On October 1, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) issued an advisory opinion aimed at debt collectors and emphasizing their obligations under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and Regulation F. The opinion specifically emphasizes the prohibitions on false, deceptive, or misleading representations, and unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect medical debts.
On September 24, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law a package of consumer protection laws, with three bills aimed directly at collection practices. These new laws introduce significant changes in the areas of commercial debt collection practices, medical debt reporting, and civil actions for money judgments.
On September 9, the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada granted summary judgment in favor of a debt collector in a case involving alleged violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) based on phone calls the plaintiff received related to her medical debt.
In this special crossover episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast and FCRA Focus, host Kim Phan is joined by fellow Troutman Pepper partner Stefanie Jackman and Michelle Macartney, managing partner and chief compliance officer at Bridgeforce. Together, they delve into the complexities of reporting collections activity to consumer reporting agencies. Michelle shares her extensive experience in consumer reporting compliance, offering valuable insights into the challenges and best practices for maintaining data accuracy and handling disputes. The discussion also covers the latest CFPB draft rulemaking on medical debt and its implications for consumer reporting agencies, end users, and furnishers. Tune in to learn how to navigate the intersection of FCRA and debt collection as well as discover effective compliance strategies to mitigate risks in today’s regulatory environment. Don’t miss this informative episode packed with practical tips and industry updates!
In this episode of FCRA Focus, host Kim Phan is joined by fellow Troutman Pepper partner Stefanie Jackman and Michelle Macartney, managing partner and chief compliance officer at Bridgeforce. Together, they delve into the complexities of reporting collections activity to consumer reporting agencies. Michelle shares her extensive experience in consumer reporting compliance, offering valuable insights into the challenges and best practices for maintaining data accuracy and handling disputes. The discussion also covers the latest CFPB draft rulemaking on medical debt and its implications for consumer reporting agencies, end users, and furnishers. Tune in to learn how to navigate the intersection of FCRA and debt collection as well as discover effective compliance strategies to mitigate risks in today’s regulatory environment. Don’t miss this informative episode packed with practical tips and industry updates!
On July 25, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) released an Issue Spotlight focusing on the fees associated with electronic payment platforms used by school districts to process school lunch payments. In its report, the CFPB emphasized the costs of electronic payments in K-12 schools and the potential financial strain these fees could place on lower income families.
Yesterday, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) issued Circular 2024-04 warning financial institutions about the potential illegality of nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) that could deter whistleblowing. Specifically, the Bureau addressed whether requiring employees to sign broad confidentiality agreements violates § 1057 of the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA). According to the CFPB, the answer is “yes” under circumstances that could lead an employee to reasonably believe that they would be sued or subject to other adverse actions if they disclosed suspected violations of federal consumer financial law to government investigators or a law enforcement agency.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) recently released its semi-annual regulatory agenda, outlining its planned rulemaking initiatives. The CFPB releases regulatory agendas twice a year in voluntary conjunction with a broader initiative led by the Office of Budget and Management to publish a Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory actions across the federal government. This agenda includes a mix of rules in the pre-rulemaking, proposed rule, and final rule stages, covering a wide range of topics from mortgage closing costs to financial data transparency. The CFPB has not yet posted a blog or issued a press release about the agenda.
Yesterday, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) filed a brief in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas in support of its motion to dissolve the preliminary injunction that has stayed the implementation of its credit card late fee rule. Concurrently, the Bureau also filed a notice of supplemental authority in support of their motion to dismiss or transfer on the grounds that the Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce does not have associational standing to bring the suit. Within hours, the court issued an order requiring further briefing on the issue of associational standing.
As we predicted here, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) last week proposed new and, in some cases, streamlined rules governing what mortgage servicers must do after a borrower becomes delinquent. The proposed rules incorporate some pandemic-era practices, such as allowing servicers to offer assistance without a comprehensive review of the borrower’s financial situation. According to the CFPB, the new rules would require mortgage servicers to prioritize loss mitigation over foreclosing, reduce paperwork requirements, improve communication with borrowers, and ensure critical information is provided in the borrowers’ preferred language.