Slade,

Having paid close attention to (and commented on) the last round of HUD's RESPA rulemaking, and having read the request for comments you linked to, I have to say that I don't believe small independent businesses are even on HUD's radar. 

As stated by HUD, the AfBA issue was pretty much withdrawn from the 2008 round of rulemaking.  HUD was to revisit the issue and is now doing so after complaints that seem to stem from practices of the developers.  As has been the case throughout the history of RESPA, I believe it is completely consumercentric.

That said, I also see it as an open door to get the word to HUD about the fallacy, generally speaking, of the AfBA as a legitimate manner of doing business in real estate lending.  Since most loans are no longer kept in the originator's portfolio, it makes no sense that they should be making title insurance underwriting decisions.  They are not allowed, under HVCC, to control relationships with the appraisers (how does that work with an affiliate vendor manager?).  Self-insuring title on loans to be sold should also be under the looking glass. 

It seems the crux of the question HUD is asking is, 'Do Afbas wind up costing the consumer more without giving them enough opportunity to find a better deal?'.  It's difficult for an independant to answer, since the deals are going through the AfBA.  How do we know the details unless we are sitting at the closing table?  But, if anyone has evidence to bring forth, I would applaud you for doing so. 

All I know is that the AfBAs are causing damage to the smaller independent title agents.  That will ultimately leave fewer choices for consumers - and that's a bad thing as long as consumers care about choice in the matter.  I'm not sure they do.