PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 25, 2014
National Homeowners Bill of Rights Act of 2014 - Amends the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act of 1974 to require servicers of federally related mortgage loans to: (1) establish for each borrower's account a single electronic record accessible throughout the servicer, including its agents, and all its affordable loan modification staff, foreclosure staff, and bankruptcy staff; and (2) maintain a free, publicly accessible website where borrowers may check their estimated net present value.
Requires servicers to provide free oral interpretation services, as well as translated documents, upon borrower request, which may be provided by contracting with housing counseling agencies approved by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
Prescribes requirements for the affordable loan modification process, including: (1) evaluation of borrowers facing imminent default, (2) assistance in applying for affordable loan modification, (3) treatment of successors in interest, (4) loan transfers, and (5) restrictions upon foreclosure proceedings.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Bars sale of the property securing the mortgage if the servicer of the mortgage does not file a certification with the appropriate land records office where the property securing the mortgage is located, stating that the servicer has determined the eligibility of the mortgagor for an affordable loan modification.
Prescribes criteria governing: (1) mortgagor's eligibility to participate in an affordable loan modification, (2) earned principal forgiveness, (3) principal reduction, and (4) treatment of junior liens.
Subjects a servicer who violates this Act to a civil penalty, and to liability to the borrower. Limits to $1 million the maximum penalty for all violations committed by any particular servicer during any one-year period.
Directs the Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) to appoint a Mortgage Servicer Ombudsman.
Subjects to a maximum fine of $7,500 per loan a servicer who records or files with a land records office or a court more than one document with material deficiencies (robo-signing) with respect to a mortgage loan.
Extends indefinitely the Protecting Tenants at Foreclosure Act of 2009 by repealing its termination date.
People & committees
Rep. Lujan Grisham, Michelle [D-NM-1] · D–NM
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.4963 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.4963 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.4963 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.4963 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.