According to a recent report by WebRecon, court filings under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) rose by double digits while litigation under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) trended slightly down. Complaints filed with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) saw a modest increase.
Key point: Courts are concluding that not all data breaches should result in a lawsuit. Businesses need to consider causation and damages when responding to an incident and take steps to determine if there is no evidence of harm or traceability including on a class wide basis.
In a recent decision, the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, upheld the dismissal of a class action lawsuit filed against First National Collection Bureau, Inc. (FNCB). In an unpublished opinion, the court affirmed the lower court’s ruling that the plaintiff’s complaint failed to state a claim under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). This decision clarifies the scope of third-party communications under the FDCPA, particularly in the context of using third-party vendors for mailing collection letters.
In this engaging crossover episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast and Payments Pros, host Taylor Gess is joined by colleagues Jason Cover, Andrew Thurmond, and Samer Roshdy to explore the complexities of contracting with merchants and dealers in the point-of-sale finance sector. The discussion highlights the diverse needs of merchants and finance administrators, the impact of industry-specific regulations, and the importance of clear contractual terms. Discover the common pain points in negotiations, the role of regulatory compliance, and the evolving nature of contracts in this dynamic space. Gain valuable insights into how businesses can effectively manage these relationships and ensure compliance with state and federal laws.
On October 15, the California Hospital Association (CHA) filed a petition against the California Office of Health Care Affordability (OHCA) and related entities. The petition challenges the imposition of stringent cost targets on hospitals across California, arguing that these targets are arbitrary, capricious, and not based on comprehensive data analysis. CHA contends that the cost targets violate both state and federal laws, including the Takings and Due Process Clauses of the U.S. Constitution, by being confiscatory and lacking a clear methodology for compliance. Furthermore, the petition asserts that OHCA’s actions were prematurely implemented without adequate stakeholder engagement, potentially leading to significant operational disruptions and threatening the quality and accessibility of health care services.
Key point: All businesses struggle with cybersecurity risks presented by their service providers. New guidance from the NY DFS applies to all DFS regulated entities, but the guidance would assist any business in any industry in addressing these risks.
On October 21, 2025, the New York Department of Financial Services (the “DFS”) issued important guidance for covered entities (including all DFS licensees) for managing their cybersecurity risk related to third-party service providers (“TPSPs”). Industry Letter – October 21, 2025: Guidance on Managing Risks Related to Third-Party Service Providers | Department of Financial Services specifically includes the covered entity’s use of cloud, file transfer, AI and fintech providers (“Guidance”). According to the DFS, the “Guidance does not impose new requirements or obligations . . ..” Rather, “it is intended to clarify regulatory requirements, recommend industry best practices . . ., and promote compliance . . ..” The Guidance highlights that managing the cybersecurity risk presented by TPSPs “remains a crucial element of a Covered Entity’s cybersecurity program,” and notes that it applies to all covered entities, regardless of size.
To keep you informed of recent activities, below are several of the most significant federal and state events that have influenced the Consumer Financial Services industry over the past week.
In a significant development for lenders and borrowers alike, on October 6, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the Fox decision, leaving unresolved questions about the retroactive application of the Foreclosure Abuse Prevention Act (FAPA). This decision has shifted the focus to the New York State Court of Appeals where oral argument was heard on October 16, and potentially to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
On October 10, California Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill 483 (AB 483) into law, introducing new regulations on early termination fees in fixed term installment contracts. This legislation applies to contracts entered into or modified on or after August 1, 2026, and prohibits the use of termination fees unless specific conditions are met.
In this episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast, Chris Willis is joined by Lori Sommerfield and James Stevens to delve into the implications of President Trump’s Executive Order 14331, “Guaranteeing Fair Banking for All Americans.” This order aims to eliminate politicized or unlawful de-banking practices by prohibiting financial institutions from denying access to banking services based on political, religious, or ideological beliefs. The trio discusses the historical context of de-banking, tracing its roots back to the Obama-era Operation Choke Point, and explores the current regulatory landscape shaped by the executive order. They analyze the directives issued to federal agencies, including the Small Business Administration and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, and the potential risks and challenges facing financial institutions. Tune in to understand how this regulatory push will likely impact the banking industry and what steps institutions can take now to mitigate risks.