In this episode of Payments Pros, co-hosts Keith Barnett and Carlin McCrory discuss the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) latest proposed rule. This rule aims to prohibit covered financial institutions from charging consumers nonsufficient funds (NSF) fees on transactions that are declined instantaneously or near instantaneously.
In this episode of The Consumer Finance Podcast, Chris Willis is joined by Partners Sheri Adler and Mary Weeks to discuss the recent uptick in SEC enforcement activity related to whistleblowers. They focus on the implications for financial institutions and other companies, particularly those targeted by the SEC for documents potentially restricting whistleblowers from reporting violations of securities laws.
On February 15, Massachusetts became the latest state to introduce legislation to regulate earned wage access (EWA) products and services. House Bill (HB) 4456 would create a new chapter to the Massachusetts Code explicitly stating that EWA services offered under the new chapter are not loans or other form of credit or debt, and voluntary tips or gratuities are not interest or finance charges. It further requires EWA providers to be licensed and provide mandatory disclosures to consumers. The bill is pending before the Joint Financial Services Committee.
We discussed the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB or Bureau) credit card late fee proposed rule here 13 months ago, and today, the Bureau announced that it has finalized the rule (Final Rule) setting a safe harbor amount for late fees at $8 and eliminating the annual inflation adjustments to that safe harbor amount, for larger card issuers. Notably, due to industry pushback during the comment period, the Final Rule does not codify the proposal that late fees must not exceed 25% of the minimum payment. The Final Rule will take effect 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.
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:
According to a recent report by WebRecon, court filings under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), and complaints filed with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) were up double digits percentages from December 2023. The biggest jump was in TCPA filings, which increased by 78.6%!
Can digital comparison-shopping operators or lead generators violate the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA) by preferencing products or services based on financial benefit? According to today’s guidance issued by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau), the answer to that question is yes. Specifically, according to the CFPB, operators of digital comparison-shopping tools can violate the CFPA’s prohibition on abusive acts or practices by steering consumers to certain products or services based on remuneration. Lead generators can also violate the CFPA if they steer consumers to one financial services provider over another based on compensation received. As is typical for the CFPB today, the Bureau has couched this guidance on its “abusive” authority under Dodd-Frank.
The United States District Court for the District of Maryland recently denied a mortgage servicer’s motion to dismiss a putative class action claim pursuant to the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) § 2605(g), providing insight as to what is required to state a claim for statutory damages with respect to alleged mishandling of escrow accounts.
Comments on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB or Bureau) proposal to collect data from auto finance businesses that acquire or originate as few as 500 financing transactions a year are due by March 25, 2024.
On February 15, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) approved amendments to the rules and regulations implementing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). The adopted Report and Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking implemented new rules regarding revocation of consent to robocalls and robotexts — clarifying rulings from 2012 and 2015. The FCC’s goal was to “strengthen consumers’ ability to revoke consent so that it is simple and easy.”