When the Minimum is Not Enough: Eleventh Circuit Rules that Lenders May Require Borrowers to Obtain More than the Minimum Flood Insurance

by Baker Donelson
Contact

The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently resolved a district court split regarding minimum flood insurance coverage by holding that a lender may require a borrower who has a federally-insured mortgage to obtain flood insurance beyond the amount mandated by federal law. Feaz v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., et al., 745 F.3d 1098 (11th Cir. 2014).

The Eleventh Circuit stated that while some courts have found that the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulation regarding insurance against floods was ambiguous and therefore did not unequivocally indicate whether the required amount was merely a minimum or a set maximum, it agreed with the other courts that have interpreted that set amount as a minimum, thereby allowing lenders to require more insurance to cover the replacement value of the insured property.

In Feaz, the borrower obtained a $61,928 mortgage loan that was guaranteed by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA). When the FHA guarantees a mortgage loan for a home located in an area designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as presenting "special flood hazards" (as was the case in Feaz), HUD requires that the home be covered by flood insurance "in an amount equal to either the outstanding balance of the mortgage, less estimated land cost, or the maximum amount of the [National Flood Insurance Program] insurance available with respect to the property improvements [i.e., $250,000], whichever is less." Accordingly, Feaz's mortgage contract contained the following covenant (which is required by federal law for all FHA-insured mortgage contracts):

Fire, Flood and Other Hazard Insurance. Borrower shall insure all improvements on the Property, whether now in existence or subsequently erected, against any hazards, casualties, and contingencies, including fire, for which Lender requires insurance. This insurance shall be maintained in the amounts and for the periods that Lender requires. Borrower shall also insure all improvements on the Property, whether now in existence or subsequently erected, against loss by floods to the extent required by the Secretary [of HUD].

Ms. Feaz obtained $63,000 in flood insurance when she obtained the loan from her initial lender, which was more than the loan's principal balance but less than the home’s replacement value. In 2003, Wells Fargo acquired Ms. Feaz's mortgage. Ms. Feaz continued to renew her flood insurance in the amount of $63,000 until 2007, when Wells Fargo instructed her to increase her flood insurance coverage to the amount of her home's replacement value. When she failed to do so, Wells Fargo force-placed the insurance.

Thereafter, Ms. Feaz filed suit against Wells Fargo, alleging that it breached the mortgage contract by requiring her to obtain more flood insurance than what is mandated by federal law.1 Specifically, Feaz argued that the covenant requiring her to "insure . . . against loss by floods to the extent required by the Secretary" of HUD limited the amount of flood insurance Wells Fargo could require her to obtain to the amount required by the Secretary. Stated differently, Feaz contended that because the Secretary requires flood-insurance coverage in the lesser of $250,000 or the loan’s principal balance, Wells Fargo could not require her to obtain more flood insurance than her loan's principal balance (which was less than $250,000). Wells Fargo moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing that the covenant sets a floor, rather than a ceiling, on the amount of flood insurance coverage that a borrower must obtain. The district court granted Wells Fargo’s motion and dismissed Ms. Feaz’s complaint. Ms. Feaz subsequently appealed.

Affirming the district court’s ruling, the Eleventh Circuit three-judge panel held that the covenant "unambiguously makes the federally required flood-insurance amount the minimum, not the maximum, the borrower must have." Employing traditional contract-interpretation principles, the Court noted that the covenant allows a lender to set the required insurance for "any hazards," including but not limited to floods. In addition, the Court noted that the covenant "adds a separate and independent requirement that the borrower maintain the federally required minimum amount of insurance in addition to – not in lieu of – what the lender requires." The Court further noted that the mortgage contract allows the lender to "do and pay whatever is necessary" to "protect the value of the Property," which is not limited to the loan’s principal balance, but rather, extends to the replacement value of the home.

The Court also noted that its interpretation of the covenant comports with the language of the regulatory scheme. Specifically, the Court pointed out that the HUD regulations require that a borrower obtain flood insurance in "an amount at least equal to either the outstanding balance of the mortgage . . . or the maximum amount of the [National Flood Insurance Program] insurance available with respect to the property improvements, whichever is less." The Court noted that the words "at least" are consistent with interpreting the covenant to allow the lender to require more insurance than HUD requires.

Turning to the context and purpose of the regulatory scheme, the Court noted that it is implausible to read the Covenant as imposing a ceiling on the amount of flood insurance a lender may require. The Court explained that when a borrower defaults on an FHA-guaranteed mortgage, the lender conveys the mortgage to the federal government and collects on the guarantee. If the property is damaged by flood, however, the lender cannot collect on the guarantee until it has repaired the damage or deducts the repair costs from the insurance benefits. The Court concluded that if the insurance amount is limited to the unpaid principal balance, as opposed to the property's replacement value, the lender would be forced to bear the cost of repairing the property in amounts that could exceed the insurance benefits. Accordingly, lenders would likely be reluctant to offer FHA-insured mortgages in high risk flood areas, or would pass on their increased risk of loss in the form of higher interest rates, which would undermine the FHA's purpose of encouraging affordable home ownership and the National Flood Insurance Program’s purpose of encouraging adequate flood insurance.

Accordingly, with the resolve of the district court split on the issue of flood insurance coverage, it is now crystal clear that lenders are free to require higher flood insurance coverage from its borrowers pursuant to FHA-guaranteed mortgages. However, with the redrawing of federal flood hazard maps and proposed increased in premium rates for flood insurance, the jury is still out on the impact this holding will have on property owners within special flood hazard zones located in the coastal states and those borrowers' ability to refinance their loans.


1 Feaz also asserted claims for breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, as well as breach of fiduciary duty, under Alabama state law.

 

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Baker Donelson | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Baker Donelson
Contact
more
less

Baker Donelson on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.