In Valentine v. Mullooly, Jeffrey, Rooney & Fylnn LLP the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey found that the plaintiff had not suffered an injury in fact and therefore lacked standing to assert a claim under the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA).
In Gebreseralse v. Columbia Debt Recovery, LLC, the plaintiff, a tenant under a residential lease agreement, vacated the premises early due to concerns over the property’s condition. In response, the property management company engaged a collection agency to recover the remaining amounts claimed as due and owing under the lease.
To help you keep abreast of relevant activities, below find a breakdown of some of the biggest events at the federal and state levels to impact the Consumer Finance Services industry this past week:
On August 18, the American Financial Services Association, Consumer Bankers Association, CRE Finance Council, Equipment Leasing and Finance Association, Mortgage Bankers Association, National Association of Federally-Insured Credit Unions, Truck Renting and Leasing Association, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (collectively “the Trades”) sent a joint letter to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) urging it to stay enforcement and implementation of the small business data collection and reporting final rule under § 1071 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Final Rule) for all covered financial institutions to correct the current disparity between those institutions covered by the Texas Bankers Association et al v. CFPB injunction and those that are not covered.
On August 22, a district court judge in the Western District of New York denied the defendants’ motions to dismiss a case brought by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA) and Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA).
On August 28, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced its eighth redlining settlement under its Combatting Redlining Initiative. The settlement between the DOJ and the American Bank of Oklahoma, which originated from a referral by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), aims to resolve allegations that the bank engaged in a pattern or practice of lending discrimination by redlining historically Black neighborhoods in the Tulsa, Oklahoma Metropolitan Statistical Area (Tulsa MSA). Under the terms of the proposed consent order, American Bank of Oklahoma will pay more than $1.15 million to resolve the allegations that it engaged in a “pattern or practice” of redlining in violation of the Fair Housing Act and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act.
According to a recent report by WebRecon, court filings under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) were slightly up while filings under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) remained unchanged for the month of July. Complaints filed with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) were down for the month.
On August 18, a judge in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York granted the plaintiff’s motion for class certification for alleged violations of the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA) relating to an allegedly improper debt assignment notification.
To help you keep abreast of relevant activities, below find a breakdown of some of the biggest events at the federal and state levels to impact the Consumer Finance Services industry this past week:
Earlier this month, the California Department of Financial Regulation and Innovation (CA DFPI) announced a new rule expanding the definition of unfair, deceptive and abusive acts and practices (UDAAP) to commercial financing. Specifically, the rule makes it unlawful “for a covered provider to engage or have engaged in any unfair, deceptive, or abusive act or practice in connection with the offering or provision of commercial financing or another financial product or service to a covered entity.” The new rule also includes annual reporting requirements (described below) for any covered provider who makes more than one commercial financing transaction to covered entities in a 12-month period or who makes five or more commercial financing transactions to covered entities in a 12-month period that are “incidental” to the business of the covered provider. Importantly, this rule does not apply to banks, credit unions, federal savings and loan associations, current licensees of the CA DFPI or licensees of other California agencies “to the extent that licensee or employee is acting under the authority of” the license.