Photo of Chris Capurso

Chris Capurso

Subscribe to Chris Capurso's Posts

Chris focuses his practice on consumer financial services compliance, guiding clients through the many federal and state laws and regulations that impact consumer credit programs.

Follow:Read more about Chris CapursoChris's Linkedin Profile

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.

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.

Colorado lawmakers are considering legislation that would significantly expand consumer protections around motor vehicle finance and sales. House Bill 26‑1261, introduced on February 19, 2026 and currently pending before the House Business Affairs & Labor Committee, would overhaul repossession timelines for certain “qualified motor vehicles,” restrict use of vehicle-disabling technology, and create a three‑business‑day right to return certain vehicles purchased from dealers.

In this episode of Moving the Metal: The Auto Finance Podcast, hosts Brooke Conkle and Chris Capurso are joined by New York-based colleagues Bill Foley and Joe DeFazio to unpack the newly enacted New York FAIR Act (Fostering Affordability and Integrity through Reasonable Business Practices Act). They explain how the law fundamentally expands New York’s unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices regime (from “deceptive” to now “unfair” and “abusive” practices) broadens coverage to small businesses and nonprofits, and gives the attorney general extraterritorial enforcement tools. The discussion focuses on how auto dealers and finance companies are already being singled out by New York officials, the litigation and enforcement risks this creates, and practical compliance steps — especially around add-on products, sales practices, underwriting, and emerging technologies such as AI.

In this episode of Moving the Metal: The Auto Finance Podcast, hosts Brooke Conkle and Chris Capurso unpack Senator Elizabeth Warren’s February 5 data request to major auto finance companies, buy-here-pay-here dealers, and key industry trade groups about auto repossessions. They walk through the main categories of information sought — repossession activity and errors, consumer complaints and disputes, policies and training, vendor contracts, and handling of personal property — and discuss the tight 11-day response deadline and lack of a clear statutory hook for the request. Brooke and Chris also consider what this move may signal about future regulatory and enforcement activity in the auto finance space.

In 2025, the U.S. digital asset landscape evolved more dramatically than in any year since the industry’s inception. A pro‑innovation White House, an active Congress, and key regulators — including the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the Department of…

In this episode of Moving the Metal, hosts Brooke Conkle and Chris Capurso are joined by Troutman colleagues Chris Carlson and Nam Kang from the firm’s RISE Practice Group to unpack what “Trump 2.0” really means for dealers and auto finance companies. With the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and other federal regulators pulling back, the group explains how state attorneys general (AGs) and state financial regulators are rapidly filling the void — often led by former CFPB staff now embedded in state offices — and why that creates a complex patchwork of unfair or deceptive acts or practices standards and enforcement approaches across 50 states. They discuss hot-button themes like affordability, junk fees, mini-CFPBs, and the growing role of state working groups, as well as how state AGs are leveraging prior CFPB theories, the California CARS rule, and copy‑and‑paste complaints.

On January 12, the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) issued a second invitation for comments on potential regulations under the California Consumer Financial Protection Law (CCFPL) that would require registration and reporting by firms engaged in consumer reporting and related data activities. Comments are due by February 26.

In this episode of Moving the Metal: The Auto Finance Podcast, hosts Brooke Conkle and Chris Capurso launch a new AI-focused segment, examining how artificial intelligence is changing auto finance through smarter chatbots and targeted advertising, digital loan applications and algorithmic decisioning, and enhanced fraud detection tools. They highlight the legal risks that come with these innovations — including unfair or deceptive acts or practices (UDAP), fair lending, bias, explainability, false positives, and increased compliance risk — and stress the importance of strong human oversight, governance, and complaint management as dealers and auto finance companies accelerate their adoption of AI in 2026.

On January 6, the Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC) Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau issued an order further extending the effective date of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) “revoke-all” requirement in 47 C.F.R. § 64.1200(a)(10) to January 31, 2027. That provision would require callers to treat a revocation of consent made in response to one type of informational call or text message as applying to all future calls and text messages from that caller on unrelated matters. The Bureau found good cause to continue the waiver while the FCC reviews comments filed in response to its 2025 Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, which specifically asks whether the revoke-all rule should be modified or replaced to give consumers more tailored control over unwanted calls. The FCC also noted that requiring companies to implement costly, enterprise-wide changes now could result in unnecessary compliance expenditures if the rule is later revised.