Photo of Chris Willis

Chris Willis

Subscribe to Chris Willis's Posts

Chris is the co-leader of the Consumer Financial Services Regulatory practice at the firm. He advises financial services institutions facing state and federal government investigations and examinations, counseling them on compliance issues including UDAP/UDAAP, credit reporting, debt collection, and fair lending, and defending them in individual and class action lawsuits brought by consumers and enforcement actions brought by government agencies.

Follow:Read more about Chris WillisChris's Linkedin Profile

In this episode of Moving the Metal, hosts Brooke Conkle and Chris Capurso from Troutman Pepper Locke’s Consumer Financial Services Practice Group are joined by Chris Willis to explore the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) proposed changes to the larger participant rule for auto finance. The discussion delves into the CFPB’s current regulatory activities, including its focus on revisiting and potentially reducing the number of nonbank companies subject to supervision. The team examines the implications of raising the threshold for what constitutes a larger participant in the auto finance market and how this could impact industry dynamics. They also consider the broader regulatory landscape and the potential for future changes under different administrations. Tune in for valuable insights into the evolving world of auto finance regulation and what it means for industry participants.

In this episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast, Chris Willis, co-leader of Troutman Pepper Locke’s Consumer Financial Services Regulatory practice, delves into the intricacies of corporate restructuring with Alex Rovira, a partner in the Bankruptcy + Restructuring group. They explore two key strategies — optimization restructuring and liability management transactions — that financial services companies can employ to isolate liabilities and enhance asset value. Learn how these methods can help businesses manage distress, improve credit lines, and maintain operational efficiency amid regulatory challenges and market fluctuations. Tune in for insights on aligning business structures and leveraging balance sheet adjustments to navigate financial complexities effectively.

In this episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast, Chris Willis and Louis Manetti delve into the evolving legal landscape surrounding the statute of limitations for mortgage foreclosures in Illinois. With recent cases challenging long-held assumptions, lenders face new uncertainties. This discussion provides insights into how these cases could set binding precedents, potentially altering foreclosure practices statewide. Tune in to understand the implications for lenders and servicers and learn strategies to navigate these legal challenges effectively.

On August 29, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) announced updates to its Consumer Compliance Examination Manual, marking a pivotal shift in how potential discrimination under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Fair Housing Act will be evaluated. The FDIC will now focus solely on evidence of disparate treatment, removing all references to disparate impact analysis from its examination procedures. This action follows on the heels of the OCC’s announcement on July 14 that it had removed all references to disparate impact analysis from the Fair Lending booklet of the Comptroller’s Handbook and directed examiners to cease examining banks for disparate impact liability, discussed here.

On August 26, the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) took action to enforce President Trump’s directive by issuing a letter to its network of over 5,000 lenders. This letter mandates the cessation of alleged politicized or unlawful banking practices, requiring lenders to reinstate qualified customers who were wrongfully denied access to financial services based on political, religious, or ideological beliefs. It further warns that punitive measures will be taken against lenders who fail to comply with the directives. This move marks a significant step in implementing Executive Order 14331, Guaranteeing Fair Banking for All Americans.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) is taking a significant step to modify its supervisory approach to nonbanks by publishing a proposed rule advancing a more stringent definition of “risks to consumers” in the context of § 1024(a)(1)(C) of the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA) when designating nonbanks for supervision. This move aims to limit the Bureau’s oversight of nonbanks to cases where there is a high likelihood of significant harm to consumers, thereby narrowing the scope of its supervisory authority.

In this episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast, Chris Willis, Heryka Knoespel, and Lori Sommerfield discuss overdraft and deposit account fees as they continue to dive into the CFPB’s guidance withdrawal. They highlight the regulatory and litigation impacts of the rescinded guidance and its impact on banks and financial institutions, particularly in terms of compliance burdens and fee income, while also weighing potential reputational risks and operational challenges that may arise if policy changes follow the CFPB’s withdrawn guidance. This episode also emphasizes the importance of financial institutions being prepared to defend against lawsuits, specifically those related to Regulation E and affirmative consent.

As has been well-documented, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) is navigating a period of significant uncertainty. Just last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia vacated a preliminary injunction in the case of National Treasury Employees Union v. CFPB, potentially allowing for substantial layoffs and operational changes within the agency (discussed here). Despite this development, the CFPB briefly released an ambitious rulemaking agenda on the OMB’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs website on August 15, which then became inaccessible due to “Site Maintenance.”

On August 8, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) published a series of proposed rules aimed at redefining what constitutes a “larger participant” in several key financial markets. Under § 1024 of the Consumer Financial Protection Act, the Bureau’s supervisory authority extends to “larger participants” offering consumer financial products or services. The proposed rules seek to amend existing thresholds in the consumer reporting, auto financing, consumer debt collection, and international money transfer markets to better align with current market conditions and regulatory priorities. The Bureau is accepting comments on these proposals until September 22, 2025.

On August 15, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued a decision in the case of National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau). The appellate court vacated the district court’s preliminary injunction, which had previously restricted the CFPB’s actions to halt the Bureau’s operations and terminate its employees.