision, vacating the decision of the Director of the CFPB, and finding in favor of the Company’s arguments, among others, around the correct interpretations of Section 8 of RESPA, the applicability of prior HUD interpretations around captive re-insurance and the applicability of statute of limitations to administrative enforcement proceedings at the CFPB. The Court of Appeals remanded the case to the CFPB to determine the Company's compliance with provisions of RESPA specific to whether any mortgage insurers paid more than reasonable market value to the Company for reinsurance. The Company continues to believe that it has complied with RESPA and other laws applicable to its former mortgage reinsurance activities. In February 2017, the Court of Appeals granted the CFPB's request to rehear the case en banc. Arguments in the appeal are currently scheduled for May 2017. Given the nature of this matter and the current status, the Company cannot estimate the amount of possible loss, or a range of possible losses, if any, in connection with this matter. MMC Examination. 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 consumer protection and other 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 to a foreclosure attorney 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. The Company continues to engage in substantive discussions with the MMC regarding the proposal. The Company believes it has meritorious explanations and defenses to the findings. In the fourth quarter of 2016, the Company entered into a consent order and paid a civil monetary penalty with the New York Department of Financial Services to close out New York's pending examination report findings, including New York findings stemming from the MMC examination. As of March 31, 2017 , the Company included an estimate of probable losses in connection with the MMC matter in the recorded liability. 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”) during the period between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2011. As part of the investigation, HUD has also requested documents related to a small sample of loans originated during this period. This investigation could lead to a demand or claim under the False Claims Act, which allows for civil penalties and treble damages substantially in excess of actual losses. Several large mortgage originators that participate in FHA lending programs have been subject to similar investigations, which have resulted in settlement agreements that included the payment of substantial fines and penalties. 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 March and April 2017, the Company engaged in substantive settlement discussions with the government towards resolving this matter. In May 2017, the Company received proposed settlement documentation from the government, and the Company is engaged in discussions concerning that proposal. As of March 31, 2017 , the Company included an estimate of probable losses in connection with this matter in the recorded liability. 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, in January 2017, the Company entered into an agreement to settle outstanding litigation relating to this matter. The settlement is subject to court approval. The Company’s recorded estimate of probable losses as of March 31, 2017 for this matter was not materially different than the losses it expects to incur in connection with the resolution. 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: (i) foreclosure expenses that the Company incurred in connection with the foreclosure of loans insured or guaranteed by FHA, Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac and (ii) the origination and underwriting of loans sold pursuant to programs sponsored by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or Ginnie Mae. In July 2016, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York requested production of additional documents responsive to the subpoenas. There can be no assurance that claims or litigation will not arise from these inquiries, or that fines and penalties, as well as other consumer or injunctive relief, 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, its origination, underwriting and quality control processes for loans sold to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. While the FHFA, as regulator 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. Repurchase and Foreclosure-Related Reserves Repurchase and foreclosure-related reserves are maintained for probable losses related to repurchase and indemnification obligations and for on-balance sheet loans in foreclosure and real estate owned. A summary of the activity in repurchase and foreclosure-related reserves is as follows: Three Months Ended 2017 2016 (In millions) Balance, beginning of period $ 73 $ 89 Realized losses (6 ) (6 ) (Decrease) increase in reserves due to: Changes in assumptions (1 ) (2 ) New loan sales 1 2 Balance, end of period $ 67 $ 83 Repurchase and foreclosure-related reserves consist of the following: March 31, December 31, (In millions) Loan repurchase and indemnification liability $ 43 $ 49 Adjustment to value for real estate owned 15 14 Allowance for probable foreclosure losses 9 10 Total $ 67 $ 73 Loan Repurchases and Indemnifications. The liability for loan repurchases and indemnifications represents management’s estimate of probable losses based on the best information available and requires the application of a significant level of judgment and the use of a number of assumptions including borrower performance, investor demand patterns, expected relief from the expiration of repurchase obligations, the expected success rate in defending against requests and estimated loss severities (adjusted for home price forecasts). In December 2016, the Company executed resolution agreements and paid Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to resolve substantially all representation and warranty exposure related to the sale of mortgage loans that were originated and delivered prior to September 30, 2016 and November 30, 2016, respectively. The Company's remaining exposure to repurchase and indemnification claims consists primarily of estimates for claims from private investors, losses for specific non-performing loans where the Company believes it will be required to indemnify the investor and losses from government mortgage insurance programs. Given the inherent uncertainties involved in estimating losses associated with future repurchase and indemnification requests, there is a reasonable possibility that future losses may be in excess of the recorded liability. As of March 31, 2017 , the estimated amount of reasonably possible losses in excess of the recorded liability was $20 million . The maximum amount of losses cannot be estimated because the Company does not service all of the loans for which it has provided representations or warranties. As of March 31, 2017 , $65 million of loans have been identified in which the Company has full risk of loss or has identified a breach of representation and warranty provisions; 21% of which were at least 90 days delinquent (calculated based upon the unpaid principal balance of the loans). Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements and Guarantees Lease Arrangements. On February 8, 2017, the Company entered into an assignment with LenderLive Network, LLC ("LenderLive") of its Jacksonville, Florida facility lease. Under the terms of the original facility lease, PHH remains jointly and severally obligated with LenderLive for performance under the lease agreement. As of March 31, 2017, the total amount of potential future lease payments under this guarantee is $15 million ; however, the Company does not believe any amount of loss under this guarantee is probable. |