As discussed here, in August 2020, a district court for the Middle District of Tennessee held that a medical provider’s third-party billing servicer did not qualify as a debt collector under the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA) because the debt was not in default when it was placed with the extended billing office
Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita and the Indiana Department of Financial Institutions announced a settlement in excess of $250,000 with Integrity Acceptance Corp., affiliated companies, and their owners to resolve allegations that they originated personal loans without the required license, contracted for charges in excess of the maximum allowable rate, misrepresented finance charges, and failed to disclose prepaid finance charges in violation of the Indiana Uniform Consumer Credit Code and Indiana Deceptive Consumer Sales Act. As part of the settlement, the entities will forgive $223,685 in loans, pay $33,991 in restitution, and pay $33,000 in civil penalties and costs to the state. The entities and their owners are also enjoined from engaging in similar conduct in the future.
Yesterday, a three-judge panel of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals issued a unanimous opinion declining to follow the Fifth Circuit’s decision in Community Financial Services Association of America, Ltd. v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) finding no “support for the Fifth Circuit’s conclusion” that the CFPB’s funding structure is unconstitutional in Supreme
An Illinois federal district court recently denied a creditor-defendant’s motion for summary judgment in a Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) case brought by a consumer who questioned why his debt was being reported twice — as both a tradeline with the original creditor and as a tradeline with a third-party collection agency. The court’s opinion
On March 16, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) released a compliance bulletin entitled Unfair Billing and Collection Practices After Bankruptcy Discharges of Certain Student Loan Debts. The compliance bulletin focused on the treatment of certain private student loans following a bankruptcy discharge. It’s also another example of the CFPB’s efforts to expand bankruptcy
On March 8, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) released a special edition of its Supervisory Highlights report, focusing once again on fees assessed in relation to bank account deposits, auto loan servicing, mortgage loan servicing, payday lending, and student loan servicing. As the Supervisory Highlights reveal, the CFPB continues to scrutinize and challenge fees
On February 27, Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon signed into law House Bill 284, which requires debt buyers be licensed as “collection agencies” starting July 1, 2023.
The bill was introduced at the request of the Receivables Management Association International (RMAI) to address an emerging debate as to whether debt buyers should have been licensed
As reported here, on September 9, 2022, the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (CA DFPI) published a notice of rulemaking action, proposing amendments to the Student Loan Servicing Act.
The proposed rules clarify that all education financing products, including income share agreements (ISAs) and installment contracts, are student loans, and servicers of
A district court in the Northern District of California recently denied in part a motion for judgment on the pleadings in a case alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), and California’s Rosenthal Act involving collection texts sent to a consumer.
The Arizona Court of Appeals recently clarified how the state’s debt collection statute of limitations applies to debt created by a land sale contract.
Arizona has a six-year statute of limitations to enforce installment debt created by a written contract, which is codified at A.R.S. § 12-548. A lender must enforce the debt through foreclosure