Auto Finance

Subscribe to Auto Finance via RSS

In this episode of Moving the Metal: The Auto Finance Podcast, hosts Brooke Conkle and Chris Capurso are joined by partner Brian Casey to unpack Kentucky SB 158, a new law creating a comprehensive framework for vehicle financial protection products, including GAP waivers, excess wear and tear waivers, and vehicle value protection agreements. They explain how SB 158 designates these products as “not insurance,” imposes clear optionality and disclosure requirements, mandates a 30-day free look period, and addresses how benefits and refunds work — particularly in repossession scenarios. They also discuss what dealers, lenders, and administrators should do now to update forms, contracts, and processes, and how Kentucky’s approach may become a model for other states considering regulation of auto add-on products.

In a recent decision from the Eastern District of Virginia, the court dismissed Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) claims brought by a consumer who never received the vehicle he attempted to purchase with an auto loan. Despite acknowledging the underlying fraud in the transaction, the court held that the dispute over whether the consumer still…

In this episode of Moving the Metal: The Auto Finance Podcast, hosts Brooke Conkle and Chris Capurso break down a major FTC–Maryland AG settlement with multiple auto dealerships over alleged deceptive pricing, unauthorized add-ons, and misleading financing practices. Brooke and Chris walk through the redress and penalty structure and explain how “total price,” clear disclosure, and express informed consent are being enforced post-CARS Rule. They also discuss what dealers and auto finance companies should do now to strengthen compliance, documentation, and oversight of dealer practices.

In this second installment of Moving the Metal: The Auto Finance Podcast’s 2025 auto finance year in review, hosts Brooke Conkle and Chris Capurso unpack three emerging risk hotspots: service member auto lending, changes to Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) larger-participant supervision, and state vehicle data privacy laws. They break down the CFPB’s 2025 Servicemember Auto Lending Report, proposed shifts to the auto larger-participant threshold, and New Jersey’s first-of-its-kind vehicle data deletion law — along with what each development means for compliance programs, dealer oversight, and litigation risk. Tune in to hear how federal and state trends are reshaping auto finance risk and what companies should be doing now to stay ahead in 2026.

On April 3, Kentucky enacted SB 158, a comprehensive statute governing products that offer benefits in connection with personal property, with a particular focus on add‑on products sold with vehicle finance and lease transactions. The law creates a formal regulatory framework for “vehicle financial protection products,” provides that they are not “insurance”, and ties compliance to the state’s retail installment and consumer loan regimes. Most vehicle financial protection provisions apply to products that become effective on or after January 1, 2027.

In this episode of Moving the Metal: The Auto Finance Podcast, hosts Brooke Conkle and Chris Capurso break down two major developments turning up regulatory pressure on the auto finance industry. They unpack the FTC’s “WARNING LETTER” campaign targeting nearly 100 dealers, focused on UDAAP risks in pricing and advertising, including hidden fees, conditional pricing, mandatory add-ons, and unavailable vehicles. They also examine Senator Elizabeth Warren’s sweeping, short-fuse request for granular data comparing servicemember and civilian auto finance outcomes, signaling heightened bipartisan scrutiny of military borrowers. Tune in to hear what these letters really mean, what regulators are looking for, and how auto finance companies and dealers should be preparing now.

In this episode of Moving the Metal: The Auto Finance Podcast, hosts Brooke Conkle and Chris Capurso kick off a two-part Auto Finance Year in Review by unpacking the Fifth Circuit’s vacatur of the FTC CARS Rule, the decision by the Trump 2.0 administration not to appeal, and how states — led by California’s CARS Act and Oregon’s new auto finance law — are quickly filling the gap with their own disclosure, add-on, cancellation, and recordkeeping requirements, creating a growing state-by-state patchwork that challenges truly uniform national compliance programs for dealers, finance companies, and servicers.

On March 13, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced that it is sending warning letters to 97 auto dealership groups across the country, signaling a renewed focus on deceptive pricing practices in the retail auto sector. The letters stress that advertised prices must reflect the total price consumers will be required to pay, including all mandatory, dealer-imposed fees other than government charges like taxes. The agency frames this effort as part of a broader initiative to promote price transparency across sectors such as rental housing, ticketing and hotels, grocery delivery, and now auto sales and leasing.

Colorado lawmakers are considering legislation that would significantly expand consumer protections around motor vehicle finance and sales. House Bill 26‑1261, introduced on February 19, 2026 and currently pending before the House Business Affairs & Labor Committee, would overhaul repossession timelines for certain “qualified motor vehicles,” restrict use of vehicle-disabling technology, and create a three‑business‑day right to return certain vehicles purchased from dealers.

In this episode of Moving the Metal: The Auto Finance Podcast, hosts Brooke Conkle and Chris Capurso unpack Senator Elizabeth Warren’s February 5 data request to major auto finance companies, buy-here-pay-here dealers, and key industry trade groups about auto repossessions. They walk through the main categories of information sought — repossession activity and errors, consumer complaints and disputes, policies and training, vendor contracts, and handling of personal property — and discuss the tight 11-day response deadline and lack of a clear statutory hook for the request. Brooke and Chris also consider what this move may signal about future regulatory and enforcement activity in the auto finance space.