On December 3, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) issued a proposed rule for public comment aimed at amending Regulation V, which implements the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The proposed rule seeks to redefine (and, in some cases, rewrite) key terms and provisions within the FCRA, particularly focusing on the activities of purported “data brokers.”
In the latest episode of Payments Pros, hosts Keith Barnett and Carlin McCrory discuss a significant Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) enforcement action against Global Tel Link Corporation (GTL), issued on November 14. This action resulted in a consent order addressing chargebacks, alternate payment channel fees, and handling of inactive accounts.
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 shocking development yesterday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a per-curiam, single-sentence order purporting to “clarify” its prior stay of the compliance date for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) payday loan rule. The new order provides that the rule will go into effect on March 30, 2025, 286 days after the Supreme Court entered its judgment in the CFSA lawsuit and not 286 days after the Fifth Circuit’s subsequent decision not to rehear the case en banc. The new order does not even attempt an explanation on how it conforms with the earlier order that the rule would be stayed “until 286 days after resolution of the appeal.”
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 this episode, Brooke Conkle and Chris Capurso, attorneys in the firm’s Consumer Financial Services practice, are joined by Partner Ethan Ostroff to discuss the recent Supreme Court of California decision in Rodriguez vs. FCA US. They explore recent cases from the court that impact auto finance, this case’s background, the court’s reasoning, and the significant impact this ruling may have on manufacturers, dealers, and auto finance companies. The discussion also touches on the broader implications for consumer protection laws in California and the potential shift in legal strategies for both plaintiffs and defendants in the auto finance industry.
California is famously inhospitable to arbitration. In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down California laws disfavoring arbitration on no fewer than six occasions between 1987 and 2022.
Last month, we discussed the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation’s (DFPI) newly approved regulations for direct-to-consumer earned wage access (EWA) products. These regulations, approved by the Office of Administrative Law, marked a significant shift in the regulatory landscape for EWA providers, classifying these products as loans under the California Financing Law and imposing new registration requirements. The regulations are set to become effective on February 15, 2025, however, if you are a financial service provider operating in California in one of the four industry categories listed below, you must complete an application and register with DFPI before Feb. 15, 2025 to continue operating legally in the state.
Earlier this month, we discussed the lawsuit filed by ACA International, LLC and Collection Bureau Services, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) and Director Rohit Chopra. The lawsuit challenges the CFPB’s October 1, 2024 advisory opinion on medical debt collection practices. The plaintiffs are seeking an order vacating the advisory opinion and a stay of the effective date pending the conclusion of the case.
On November 18, the plaintiff trade groups in Community Financial Services Association of America, Ltd.(CFSA) v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) filed an Opposed Motion for Clarification of Stay Pending Appeal asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to clarify that its stay of the compliance date for the CFPB’s payday loan rule extends until the time for filing a new petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court has expired or, if the petition is filed, until the Supreme Court finally disposes of the case. At a minimum, the trade groups ask the Fifth Circuit to clarify that its existing stay expires 286 days after the court’s recent issuance of its mandate (that is, August 25, 2025) and not on March 30, 2025.