SystemResidential Mortgage & Home Equity Origination

Mortgage QC Automation

Mortgage QC automation: every closed loan reviewed before it is sold, not a sample after

Every loan reviewed before it is sold, not a sample after.

See one case, screen by screen ↓
demo2minof agent time to read a 1,412-page closed loan file and run all 386 checks
demo1.4daysmedian from a complete closing package to a graded loan
demo97.8%of agent findings confirmed by auditors on the agency random sample
target100%of closed loans reviewed before sale, not a 10% sample after
In short

What is Mortgage QC Automation?

Software that runs a lender’s quality control review on closed loans automatically. Mortgage QC Automation reads every closed loan file the moment its closing package is complete, runs a 386-check QC script, recalculates income, debts, assets and fees, checks every disclosure and its tolerances, and grades each defect by agency severity — before the loan is sold.

How to choose AI solutions for lending →

Updated

The problem

Why post-closing QC finds defects after the loan is sold

The agency rules ask for a monthly post-closing sample — 10% random or a statistically valid sample — reviewed within 90 days of the end of the closing month. Most loans are pooled and sold well before then. So the QC review usually finishes after the sale, and a defect found then can only be cured at a cost, repriced or repurchased.

Inside the sample, the work is still by hand: auditors sort and bookmark the file, re-key the numbers, recalculate income and DTI, line up the loan estimate against the closing disclosure, and wait on VOEs, credit refreshes and tax transcripts. The other nine loans in ten get no post-closing review. Defect rates swing with the refinance mix, and a QC team cannot grow fast enough to keep up.

typical1.71%industry critical defect rate in Q1 2026 — the largest quarterly jump since 2022
typical10%of closings — the random sample the agency rules allow, or a statistical sample, reviewed within 90 days
demo1.52%of loans sold with a significant defect in May, when only the sample was reviewed
Where a closed loan’s QC days goestimated
By hand50 days
With the solution2.2 days
  • Waiting for the month’s sample to be drawn15 → 0 d
  • In the queue for an auditor30 → 1 d
  • Sorting, bookmarking and re-keying the file2 → 0.1 d
  • Recalculating income, debts, assets and fees1 → 0.1 d
  • Confirming findings and agreeing the cure2 → 1 d

Estimated split for one loan in the post-closing sample, by hand and with the solution, in days from a complete closing package.

How it works

How a closed loan moves

A 386-check QC script runs on every closed loan before it is sold; agents grade each defect by agency severity and QC auditors confirm it.

What comes in
Closed loan in1,412 pages · closing package, loan data, re-verifications
Agents at work
Loan file readerevery page vs loan data
Then
Income and asset recalculator
Disclosure and compliance checker
Re-verification agent
Then
Defect graderagency severity · cure
Then
Trend and report writerbranches · causes
A person decides
QC auditorconfirms every finding
What comes out
Graded loan
Held until cured
Monthly QC report
One case, step by step

One closed loan, from complete package to cured

The Dorsey purchase is the last of Halden Ridge Home Loans’ 1,186 September closings. Its closing package was complete on Fri 9 Oct; its pool cuts off Fri 16 Oct. Here is what happens, screen by screen, in the working solution.

  1. 01Mon 12 Oct

    Every September loan, not a sample

    Renée Castellano · QC manager

    Renée opens the solution on the month as it stands: 1,185 of 1,186 September loans run through the full QC script before sale, 13 held from the October pools. Each square is a loan, coloured by its grade. Pressing “10% sample” dims every loan a sample would never have read.

    “A 10% sample: 119 loans, reviewed by about day 75, after the pools settle.”

  2. 02Run the script

    The last file: 1,412 pages, 386 checks

    The agents

    Marcus and Elena Dorsey, loan 2609-04417: a $412,800 2-unit purchase, closed Thu 24 Sep at the Westlake branch, slotted for the pool settling 21 Oct. The script runs 386 checks in nine parts, each headed by the agent that runs it. Every row shows the value read and the page it came from — note, deed, credit report, closing disclosure.

  3. 03Check 173 of 386

    The script stops on a significant defect

    Income and asset recalculator

    Qualifying ratios, check RAT-005: DTI recalculated at 51.2% against 44.8% approved, over the 50% maximum. Qualifying income falls from $13,370 to $12,770; monthly debts rise from $5,989.33 to $6,538.23. The defect grader marks it significant — not eligible for sale as closed.

    “Agency severity: the loan was not eligible for sale as closed. Curable: document the student loan payment and re-run the AUS — at its $186 income-driven payment, DTI is 48.4%.”

  4. 04One click

    The page behind the number

    Renée Castellano · QC manager

    Each cause links to its source. The lease for unit B shows rent of $2,400 a month, counted in full on the transmittal; the guide counts 75% of gross rent (B3-3.1-08). The credit report shows Elena’s deferred student loan of $54,890 counted at $0, where the guide counts 1% of the balance (B3-6-05).

    Every failing check opens the document page that caused it.

  5. 052 min 06 s of agent time

    The whole file, graded by agency severity

    Defect grader

    Renée continues the script to the end: 386 checks, 375 passed, 9 failed, 2 need review. Four findings, each with its agency grade — 2 significant, 1 moderate, 1 minor. The loan is held from the 21 Oct pool, with both significant findings curable before the Fri 16 Oct cut-off.

  6. 06Review

    Four findings, each with its evidence

    Owen Mbeki · Senior QC auditor

    The loan review shows the six agents’ run step by step and every finding with its links. Two are significant: the DTI defect, and an $18,500 gift from Elena’s father with no proof of transfer, which leaves the file $8,060 short without it. One is moderate: a $175 re-inspection fee with no valid change of circumstance and recording fees $38 over the 10% tolerance — a $213 refund. The fourth, minor: the initial application unsigned by the loan originator.

    The agents propose. Owen confirms or rebuts each finding, and a rebuttal goes back to the agent with its reason.

  7. 07Signed

    A cure plan, timed to the pool

    Renée Castellano · QC manager

    With all four findings confirmed, Renée signs and sends the cure plan: correct the rental income and re-run the AUS by Wed 14 Oct, refund $213 with a letter and corrected closing disclosure by Thu 15 Oct, and the donor’s statement for the gift by Thu 15 Oct. Tasks go to Caleb Ruiz, Mei-Lin Ostrander and the loan officer, Brett Sayer.

    “Done by Thu 15 Oct, the loan makes the 21 Oct pool — one day before the cut-off.”

  8. 08Before the cut-off

    The hold list, before the pools close

    Jordan Pell · Secondary marketing

    The delivery gate shows each October pool with its loans in and held: 14 loans held, $4.68M of $398.6M — 11 curable before the cut-off, 3 not curable (2 to the portfolio desk, 1 to fraud review). No loan with an open significant finding goes into a pool. The hold list goes to Jordan in secondary with one click.

  9. 09The quarter

    The cause, not just the loan

    Caleb Ruiz · Underwriting manager

    Trends put the Dorsey defect in context: Westlake runs at 24.3 findings per 100 loans against 17.9 for the company, led by rental income on 2–4 unit homes. The fix is a corrective action — training for Westlake underwriters, and a warning at underwriting when rent is counted at 100% — owned by Caleb, due Fri 30 Oct.

  10. 10Due Fri 30 Oct

    The monthly QC report, signed

    Renée Castellano · QC manager

    The trend and report writer drafts the September report for senior management: 1,186 loans reviewed, a significant defect rate of 1.18% against the industry’s 1.71%, and 0.25% sold with a significant defect after cures, down from 1.52% in May. Nothing is sent until Renée signs it for Denise Hollander, SVP of quality and risk.

Who it’s for

Built for everyone between closing and the pool.

The same loan, seen by the four people who carry it — QC, underwriting and secondary — and what their month looks like now.

RC
Renée CastellanoQC manager · releases held loans, signs the monthly report
QC manager
Before
Read 119 files a month and hoped the other 1,067 were clean.
Now
Sees every loan graded before its pool, signs the cure plans and the monthly report, and releases a held loan only once its cure is confirmed.
OM
Owen MbekiSenior QC auditor
QC auditor
Before
Spent his days sorting and bookmarking files before he could judge a single defect.
Now
Starts from findings with the page attached — “Show me the page. I’ll tell you if it’s a defect.” — and confirms or rebuts each with a reason.
CR
Caleb RuizUnderwriting manager · income and asset cures
Underwriting
Before
Heard about an underwriter’s income mistake months later, after the loan was sold.
Now
Owns the income and asset cures the same week, and sees which branch and underwriter the pattern comes from.
JP
Jordan PellSecondary marketing · pools and delivery
Secondary marketing
Before
Had to ask, every month, which loans come out of which pool before the cut-off.
Now
Gets the hold list before the cut-off — which loans come out of which pool, and which are cured and back in.
Built on the engine

6 agents. Each with one job, and hard limits.

A 386-check QC script runs on every closed loan before it is sold; agents grade each defect by agency severity and QC auditors confirm it.

Loan file reader

Classifies every document in the closing package, extracts its data and compares it with the loan data in the origination system; checks that required documents are present and signed.

  • Never edits the file or the loan data
  • Every difference cites a page
Income and asset recalculator

Recomputes qualifying income, debts, DTI, assets, gifts and large deposits from the documents — salary, overtime and bonus with history, self-employed income, rental income at 75% of gross rent.

  • Never changes the underwriting decision
  • Reports the difference, with both numbers
Disclosure and compliance checker

Lines up every loan estimate and closing disclosure, tests zero and 10% tolerances, checks each change of circumstance, disclosure timing, APR tolerance, right to cancel for every owner and HMDA data, and computes any cure and its deadline.

  • Never sends a cure — drafts it for the compliance officer
Re-verification agent

Orders and reads re-verifications for the samples: employment, a refreshed credit report, tax transcripts and an appraisal desk review.

  • Never contacts the borrower; requests go through the loan officer
  • Uses only the borrower’s signed authorisation
Defect grader

Maps each finding to the defect categories and agency severity, decides whether it can be cured and how, with the owner and deadline, and holds significant loans from delivery.

  • Never sets the final grade — an auditor confirms
  • Never releases a held loan
Trend and report writer

Tracks defect rates by branch, product, underwriter and category, finds root causes and drafts the monthly QC report.

  • Never sends the report without the QC manager’s signature
QC auditor and QC manager

Confirm each finding; release cured loans; sign the report. The agents propose; a named person decides.

Ask in plain words

Ask about any loan, finding, branch or trend

The QC team can ask in plain words — or ask for a draft. Every answer points to its source.

Why is the Dorsey loan held from the 21 October pool?

Two significant findings and one moderate, all curable before the 16 October cut-off. Significant: rent counted at 100% of the $2,400 lease, not 75%, and a deferred student loan at $0 — DTI 51.2% against 44.8% approved. Significant: an $18,500 gift with no proof of transfer — $8,060 short. Moderate: a $175 re-inspection fee with no valid change and recording fees $38 over 10% — a $213 refund. Cured by Thursday 15 October, it goes back into the pool.

Which branch is driving our defects this quarter?

Westlake: 24.3 findings per 100 loans in September against 17.9 for the company, with 3 of the 14 significant loans. The pattern is rental income on 2–4 unit homes counted in full — 5 of the quarter’s 7 such findings, 4 from one underwriter. A training action for Caleb Ruiz is already in the September report.

How does our significant defect rate compare with the industry?

September: 1.18% of loans had a significant defect; the industry’s critical defect rate — the same grade under its name — was 1.71% in Q1 2026, up from 1.38% in Q4 2025. And 0.25% of September loans will be sold with a significant defect after cures, against 1.52% in May, when only the 10% sample was reviewed, after sale.

Draft the fee refund letter to the Dorseys

Drafted for Mei-Lin Ostrander to sign. It explains the $175 re-inspection fee and the $38 over the recording-fee allowance, and encloses a $213 refund and a corrected closing disclosure. The legal deadline is 23 November, 60 days after closing; the cure plan has it by Thursday 15 October so the loan makes its pool.

Every screen

The working solution, as it ships.

13 screens from the working solution, on its sample data. Pick one to see it large.

The QC test scriptThe last September file, stopped at check 173 of 386 on a significant defect — the arithmetic, the guide rule and the pages behind it.
Every loan against a 10% sampleThe month’s 1,186 loans by grade; the sample view dims every loan a 10% sample would never have read.
The script runningChecks in nine parts, each headed by its agent, with the value read and its source page, and a run log of what each agent did.
The page behind a checkA failing check opens the document that caused it — here the unit B lease, rent highlighted.
Graded by agency severity386 checks done: 2 significant, 1 moderate, 1 minor, and the loan held from its pool until cured.
The loan reviewSix agents’ run step by step, the recalculated ratios and every finding with its evidence, waiting for an auditor.
The cure planEach cure with its owner and due date against the pool cut-off, signed by the QC manager.
Findings to confirmEvery finding across all loans waits for an auditor — significant first, then by pool cut-off — to confirm or rebut.
The delivery gateThe October pools with loans in and held, and each held loan’s cure, owner and due date.
Re-verificationsThe agency random sample and discretionary samples re-verified at the source — and the agents’ accuracy measured.
Defect trendsSignificant defects found against loans sold with one, over 12 months, by category and branch, with root causes.
The monthly QC reportDrafted for senior management with results by severity, significant loans and causes — sent only once signed.
The QC planReview scope, samples and the agency severity scale that gates delivery — version 12, approved by the SVP of quality and risk.
Governance

Built for loans you warrant: cited, confirmed, held until cured.

Every finding cites its pageEach failed check and each finding links to the document and page that caused it — the lease, the credit report, the closing disclosure, the AUS findings.
An auditor confirms every findingThe agents propose. A QC auditor confirms each finding or rebuts it with a reason, and the reason goes back to the agent so the next review learns.
No significant defect goes into a poolA loan with an open significant finding is held from delivery. Only the QC manager releases it, after its cure is confirmed.
Loan data and decisions stay untouchedThe agents never change loan data or an underwriting decision, never contact a borrower and never send a cure — they draft it for the person who owns it.
The random sample checks the agentsThe agency random sample is still drawn and re-verified in full by people, independent of the agents — and measures how often the agents are right.
Signed, versioned, on the audit trailThe QC manager signs the cure plan and the monthly report; the QC plan is versioned and approved; every agent step and every decision is on the audit trail.
Configuration

Your QC plan, as settings

The rules every loan is reviewed against are the lender’s own — versioned, approved and on the audit trail.

SettingDefaultChoose from
Review scopeEvery closed loan, before deliveryOn or off
Agency random sample10% of closings, monthly10% monthly · statistical, 95% confidence, 2% precision
Discretionary samplesEarly defaults, DTI over 45%, 2–4 units, gifts, new loan officersEarly defaults and DTI over 45% only · every manually underwritten loan
Moderate defectsCure before saleCure before sale · fix within 30 days · blocks delivery
Pool cut-off3 business days before settlement2 · 3 · 5 business days
Rental income for qualifying75% of gross rent (lease or rent schedule)75% of gross rent · net of expenses from the tax return
Verification of employmentWithin 10 business days of the noteWithin 10 · within 5 business days
Who releases a held loanRenée Castellano, QC managerRenée Castellano · Owen Mbeki
Connections

Works with the systems you already run

Closed loan filesthe full closing package, every page
Your origination systemthe loan data the file is compared with
Re-verification sourcesemployment, credit bureau, tax transcripts, desk review
Selling guides and your QC plandefect categories, severity, the rules each check applies
Secondary marketingpool calendar and the hold list
Management reportingthe monthly QC report, signed
What it changes

The difference, in numbers.

Every figure is labelled: a target the solution is built to, an estimate, a typical published result, or a proven one.

target
100%
of closed loans reviewed before sale, not a 10% sample after
1,186 of 1,186 loans
September, before delivery
estimated
0.25%
of loans sold with a significant defect, after pre-sale cures (1.18% found)
Sample after sale1.5%
Every loan, before0.25%
typical
1.71%
industry critical defect rate in Q1 2026, the largest jump since 2022
10% sampleEvery loan

“demo” = seen in the working solution, on its sample loan data · “target” = the design goal, measured in the live solution · “estimated” = our estimate · “typical” = published figures (ACES Quality Management mortgage QC industry trends, Q1 2026, via National Mortgage News, 18 Aug 2026 — critical defect rate 1.71%; Fannie Mae Selling Guide D1-3 — 10% or statistical sample, reviewed within 90 days). Halden Ridge Home Loans, its branches, borrowers and the people named on this page are fictional — characters and sample data in the working solution.

Questions

What QC and secondary teams ask us.

What is mortgage QC automation?

Software that runs a lender’s quality control review on closed loans automatically. Mortgage QC Automation reads every closed loan file the moment its closing package is complete, runs a 386-check QC script, recalculates income, debts, assets and fees, checks every disclosure and its tolerances, and grades each defect by agency severity — before the loan is sold.

Does it replace the agency’s post-closing QC sample?

No. The 10% random sample and the discretionary samples are still drawn and re-verified in full by people. In this solution the random sample also measures the agents: in the working solution, auditors confirmed 97.8% of agent findings on it over three months.

How are defects graded?

By agency severity, set in the QC plan. Significant means not eligible for sale as closed and blocks delivery; moderate is eligible but must be cured before sale; minor has no effect on eligibility and is counted in the trends. FHA loans map to the HUD defect tiers.

Can it stop a defective loan from being sold?

Yes. A loan with an open significant finding is held from its pool. The delivery gate shows each pool’s held loans, the cure, its owner and due date against the cut-off, and the QC manager releases a loan once its cure is confirmed.

Does it catch TRID tolerance violations?

The disclosure and compliance checker lines up every loan estimate and closing disclosure, tests zero and 10% tolerances, checks each change of circumstance and its timing, and computes the cure and its deadline — 60 days after closing for a tolerance refund. It drafts the cure; the compliance officer sends it.

Do people stay in control?

Yes. The agents propose findings; a QC auditor confirms or rebuts each one with a reason. The agents never change loan data or an underwriting decision, and never contact a borrower. The QC manager signs the cure plan, releases held loans and signs the monthly report.

Which systems does it work with?

The closed loan file and closing package, loan data from your origination system, re-verification sources (employment, credit bureau, tax transcripts, appraisal desk review), the selling guides and your QC plan, and your pool calendar for the hold list.

How long does it take to go live?

The Agentic Solution Engine builds and deploys it from your requirements and documents — your QC plan, defect categories and a sample of closed loan files — and it goes live once every quality gate has passed. We will walk you through it on your own loans first.

See it on
your closed loans.

We’ll run Mortgage QC Automation on a sample of your own closed loan files.