In determining the amount of a penalty for a violation of the Residential Mortgage Lending Act, which of the following would NOT be considered?

In the context of assessing penalties for violations of the Residential Mortgage Lending Act, factors such as severity of the violation, number of occurrences, and intent of the violator are all integral components of the assessment process.

The severity of the violation pertains to the impact and potential harm caused to consumers and the overall integrity of the mortgage lending system. A more severe violation typically warrants a harsher penalty. Similarly, if a violation has occurred multiple times, it suggests a pattern of behavior that can lead to increased penalties since it reflects a disregard for regulations. Intent is also significant, as a violator acting with willful negligence or fraudulent intent may face stricter penalties compared to someone who made an unintentional error.

Public opinion is not a standard factor considered in determining penalties for legal violations within the framework of the Residential Mortgage Lending Act. Regulatory bodies focus primarily on objective measures related to the violation itself rather than subjective or societal views about the conduct in question. Hence, while public sentiment might influence broader regulatory conversations or reforms, it does not play a role in penalty determination for specific violations.