Photo of David N. Anthony

David Anthony handles litigation against consumer financial services businesses and other highly regulated companies across the United States. He is a strategic thinker who balances his extensive litigation experience with practical business advice to solve companies’ hardest problems.

In an unpublished decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently affirmed the decision of a California district court finding that the furnisher conducted a reasonable investigation under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) when it updated its credit reporting to more accurately reflect the plaintiffs’ payment history.

Earlier this week, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) released its second report detailing changes in the credit reporting of medical debts made by the three national consumer reporting agencies (CRAs) to reduce the number of medical bills on credit reports. Overall, the CFPB found the changes in the reporting of medical collections have led to a significant reduction in the number of consumers with tradelines relating to medical debts on their consumer reports. However, the total balances of medical collections on consumer reports only fell by 38% nationwide.

A U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Missouri recently granted a defendant’s summary judgment motion in a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) case, holding that the plaintiff lacked standing because she did not show an injury in fact traceable to the defendant’s alleged consumer reporting.

Recently, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) submitted letters to senators in Connecticut and California supporting their proposals to prohibit medical debt reporting.

On April 17, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) entered a consent order against BloomTech, a for-profit vocational school, and its CEO, Austen Allred, for deceptive marketing practices related to income-share agreements (ISAs). The CFPB found that BloomTech and Allred misled students about the nature and cost of their ISAs and made false claims about job-placement rates for graduates. The CFPB’s action highlights the Bureau’s ongoing scrutiny of ISAs, including the Bureau’s classification of ISAs as loans, and the Bureau’s concern that consumers may not fully understand the true cost of their educations if they use ISAs.

In March, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss a claim that the defendant violated § 1692e(8) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) when it failed to report a debt as disputed. Specifically, the court determined it could disregard the allegations in the complaint that the plaintiff had disputed the debt during a telephone call, because the defendant attached the transcript of the call to the motion to dismiss that contradicted the plaintiff’s allegations.

In this episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast, Chris Willis is joined by Partners David Anthony and David Dove to discuss the potential implications of the Supreme Court overruling the Chevron case. This case established the principle of deferring to agency interpretations of statutes they administer. While some industry insiders may view the potential overruling as beneficial, the discussion highlights the potential for increased unpredictability and instability. The guests emphasize the importance of vigilance, strategic planning, and the engagement of experienced legal counsel to navigate potential challenges and optimize business opportunities.

In a recent speech at the National Consumer Law Center/National Association of Consumer Advocates Spring Training, Seth Frotman, General Counsel of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau), focused on medical billing and collections and tenant screening and debt, emphasizing the CFPB’s enforcement of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) in these areas.

Last week, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) released the spring edition of its Supervisory Highlights report, providing a high-level overview of alleged unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices identified by the agency during examinations from April 1, 2023 to December 31, 2023. According to the report, examiners have continued to find deficiencies in consumer reporting agencies’ (CRAs) compliance with the accuracy and identity theft requirements of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) as well as deficiencies in furnishers’ compliance with the accuracy and dispute investigation requirements.