2026

In this episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast, Chris Willis is joined by Troutman Pepper Locke Partners Chad Fuller and Virginia Flynn for a practical, forward-looking discussion of the TCPA landscape as part of the CFS Year in Review and Look Ahead series. They explain how courts’ reduced reliance on agency interpretations is creating both opportunity and uncertainty, why plaintiffs’ attorneys are shifting hard toward do-not-call (DNC) and prerecorded-message theories, and how ongoing battles over consent, revocation, and text-message exposure are changing class action risk. The conversation closes with guidance for in-house counsel on tightening DNC compliance, managing vendors, and structuring consent and opt-out processes.

In this episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast, Chris Willis is joined by Consumer Financial Services Partners Stefanie Jackman and Nicholas O’Conner to dissect the shifting risk landscape for servicers, collectors, and debt buyers as federal scrutiny eases and state regulators surge to the forefront. As a segment of the Year in Review and Look Ahead series, the trio talks about Reg F’s post-Loper Bright staying power, the explosive growth of state medical debt restrictions and FCRA preemption battles, and the rapid spread of coerced debt/economic abuse statutes reshaping account handling. They also explore the evolving role of debt settlement companies and their use of AI, in addition to offering practical tips on building national policies and procedures to prepare for the next wave of litigation and enforcement.

Troutman Pepper Locke partner David Anthony and associate Noah DiPasquale co‑authored a recent article for the American Bar Association’s Litigation Section, “Reasonable Reinvestigation, Not Legal Adjudication: CRAs and Furnishers under the FCRA,” together with Jennifer Sarvadi of Hudson Cook. The piece examines how courts nationwide are refining what counts as a “reasonable” investigation under the Fair Credit Reporting Act’s (FCRA) reasonable procedures and reinvestigation provisions, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681e(b), 1681i, and 1681s‑2(b).

In this episode of Payments Pros, host Carlin McCrory is joined by Marissa Tartarini of Elliott Davis to explore how banks can build sustainable, scalable fintech partnerships in a shifting regulatory environment. They begin with the foundational risk questions banks should ask before choosing a partner — speed to market, in-house expertise and gaps, strategic fit, and risk appetite — then turn to practical legal and compliance considerations, including staffing, board oversight, and the need for tailored partnership agreements. Marissa and Carlin discuss the challenges of managing multiple fintech programs at once, maintaining up-to-date policies and marketing, and ensuring that growth does not outpace governance and BSA/AML controls. They highlight what separates successful programs from those that fail, lessons from terminated partnerships, and how to prepare for increasingly technical regulatory exams. Carlin and Marissa close the episode with a look at how regulators’ and banks’ views of fintech partnerships have evolved and what that means for the future of bank-fintech collaboration.

In this episode of Moving the Metal: The Auto Finance Podcast, hosts Brooke Conkle and Chris Capurso kick off a two-part Auto Finance Year in Review by unpacking the Fifth Circuit’s vacatur of the FTC CARS Rule, the decision by the Trump 2.0 administration not to appeal, and how states — led by California’s CARS Act and Oregon’s new auto finance law — are quickly filling the gap with their own disclosure, add-on, cancellation, and recordkeeping requirements, creating a growing state-by-state patchwork that challenges truly uniform national compliance programs for dealers, finance companies, and servicers.

A new discussion draft from Representative Bill Huizenga (R-MI) would significantly update Title V of the Gramm‑Leach‑Bliley Act (GLBA) to reflect how financial data is collected, shared, and monetized in today’s market. Released in connection with the March 17, 2026 House Financial Services Committee (Committee) hearing, “Updating America’s Financial Privacy Framework for the 21st Century,” the draft purports to give consumers greater control over their financial data, impose new limits on financial institutions and data aggregators, and create a more uniform national privacy regime for consumer financial information.

On March 13, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced that it is sending warning letters to 97 auto dealership groups across the country, signaling a renewed focus on deceptive pricing practices in the retail auto sector. The letters stress that advertised prices must reflect the total price consumers will be required to pay, including all mandatory, dealer-imposed fees other than government charges like taxes. The agency frames this effort as part of a broader initiative to promote price transparency across sectors such as rental housing, ticketing and hotels, grocery delivery, and now auto sales and leasing.

This article was cited in the April 1, 2026 Multifamily Dive article, “FTC Seeks Public Input on Junk Fee Rule for Rental Housing.”

The Federal Trade Commission has announced an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) to explore a new rule governing unfair or deceptive rental housing fee practices. The initiative focuses on the widening gap between advertised rent and the total amounts renters actually pay once mandatory fees and charges are added. Once the ANPRM has been published in the Federal Register, comments will be accepted for 30 days. 

On March 11, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a new Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) to revisit its Rule Concerning the Use of Prenotification Negative Option Plans. The move follows the Eighth Circuit’s 2025 decision vacating the FTC’s 2024 amendments (discussed here), which would have imposed uniform requirements on subscriptions, auto‑renewals, and trial‑to‑pay offers across all marketing channels. The ANPRM makes clear that while the FTC acknowledges that so-called negative options are widely offered and can provide benefits to both sellers and consumers, the FTC intends to address recurring billing and cancellation frictions that continue to generate a high volume of consumer complaints.