A United States district court in Kentucky recently granted defendants’ motion to dismiss a case arising under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) for lack of personal jurisdiction.
Tenth Circuit Affirms Summary Judgment in Favor of Defendant in FDCPA Case on the Basis of Claim Preclusion
On August 1, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit upheld a trial court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of a debt buyer holding that claim preclusion barred the plaintiff’s claims brought under the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA) and Utah’s Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Act (UCSPA).
CFPB Advisory Opinion on Time-barred Debt Collection
In our latest episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast, Chris Willis and his colleagues Stefanie Jackman, Joe Reilly, and Jonathan Floyd discuss the CFPB’s advisory opinion related to collection of time-barred debt. The discussion includes a look at the historical events that led up to this opinion, whether or not an FDCPA-covered debt collector can sue to collect a time-barred debt, how this opinion relates to state law analogs, and key takeaways for the industry.
CFPB’s Summer Edition of Supervisory Highlights Focuses on Auto Lending/Servicing and Debt Collection Practices
On July 26, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) released the summer edition of its Supervisory Highlights report, providing a high-level overview of alleged unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices (UDAAP) identified by the agency during examinations from July 1, 2022 to March 31, 2023. The findings included in the report cover examinations in the areas of auto origination, auto servicing, consumer reporting, debt collection, deposits, fair lending, information technology, mortgage origination, mortgage servicing, payday and small dollar lending, and remittances.
How Voice AI and Machine Learning Redefine Call Center Controls
Please join Troutman Pepper Partners Chris Willis and Stefanie Jackman, along with special guest Prodigal Banking Strategy Leader Scott Hamilton for a discussion about how voice AI and machine learning contribute to more efficient call center controls plus much more. Topics include:
Nevada Enacts Law Imposing Licensing Requirements and Regulations on Student Loan Servicers
On June 14, Nevada Governor Joe Lombardo signed into law AB 332, An Act Relating to Student Education Loans, requiring, among other things, student loan servicers to be licensed by the Commissioner of Financial Institutions and regulating certain conduct of the servicers towards borrowers. The law will take effect on January 1, 2024.
132 Members of Congress File Amici Brief Urging Supreme Court to Find CFPB Funding Structure Unconstitutional
As discussed here, on October 19, 2022, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in Community Financial Services Association of America, Limited (CFSA) v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) held that the CFPB’s funding mechanism violates the appropriations clause because the CFPB does not receive its funding from annual congressional appropriations like most executive agencies, but instead, receives funding directly from the Federal Reserve based on a request by the CFPB’s director. In response, the CFPB filed a petition for a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court. On February 27, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court granted the CFPB’s petition (discussed here).
Federal Agencies Launch Inquiry Into Medical Payment Products
On July 7th, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and the U.S. Department of Treasury (collectively, the agencies) jointly issued a Request for Information (Request) seeking public comment on medical credit cards, loans, and other financial products used to pay for health care. Specifically, the agencies are interested in information regarding whether these products contribute to health care cost inflation, displace hospital provided financial assistance, lead to inaccurate or inflated medical bills, inflate bills due to financing costs, or otherwise harm patients financially.
Nevada Significantly Amends Its Collection Agency Licensing Act
On June 16, Nevada Governor Joe Lombardo signed into law Senate Bill 276, which significantly amended Nevada Revised Statute 649, otherwise known as the Nevada Collection Agencies Licensing Act (the Act). The Act regulates the activities of “collection agencies,” or any person “engaging, directly or indirectly, and as a primary or a secondary object business or pursuit, in the collection of or in soliciting or obtaining in any manner the payment of a claim owed or due or asserted to be owed or due to another.” Among other things, Senate Bill 276 expanded the exemptions from the collection agency licensing requirement to include entities that are not debt collectors under § 1692a(6)(A) – (F) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). From a practical perspective, these expanded licensure exemptions should result in many first-party servicers no longer needing to obtain a Nevada collections license. Highlights of Senate Bill 276 include:
Ninth Circuit Rejects Constitutional Challenge to Nevada Medical Debt Legislation; Also Finds Legislation Not Preempted by FDCPA or FCRA
Last week, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court’s denial of preliminary injunctive relief to plaintiffs challenging Nevada Senate Bill 248 (S.B. 248), which places new restrictions on the collection of consumer medical debt. In doing so, the court found the bill neither ran afoul of the First Amendment, nor was preempted by the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) or Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). Read on for further analysis.
By way of background, S.B. 248 amended chapter 649 of the Nevada Revised Statutes governing debt collection agencies. Passed in response to the uptick in needed medical care caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, S.B. 248 was designed to protect Nevada consumers from potential financial ruin caused by medical debt by imposing new restrictions on the collection of such debt. Among other provisions of the bill, § 7 requires debt collection agencies to send written notification to medical debtors 60 days before taking any action to collect such debt (Section 7 Notice). The Section 7 Notice must inform the debtor that the “medical debt has been assigned to the collection agency” for collection or that the “collection agency has otherwise obtained the medical debt for collection.” During the 60-day period following the notice, a collection agency cannot take “any action to collect a medical debt.” Voluntary payments during the 60-day period are permitted, but a debt collector must disclose to the debtor that “payment is not demanded or due,” and that the “medical debt will not be reported to any credit reporting agency during the 60-day notification period.” Implementing regulations define “action to collect a medical debt” as “any attempt by a collection agency or its manager or agents to collect a medical debt from a medical debtor” and provide examples of what are, and are not, “attempts” to collect such debt.