Regulatory Requirements	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2019
Brokers and Dealers [Abstract]
Regulatory Requirements	Note 19 – Regulatory Requirements Our business is subject to extensive regulation by federal, state and local governmental authorities, including the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), HUD, the SEC and various state agencies that license and conduct examinations of our servicing and lending activities. In addition, we operate under a number of regulatory settlements that subject us to ongoing reporting and other obligations. From time to time, we also receive requests (including requests in the form of subpoenas and civil investigative demands) from federal, state and local agencies for records, documents and information relating to our servicing and lending activities. The GSEs (and their conservator, the Federal Housing Finance Authority (FHFA)), Ginnie Mae, the United States Treasury Department, various investors, non-Agency securitization trustees and others also subject us to periodic reviews and audits. In the current regulatory environment, we have faced and expect to continue to face heightened regulatory and public scrutiny as an organization as well as stricter and more comprehensive regulation of the entire mortgage sector. We continue to work diligently to assess and understand the implications of the evolving regulatory environment in which we operate and to meet its requirements. We devote substantial resources to regulatory compliance, while, at the same time, striving to meet the needs and expectations of our customers, clients and other stakeholders. Our failure to comply with applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations and licensing requirements could lead to (i) administrative fines and penalties and litigation, (ii) loss of our licenses and approvals to engage in our servicing and lending businesses, (iii) governmental investigations and enforcement actions, (iv) civil and criminal liability, including class action lawsuits and actions to recover incentive and other payments made by governmental entities, (v) breaches of covenants and representations under our servicing, debt or other agreements, (vi) damage to our reputation, (vii) inability to raise capital or otherwise fund our operations and (viii) inability to execute on our business strategy. In addition to amounts paid to resolve regulatory matters, we could incur costs to comply with the terms of such resolutions, including, but not limited to, the costs of audits, reviews and third-party firms to monitor our compliance with such resolutions. We must comply with a large number of federal, state and local consumer protection and other laws and regulations, including, among others, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the Dodd-Frank Act), the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, the Homeowners Protection Act, the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, as well as individual state licensing and foreclosure laws, individual state and local laws relating to registration of vacant or foreclosed properties, and federal and local bankruptcy rules. These laws and regulations apply to many facets of our business, including loan origination, default servicing and collections, use of credit reports, safeguarding of non-public personally identifiable information about our customers, foreclosure and claims handling, investment of, and interest payments on, escrow balances and escrow payment features and fees assessed on borrowers, and they mandate certain disclosures and notices to borrowers. These requirements can and do change as laws and regulations are enacted, promulgated, amended, interpreted and enforced, including through CFPB interpretive bulletins and other regulatory pronouncements. In addition, the actions of legislative bodies and regulatory agencies relating to a particular matter or business practice may or may not be coordinated or consistent. As a result, ensuring ongoing compliance with applicable legal and regulatory requirements can be challenging. Over the past decade, the general trend among federal, state and local legislative bodies and regulatory agencies as well as state attorneys general has been toward increasing laws, regulations, investigative proceedings and enforcement actions with regard to residential real estate lenders and servicers. New regulatory and legislative measures, or changes in enforcement practices, including those related to the technology we use, could, either individually or in the aggregate, require significant changes to our business practices, impose additional costs on us, limit our product offerings, limit our ability to efficiently pursue business opportunities, negatively impact asset values or reduce our revenues. Accordingly, they could materially and adversely affect our business and our financial condition, liquidity and results of operations. As further described below and in Note 21 – Contingencies, in recent years Ocwen has entered into a number of significant settlements with federal and state regulators and state attorneys general that have imposed additional requirements on our business. For example, we made various commitments relating to the process of transferring loans off the REALServicing servicing system and onto Black Knight MSP, we have engaged a third-party auditor to perform an analysis with respect to our compliance with certain federal and state laws relating to the escrow of mortgage loan payments, we have revised various aspects of our complaint handling processes and we have extensive review and reporting obligations to various regulatory bodies with respect to various matters, including our financial condition. We devote significant management time and resources to compliance with these additional requirements. These requirements are generally unique to Ocwen and, while certain of our competitors may have entered into regulatory-related settlements of their own, our competitors are generally not subject to either the same specific or the same breadth of additional requirements to which we are subject. Ocwen has various subsidiaries that are licensed to originate and/or service forward and reverse mortgage loans in those jurisdictions in which they operate, and which require licensing. Our licensed entities are required to renew their licenses, typically on an annual basis, and to do so they must satisfy the license renewal requirements of each jurisdiction, which generally include financial requirements such as providing audited financial statements and satisfying minimum net worth requirements and non-financial requirements such as satisfactory completion of examinations relating to the licensee’s compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Failure to satisfy any of the requirements to which our licensed entities are subject could result in a variety of regulatory actions ranging from a fine, a directive requiring a certain step to be taken, entry into a consent order, a suspension or, ultimately, a revocation of a license, any of which could have a material adverse impact on our business, reputation, results of operations and financial condition. The minimum net worth requirements to which our licensed entities are subject are unique to each state and type of license. We believe our licensed entities were in compliance with all of their minimum net worth requirements at June 30, 2019. PMC and Liberty are also subject to seller/servicer obligations under agreements with one or more of the GSEs, HUD, FHA, VA and Ginnie Mae. These seller/servicer obligations contain financial requirements, including capital requirements related to tangible net worth, as defined by the applicable agency, an obligation to provide audited consolidated financial statements within 90 days of the applicable entity’s fiscal year end as well as extensive requirements regarding servicing, selling and other matters. To the extent that these requirements are not met or waived, the applicable agency may, at its option, utilize a variety of remedies including requirements to provide certain information or take actions at the direction of the applicable agency, requirements to deposit funds as security for our obligations, sanctions, suspension or even termination of approved seller/servicer status, which would prohibit future originations or securitizations of forward or reverse mortgage loans or servicing for the applicable agency. Any of these actions could have a material adverse impact on us. To date, none of these counterparties has communicated any material sanction, suspension or prohibition in connection with our seller/servicer obligations. We believe we were in compliance with applicable net worth requirements at June 30, 2019. Our non-Agency servicing agreements also contain requirements regarding servicing practices and other matters, and a failure to comply with these requirements could have a material adverse impact on our business. The most restrictive of the various net worth requirements referenced above is based on the total assets of PMC, and the required net worth was $214.6 million at June 30, 2019. In addition, a number of foreign laws and regulations apply to our operations outside of the U.S., including laws and regulations that govern licensing, employment, safety, taxes and insurance and laws and regulations that govern the creation, continuation and the winding up of companies as well as the relationships between shareholders, our corporate entities, the public and the government in these countries. Non-compliance with these laws and regulations could result in adverse actions against us, including (i) restrictions on our operations in these countries, (ii) fines, penalties or sanctions or (iii) reputational damage. New York Department of Financial Services. In March 2017, we entered into a consent order with the NY DFS (the 2017 NY Consent Order) that provided for the termination of the engagement of a monitor appointed pursuant to an earlier 2014 consent order and for us to address certain concerns raised by the NY DFS that primarily relate to our servicing operations, as well as for us to comply with certain reporting and other obligations. In addition, in connection with the NY DFS’ approval in September 2018, of our acquisition of PHH, we agreed to satisfy certain post-closing requirements, including reporting obligations and record retention and other requirements relating to the transfer of loans collateralized by New York property (New York loans) onto Black Knight MSP and certain requirements with respect to the evaluation and supervision of management of both Ocwen Financial Corporation and PHH Mortgage Corporation. In addition, we are prohibited from boarding any additional loans onto the current REALServicing system and we were required to transfer all New York loans off the REALServicing system by April 30, 2020. The conditional approval also modified a preexisting restriction on our ability to acquire MSRs such that the restriction applies only to New York loans and, with respect to New York loans, provides that Ocwen may not increase its aggregate portfolio of New York loans serviced or subserviced by Ocwen by more than 2% per year (based on the unpaid principal balance of loans serviced at the prior calendar year-end). This restriction will remain in place until the NY DFS determines that all loans serviced on the REALServicing system have been successfully migrated to Black Knight MSP and that Ocwen has developed a satisfactory infrastructure to board sizable portfolios of MSRs. We continue to work with the NY DFS to address matters they continue to raise with us as well as to fulfill our commitments under the 2017 NY Consent Order and PHH acquisition conditional approval. To the extent that we fail to address adequately any concerns raised by the NY DFS or fail to fulfill our commitments to the NY DFS, the NY DFS could take regulatory action against us, including imposing fines or penalties or otherwise restricting our business activities. Any such actions could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition liquidity and results of operations. California Department of Business Oversight. In January 2015, OLS entered into a consent order (the 2015 CA Consent Order) with the CA DBO relating to our alleged failure to produce certain information and documents during a routine licensing examination. In February 2017, we entered into another consent order with the CA DBO (the 2017 CA Consent Order) that terminated the 2015 CA Consent Order and resolved open matters between us and the CA DBO. We believe that we have completed those obligations of the 2017 CA Consent Order that have already come due, and we have so notified the CA DBO. We have certain remaining reporting and other obligations under the 2017 CA Consent Order. Pursuant to the 2017 CA Consent Order, the CA DBO has engaged a third-party administrator who, at the expense of the CA DBO, has commenced work to confirm that Ocwen has completed certain commitments under the 2017 CA Consent Order. Still outstanding, however, is confirmation of our completion of $198.0 million in debt forgiveness for California borrowers by June 30, 2019. We believe that we fulfilled this requirement during the first quarter of 2019. However, our completion of this requirement is subject to testing by the CA DBO’s third-party administrator who must confirm, among other things, that modified loans have remained current for specified time periods. If we are unable to satisfy this requirement or obtain an extension, the 2017 CA Consent Order obligates us to pay the remaining amount to the CA DBO in cash. Our debt forgiveness activities take place as we modify loans - our loan modifications are designed to be sustainable for homeowners while providing a net present value for mortgage loan investors that is superior to that of foreclosure. Debt forgiveness as part of a loan modification is determined on a case-by-case basis in accordance with the applicable servicing agreement. Debt forgiveness does not involve an expense to Ocwen other than the operating expense incurred in arranging the modification, which is part of Ocwen’s role as loan servicer. If the CA DBO were to allege that we failed to comply with our obligations under the 2017 CA Consent Order or that we otherwise were in breach of applicable laws, regulations or licensing requirements, the CA DBO could also take regulatory actions against us, including imposing fines or penalties or otherwise restricting our business activities. Any such actions could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition liquidity and results of operations.

Note 19 – Regulatory Requirements

Our business is subject to extensive regulation by federal, state and local governmental authorities, including the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), HUD, the SEC and various state agencies that license and conduct examinations of our servicing and lending activities. In addition, we operate under a number of regulatory settlements that subject us to ongoing reporting and other obligations. From time to time, we also receive requests (including requests in the form of subpoenas and civil investigative demands) from federal, state and local agencies for records, documents and information relating to our servicing and lending activities. The GSEs (and their conservator, the Federal Housing Finance Authority (FHFA)), Ginnie Mae, the United States Treasury Department, various investors, non-Agency securitization trustees and others also subject us to periodic reviews and audits.

In the current regulatory environment, we have faced and expect to continue to face heightened regulatory and public scrutiny as an organization as well as stricter and more comprehensive regulation of the entire mortgage sector. We continue to work diligently to assess and understand the implications of the evolving regulatory environment in which we operate and to meet its requirements. We devote substantial resources to regulatory compliance, while, at the same time, striving to meet the needs and expectations of our customers, clients and other stakeholders. Our failure to comply with applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations and licensing requirements could lead to (i) administrative fines and penalties and litigation, (ii) loss of our licenses and approvals to engage in our servicing and lending businesses, (iii) governmental investigations and enforcement actions, (iv) civil and criminal liability, including class action lawsuits and actions to recover incentive and other payments made by governmental entities, (v) breaches of covenants and representations under our servicing, debt or other agreements, (vi) damage to our reputation, (vii) inability to raise capital or otherwise fund our operations and (viii) inability to execute on our business strategy. In addition to amounts paid to resolve regulatory matters, we could incur costs to comply with the terms of such resolutions, including, but not limited to, the costs of audits, reviews and third-party firms to monitor our compliance with such resolutions.

We must comply with a large number of federal, state and local consumer protection and other laws and regulations, including, among others, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the Dodd-Frank Act), the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, the Homeowners Protection Act, the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, as well as individual state licensing and foreclosure laws, individual state and local laws relating to registration of vacant or foreclosed properties, and federal and local bankruptcy rules. These laws and regulations apply to many facets of our business, including loan origination, default servicing and collections, use of credit reports, safeguarding of non-public personally identifiable information about our customers, foreclosure and claims handling, investment of, and interest payments on, escrow balances and escrow payment features and fees assessed on borrowers, and they mandate certain disclosures and notices to borrowers. These requirements can and do change as laws and regulations are enacted, promulgated, amended, interpreted and enforced, including through CFPB interpretive bulletins and other regulatory pronouncements. In addition, the actions of legislative bodies and regulatory agencies relating to a particular matter or business practice may or may not be coordinated or consistent. As a result, ensuring ongoing compliance with applicable legal and regulatory requirements can be challenging. Over the past decade, the general trend among federal, state and local legislative bodies and regulatory agencies as well as state attorneys general has been toward increasing laws, regulations, investigative proceedings and enforcement actions with regard to residential real estate lenders and servicers. New regulatory and legislative measures, or changes in enforcement practices, including those related to the technology we use, could, either individually or in the aggregate, require significant changes to our business practices, impose additional costs on us, limit our product offerings, limit our ability to efficiently pursue business opportunities, negatively impact asset values or reduce our revenues. Accordingly, they could materially and adversely affect our business and our financial condition, liquidity and results of operations.

As further described below and in Note 21 – Contingencies, in recent years Ocwen has entered into a number of significant settlements with federal and state regulators and state attorneys general that have imposed additional requirements on our business. For example, we made various commitments relating to the process of transferring loans off the REALServicing servicing system and onto Black Knight MSP, we have engaged a third-party auditor to perform an analysis with respect to our compliance with certain federal and state laws relating to the escrow of mortgage loan payments, we have revised various aspects of our complaint handling processes and we have extensive review and reporting obligations to various regulatory bodies with respect to various matters, including our financial condition. We devote significant management time and resources to compliance with these additional requirements. These requirements are generally unique to Ocwen and, while certain of our competitors may have entered into regulatory-related settlements of their own, our competitors are generally not subject to either the same specific or the same breadth of additional requirements to which we are subject.

Ocwen has various subsidiaries that are licensed to originate and/or service forward and reverse mortgage loans in those jurisdictions in which they operate, and which require licensing. Our licensed entities are required to renew their licenses, typically on an annual basis, and to do so they must satisfy the license renewal requirements of each jurisdiction, which generally include financial requirements such as providing audited financial statements and satisfying minimum net worth requirements and non-financial requirements such as satisfactory completion of examinations relating to the licensee’s compliance with applicable laws and regulations. Failure to satisfy any of the requirements to which our licensed entities are subject could result in a variety of regulatory actions ranging from a fine, a directive requiring a certain step to be taken, entry into a consent order, a suspension or, ultimately, a revocation of a license, any of which could have a material adverse impact on our business, reputation, results of operations and financial condition. The minimum net worth requirements to which our licensed entities are subject are unique to each state and type of license. We believe our licensed entities were in compliance with all of their minimum net worth requirements at June 30, 2019.

PMC and Liberty are also subject to seller/servicer obligations under agreements with one or more of the GSEs, HUD, FHA, VA and Ginnie Mae. These seller/servicer obligations contain financial requirements, including capital requirements related to tangible net worth, as defined by the applicable agency, an obligation to provide audited consolidated financial statements within 90 days of the applicable entity’s fiscal year end as well as extensive requirements regarding servicing, selling and other matters. To the extent that these requirements are not met or waived, the applicable agency may, at its option, utilize a variety of remedies including requirements to provide certain information or take actions at the direction of the applicable agency, requirements to deposit funds as security for our obligations, sanctions, suspension or even termination of approved seller/servicer status, which would prohibit future originations or securitizations of forward or reverse mortgage loans or servicing for the applicable agency. Any of these actions could have a material adverse impact on us. To date, none of these counterparties has communicated any material sanction, suspension or prohibition in connection with our seller/servicer obligations. We believe we were in compliance with applicable net worth requirements at June 30, 2019. Our non-Agency servicing agreements also contain requirements regarding servicing practices and other matters, and a failure to comply with these requirements could have a material adverse impact on our business.

The most restrictive of the various net worth requirements referenced above is based on the total assets of PMC, and the required net worth was $214.6 million at June 30, 2019.

In addition, a number of foreign laws and regulations apply to our operations outside of the U.S., including laws and regulations that govern licensing, employment, safety, taxes and insurance and laws and regulations that govern the creation, continuation and the winding up of companies as well as the relationships between shareholders, our corporate entities, the public and the government in these countries. Non-compliance with these laws and regulations could result in adverse actions against us, including (i) restrictions on our operations in these countries, (ii) fines, penalties or sanctions or (iii) reputational damage.

New York Department of Financial Services. In March 2017, we entered into a consent order with the NY DFS (the 2017 NY Consent Order) that provided for the termination of the engagement of a monitor appointed pursuant to an earlier 2014 consent order and for us to address certain concerns raised by the NY DFS that primarily relate to our servicing operations, as well as for us to comply with certain reporting and other obligations. In addition, in connection with the NY DFS’ approval in September 2018, of our acquisition of PHH, we agreed to satisfy certain post-closing requirements, including reporting obligations and record retention and other requirements relating to the transfer of loans collateralized by New York property (New York loans) onto Black Knight MSP and certain requirements with respect to the evaluation and supervision of management of both Ocwen Financial Corporation and PHH Mortgage Corporation. In addition, we are prohibited from boarding any additional loans onto the current REALServicing system and we were required to transfer all New York loans off the REALServicing system by April 30, 2020. The conditional approval also modified a preexisting restriction on our ability to acquire MSRs such that the restriction applies only to New York loans and, with respect to New York loans, provides that Ocwen may not increase its aggregate portfolio of New York loans serviced or subserviced by Ocwen by more than 2% per year (based on the unpaid principal balance of loans serviced at the prior calendar year-end). This restriction will remain in place until the NY DFS determines that all loans serviced on the REALServicing system have been successfully migrated to Black Knight MSP and that Ocwen has developed a satisfactory infrastructure to board sizable portfolios of MSRs.

We continue to work with the NY DFS to address matters they continue to raise with us as well as to fulfill our commitments under the 2017 NY Consent Order and PHH acquisition conditional approval. To the extent that we fail to address adequately any concerns raised by the NY DFS or fail to fulfill our commitments to the NY DFS, the NY DFS could take regulatory action against us, including imposing fines or penalties or otherwise restricting our business activities. Any such actions could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition liquidity and results of operations.

California Department of Business Oversight. In January 2015, OLS entered into a consent order (the 2015 CA Consent Order) with the CA DBO relating to our alleged failure to produce certain information and documents during a routine licensing examination. In February 2017, we entered into another consent order with the CA DBO (the 2017 CA Consent Order) that terminated the 2015 CA Consent Order and resolved open matters between us and the CA DBO. We believe that we have completed those obligations of the 2017 CA Consent Order that have already come due, and we have so notified the CA DBO. We have certain remaining reporting and other obligations under the 2017 CA Consent Order. Pursuant to the 2017 CA Consent Order, the CA DBO has engaged a third-party administrator who, at the expense of the CA DBO, has commenced work to confirm that Ocwen has completed certain commitments under the 2017 CA Consent Order. Still outstanding, however, is confirmation of our completion of $198.0 million in debt forgiveness for California borrowers by June 30, 2019. We believe that we fulfilled this requirement during the first quarter of 2019. However, our completion of this requirement is subject to testing by the CA DBO’s third-party administrator who must confirm, among other things, that modified loans have remained current for specified time periods. If we are unable to satisfy this requirement or obtain an extension, the 2017 CA Consent Order obligates us to pay the remaining amount to the CA DBO in cash. Our debt forgiveness activities take place as we modify loans - our loan modifications are designed to be sustainable for homeowners while providing a net present value for mortgage loan investors that is superior to that of foreclosure. Debt forgiveness as part of a loan modification is determined on a case-by-case basis in accordance with the applicable servicing agreement. Debt forgiveness does not involve an expense to Ocwen other than the operating expense incurred in arranging the modification, which is part of Ocwen’s role as loan servicer. If the CA DBO were to allege that we failed to comply with our obligations under the 2017 CA Consent Order or that we otherwise were in breach of applicable laws, regulations or licensing requirements, the CA DBO could also take regulatory actions against us, including imposing fines or penalties or otherwise restricting our business activities. Any such actions could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition liquidity and results of operations.