Photo of Ethan G. Ostroff

Ethan G. Ostroff

Subscribe to Ethan G. Ostroff's Posts

Ethan’s practice focuses on financial services litigation and compliance counseling, as well as digital assets and blockchain technology. With a long track record of successful litigation results across the U.S., both bank and non-bank clients rely on him for comprehensive advice throughout their business cycle.

Follow:Read more about Ethan G. OstroffEthan G.'s Linkedin Profile

In our previous post, we discussed the New York City Department of Consumer and Worker Protection’s (NYC DCWP) decision to delay the enforcement of the amended debt collection rules from December 1, 2024, to April 1, 2025. This postponement was in response to industry concerns and a legal challenge filed by ACA International, Inc. and Independent Recovery Resources, Inc. Since then, NYC DCWP also announced it would delay the effective date for the amended rules to April 1, 2025 to align with the enforcement date.

Late last month, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed suit against Global Circulation, Inc. (GCI) and its owner for engaging in deceptive and abusive debt collection practices. According to the FTC, the Georgia-based debt collector tricked consumers into paying more than $7.6 million in bogus debt. The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division, alleges violations of Section 5(a) of the FTC Act, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLB Act).

On November 1, ACA International, LLC and Collection Bureau Services, Inc. filed a lawsuit against the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) and Director Rohit Chopra, challenging the CFPB’s recent advisory opinion on medical debt collection practices. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, challenges the CFPB’s authority and the procedural validity of the advisory opinion. The plaintiffs are seeking an order vacating the advisory opinion and a stay of the effective date pending the conclusion of the case.

On October 18, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed a district court’s vacatur of a maritime attachment order, providing a detailed analysis of the requirements for personal and in rem jurisdiction over attached property under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

In the latest episode of The Crypto Exchange, host Ethan Ostroff is joined by Addison Morgan to discuss the recent CFTC enforcement action against Uniswap. The CFTC alleged that Uniswap violated the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) by facilitating retail commodity transactions on behalf of non-eligible contract participants (i.e., retail consumers) through its decentralized exchange, which enabled consumers to purchase and sell ERC-20 tokens that track the prices of Bitcoin and Ether and offer their holder a potential compounded yield of approximately two times the consumer’s initial investment.

Earlier this week, we discussed the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) final amendments to the Negative Option Rule, now retitled the Rule Concerning Recurring Subscriptions and Other Negative Option Programs. These amendments, which are set to take effect 180 days after publication in the Federal Register, are purportedly aimed at stopping deceptive and unfair practices in negative option marketing. However, the rule has now drawn a legal challenge.

Yesterday, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) issued its final rule on personal financial data rights, purportedly aimed at enhancing consumer control over their financial data and promoting competition in the financial services industry. According to the Bureau’s press release, “[t]he rule requires financial institutions, credit card issuers, and other financial providers to unlock an individual’s personal financial data and transfer it to another provider at the consumer’s request for free… help[ing] lower prices on loans and improve customer service across payments, credit, and banking markets.” Later that same day, a complaint was filed challenging the Bureau’s authority.