Photo of Brooke Conkle

Brooke Conkle

Subscribe to Brooke Conkle's Posts

Brooke Conkle offers consumer-facing companies compliance counseling and litigation services to help them address federal and state consumer protection laws. Recognizing the challenges facing financial services companies, she provides in-depth analysis of complex issues related to consumer protection and compliance.

Follow:Read more about Brooke ConkleBrooke's Linkedin Profile

In this special crossover episode between Moving the Metal and The Consumer Finance Podcast, Brooke Conkle, Chris Capurso, and Chris Willis analyze the first 100 days of the second Trump administration, focusing on its impact on the auto-finance industry. They discuss the anticipated enforcement slowdown by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), unexpected halts in supervisory activities, and leadership changes at the Federal Trade Commission and CFPB. The conversation highlights the administration’s focus on consumer fees, the evolving role of state regulators, and shifts in discrimination theories impacting compliance practices. This episode provides insights into strategic regulatory changes and offers guidance for navigating the complexities of the auto-finance sector in 2025.

In response to the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) request for input on unnecessary compliance burdens, the debt collection industry, led by ACA International, is advocating for significant reforms to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). Their primary focus is on eliminating rules that impose undue compliance burdens and conflict with existing debt collection regulations. Key proposals include the revocation of the “Revoke All” rule, restoration of the Established Business Relationship (EBR) exemption, and harmonization of TCPA rules with the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA).

On June 5, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a writ of certiorari as improvidently granted, leaving unresolved a significant question regarding class-action certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. The question presented (and left unanswered by the majority) in Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings (Labcorp) v. Davis was whether a federal court may certify a damages class that includes both injured and uninjured class members. The dismissal has sparked considerable debate, particularly highlighted by Justice Kavanaugh’s dissent, which provides a compelling argument against the court’s dismissal.

In this special crossover episode between Moving the Metal and The Consumer Finance Podcast, Brooke Conkle, Chris Capurso, and Chris Willis analyze the first 100 days of the second Trump administration, focusing on its impact on the auto-finance industry. They discuss the anticipated enforcement slowdown by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), unexpected halts in supervisory activities, and leadership changes at the Federal Trade Commission and CFPB. The conversation highlights the administration’s focus on consumer fees, the evolving role of state regulators, and shifts in discrimination theories impacting compliance practices. This episode provides insights into strategic regulatory changes and offers guidance for navigating the complexities of the auto-finance sector in 2025.

In a recent decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit clarified the expectations for furnishers when investigating consumer disputes under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). In Suluki v. Credit One Bank, No. 23-721 (2d Cir. May 28, 2025), the Second Circuit emphasized that the FCRA requires furnishers to conduct reasonable, not perfect, investigations into disputed accounts. The opinion also cements the fact that summary judgment is possible — and appropriate — when a furnisher conducts a reasonable investigation of a credit dispute.

In this episode of Moving the Metal: The Auto Finance Podcast, Brooke Conkle and Chris Capurso explore the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) recent memo detailing its supervision and enforcement priorities for 2025. They discuss the implications for the auto finance industry, focusing on the CFPB’s expected – and unexpected – shifts for the year, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act and data furnishing issues, and the ongoing scrutiny of fees. Brooke and Chris analyze the impact of federalism on regulatory practices, highlighting the CFPB’s approach to state authority and joint examinations. They also examine the shift toward consumer remediation over penalties. Tune in to understand how these priorities might affect your business operations and compliance strategies in the coming years.

On May 16, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed into law CS/CS/SB 232, aimed at refining debt collection practices within the state. Among other things, the amendment to the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act clarifies that prohibited contact between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. in debt collection does not include email communication because such contact is less invasive than telephone calls. 

On May 2, Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin signed Senate Bill 1212 (SB 1212) into law, introducing new requirements and prohibitions under the Virginia Consumer Protection Act. Specifically, SB 1212 targets the disclosure of mandatory fees and surcharges in consumer transactions.

In this episode, hosts Brooke Conkle and Chris Capurso delve into the latest TransUnion report on credit industry insights for the fourth quarter of 2024. With auto finance trends revealing rising loan-to-value ratios, increasing monthly payments, and growing account delinquencies, the industry potentially faces expected – and unexpected – challenges in the coming months. Join…

As of April 27, 2025, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) had not filed a petition for a writ of certiorari to appeal the Fifth Circuit’s decision vacating the Combating Auto Retail Scams Trade Regulation Rule (CARS Rule). The ruling, which was issued in response to a petition by the National Automobile Dealers Association and the Texas Automobile Dealers Association, challenged the procedural validity of the FTC’s rulemaking process. The court found that the FTC failed to issue an advance notice of proposed rulemaking as required leading to the vacating of the rule.