Product Hatching Ideas

Marksman Settings - TRID Closing Fee Page Rework

The closing fees listed within the TRID Closing Fee page located in settings is confusing and over-complicated.  I am suggesting a rework of this page to simplify and more clearly state what is included in the APR calculation.

1. There are more costs listed than we need.

   -The page was based off the Closing Disclosure, but we deal more with the early estimates as stated on the Loan Estimate.

   - We include the section of the Closing Disclosure each fee is included in, even though we do not provide the disclosure itself.

   - I would like to suggest removing those fees that will never impact the APR (Mortgage Insurance, Homeowners Insurance, Property Taxes, etc.)

2. Usability is lacking due to the layout and available options.

   - We require the user to chose their payment option: Borrower-Paid At Closing, Borrower-Paid Before Closing, Seller-Paid At Closing, Seller-Paid Before Closing, and Paid by Others.

   - The section where the fee is to be located on the Closing Disclosure is unnecessary.  I suggest this option be removed.

3. The lack in usability impacts the perceived accuracy of the APR calculation.

   - Only the Borrower-Paid At Closing is included in the APR calculation.  I suggest this be more clear with one of 2 options:

      - Option 1: Add a check-box to each fee (similar to the QM/HOEPA check box) that would allow the customer to choose which fees are included in their APR.

      - Option 2: Change the payment drop down into a "Used in APR?" drop down, with options that include "Included in APR" and "Not Included in APR".  These would be the only 2 options, removing the confusion of the dropdown.


These updates would give the customer more clarification into what is going into their APR calculation and would remove any liability for us making assumptions for how all lenders are interpreting regulation.

  • Lori Rezac
  • Sep 13 2017
  • Moved to Prioritzation
Rating BOB-2
Revenue or Retention? Other
Workaround Present Yes
Impact to Existing Customers Multiple
Customer ID(s) Those entering Fees into the TRID Closing Fee Screen
Business Value 1 - Important to a few or none, little or no impact on brand, little or no competitive advantage
Urgency 1 - Not time constrained
  • Attach files
  • Guest commented
    September 14, 2017 19:04

    I think this a good opportunity to update the way we handle the creation/maintenance of trid closing fees. In the coming weeks the rollout of our Partner Portal will be complete and this would be a prime example of something that should be rewritten as APIs. 


    I would propose the following 3 development tasks.


    1. This ticket's "sponsor" should work with Mike Schultz and PM/PO to develop the newer, simpler layout.
    2. While the design is being nailed down, DEV can create this page's original saving/retrieving of TRID closing fees as a new API. (best case scenario 1 sprint, but most likely 2 sprints because we would want to recreate the searching functionality)
    3. In the following sprint, dev can rewrite the page within Marksman to use the new design and the newly created API as the foundation of creating/saving/managing the trid fees.

    1&2 could happen simultaneously 

    Going this route would mean taking this ticket from two sprints (design sprint + implementation sprint) and turning it into most likely three sprints.

    This should hopefully be the future of all enhancements to Marksman where each page is powered by a small set of independent APIs. By being independent means that they could be deployed continuously and not hindered to the normal sprint release window. It also provides an API that partners can then use to maintain their own trid fees without being tied directly to Marksman. The ideal scenario would be having a full suite of API's which not only powers Marksman but is available to all partners as well. 


    - Justin

  • Admin
    Lori Rezac commented
    September 14, 2017 21:06

    BOB meeting:

    Changing the drop down in easy, but this may impact LOS integrations.  It would be safer to add the a flag (according to Bumsoo).

    Blackbox issue (Jason) - we don't know what's happening, which increases the need.

    Analytics have been added to the ticket.