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 a June 17 blog post, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) Director Rohit Chopra announced that the CFPB intends to “move away from highly complicated rules” in favor of “simpler and clearer rules.” As part of this effort, the CFPB will be “dramatically increasing the amount of guidance it is providing to the marketplace” and that it aspires such guidance to be simple and straight forward.

In a blog post released June 15, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) continued to show its interest in credit reporting by Buy Now, Pay Later (BNPL) lenders. Recognizing the importance of credit reporting to consumers building credit profiles through payment of BNPL obligations, the CFPB encouraged BNPL lenders to report both positive and negative

On May 26, preliminary approval was sought to resolve a proposed class action, pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, against background screening company Inflection Risk Solutions LLC (Inflection). The proposed settlement seeks to resolve claims that Inflection violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by allegedly reporting misdemeanor convictions as felonies

On May 26, California Supreme Court ruled that the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) “Holder Rule” does not limit the award of attorneys’ fees where a consumer seeks fees from a holder under a state prevailing party statute.

The Holder Rule and Previous California Precedent

The FTC’s Holder Rule permits consumers to bring any legal claims

On May 26, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) announced that federal anti-discrimination law requires companies to explain to applicants the specific reasons for denying an application for credit or taking other adverse actions, even if the creditor is relying on credit models using complex algorithms.

In a corresponding Consumer Financial Protection Circular

To resolve a discovery dispute in a Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) case, a judge in the Western District of Kentucky recently compelled the production of the plaintiff’s settlement agreements with several former co-defendants. Under the “one-satisfaction rule,” the agreements reduced the remaining defendant’s potential liability, making them relevant to the case and thus discoverable.

On May 5, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) together filed an amicus brief in an appeal pending before the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Sessa v. Trans Union, LLC, No. 22-87 (2d Cir. 2022). The agencies argue that the Fair Credit Reporting Act

On April 7, the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) filed an amicus brief in an appeal, pending before the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in which the Bureau argued that the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) does not exempt furnishers from investigating disputes based on legal questions as opposed to factual

On April 7, the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (CFPB) issued a request for comment on proposed amendments to the regulation implementing the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), intended to assist consumers who are survivors of human trafficking. The proposed amendments would prohibit consumer reporting agencies (CRAs) from reporting adverse information resulting from certain types