COVID-19 May Boost E-Signature Adoption in Reluctant Mortgage Ecosystem
COVID-19-related mobility restrictions may increase the adoption of e-signatures in the mortgage space, but largest changes may be to people and processes instead of laws.
April 02, 2020 at 11:30 AM
4 minute read
COVID-19 has forced many aspects of day-to-day life to go remote, and in the case of e-signature use in the mortgage space, the impact may already be rippling out. However, the biggest changes may not be to existing e-signature laws, but the people and processes that make up the mortgage ecosystem.
Margo Tank, U.S. co-chair of the financial services sector at DLA Piper, indicated that the adoption rate of e-signatures by the various entities comprising the mortgage ecosystem has grown throughout the last three to five years as people have become more comfortable with the technology and processes required. But she also noted that the surge in remote working associated with the COVID-19 outbreak over the last three weeks has accelerated the adoption base as well.
"I can't really imagine that we'll go back once people see the ease and efficiency and cost savings of moving their processes online. It takes a lot of energy and money to [implement], but once it's done, I just can't imagine that we'll go back to paper, " Tank said.
To be sure, any resistance that e-signatures have faced over the last 20 years may have more to do with people than the law itself. In 1999, the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws proposed the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act, which gives legal recognition to electronic signatures. The act has since been adopted by 48 states in addition to Washington D.C., Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. Illinois and New York have also adopted their own laws around e-signatures.
But because there are so many stakeholders in the mortgage process—brokers, loan originators, closing agents, title agents, custodians—e-signatures may have taken longer to permeate the ecosystem. "Everybody in that entire mortgage ecosystem has to be rowing in the same direction and want to use electronic signatures on the transactions," Tank said.
And the truth is that some may have been more hesitant than others, reluctant to embrace a "hybrid" process that included a mixture of e-signatures and paper. For example, while promissory notes and disclosures could be addressed with e-signatures, a deed of trust may still have been required to be notarized on paper. That's starting to shift now, with online notarization already enabled in 23 states.
Anthen Perry, an associate with Mayer Brown, said via email that the firm anticipates seeing additional states consider laws allowing for Remote Online Notarization (RON). "We expect that state legislatures will be seeing an increase in lobbying from segments of the real estate industry to pass RON legislation, as a way of keeping deals moving in light of COVID-19 related social distancing measures."
He also raised the possibility that RON legislation could be included in future federal stimulus measures, but cautioned there could be a bit of a "ramp up" period before the practice is widely used in the market.
Still, there are issues that could be causing mortgage ecosystem inhabitants some hesitation when it comes to e-signatures. Bradley Gardner, a shareholder at Polsinelli, gave the example of loan originators who are trying to resell a loan to somebody else. If the originator uses one e-signature platform and the person they are trying to sell the loan to uses another, there could be some confusion around how to proceed.
"It's not totally clear how all of those products can move from one system to another, which again just kind of creates enough murkiness to kind of cause lenders to shy away from it," Gardner said.
Other problems may not have a quick technical or even legislative fix. If a mortgage related issue should end up in court, for instance, judges who are used to ink on paper may not be sure what to make of e-signatures. This may require attorneys to do more legwork in order to bridge the knowledge gap. "Maybe now I've got to get an affidavit from somebody at DocuSign, for example, explaining how this signature was applied. It becomes potentially cumbersome from an enforcement standpoint," Gardner said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllIn-House Gurus Say Inattention to Human Side of Tech Adoption Can Derail Best-Laid Plans
5 minute readK&L Gates Looks to Extend Gen AI Expertise to Access to Justice Fight
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 3Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 4Greenberg Traurig Initiates String of Suits Following JPMorgan Chase's 'Infinite Money Glitch'
- 5It's Time Law Firms Were Upfront About Who Their Salaried Partners Are
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250