On remand from the United States Supreme Court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, in Consumer Fin. Prot. Bureau v. Seila Law LLC, reaffirmed a District Court grant of a petition by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Petitioner-Appellee, to enforce a civil investigatory demand issued to Seila Law LLC, Respondent-Appellant,
We reported in September of this year on a demand from multiple consumer advocacy groups to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) to rescind its April 1, 2020, credit report guidance that relaxed the Fair Credit Reporting Act’s (“FCRA”) deadlines to investigate consumer-initiated direct disputes. In a letter dated November 9, 2020, CFPB Director Kathleen
Following a Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) investigation into its credit reporting procedures, telecommunications debt collector Afni, Inc. agreed Thursday to implement additional safeguards against inaccurate reporting and pay a $500,000 civil penalty.
The CFPB’s investigation found that Afni had violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) in several ways. First, Afni had negligently furnished
New York Attorney General Letitia James and Governor Andrew Cuomo announced on November 4, 2020, that the State will continue the suspension of its debt collection efforts of medical and student debt through the remainder of the calendar year. The suspension, which was originally instituted during March 2020 as part of the state’s response to
Plaintiff Joseph Degroot defaulted on a credit card debt, which was subsequently placed with a collection agency. The agency sent the plaintiff a collection letter stating that “interest and fees are no longer being added to your account,” which the plaintiff took to mean that the account had been charged off. The debt was then
On October 13, 2020, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the “CFPB”) announced that it entered into a consent order (the “Order”) with Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation (“Nissan”) to resolve allegations that the auto finance company violated the Consumer Financial Protection Act (the “Act”). The Order requires Nissan to pay a $4 million penalty and offer
Multiple consumer advocacy groups are demanding the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) rescind its April 1, 2020, credit reporting guidance regarding the investigation of error disputes vowed at the beginning of the coronavirus pandemic.
In April, the CFPB said it would not hold companies to strict deadlines for investigating disputes that consumers have about information
On September 21, 2020, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) announced the settlement of its administrative proceeding against Lobel Financial Corporation (“Lobel”) – a California automobile lender that the CFPB claimed had engaged in unfair practices with respect to its Loss Damage Waiver (“LDW”) product. The action against Lobel alleged multiple violations of the Consumer
On September 15, 2020, after considerable delay and pursuant to a court settlement, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) released its Outline of Proposals Under Consideration and Alternatives Considered for small business lending data collection rulemaking. When the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank) was passed, Section 1071 amended the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) to require such small business data collection. Dodd-Frank requires the CFPB to comply with The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996, which provided new avenues for small businesses to participate in the federal regulatory arena and created Small Business Advocacy Review panels (SBAR panels, also known as SBREFA panels).
Section 1071 states that “in the case of any application to a financial institution for credit for women-owned, minority-owned, or small business, the financial institution shall – (1) inquire whether the business is a women-owned, minority-owned, or small business, without regard to whether such application is received in person, by mail, by telephone, by electronic mail or other form of electronic transmission, or by any other means, and whether or not such application is in response to a solicitation by the financial institution…” The purpose of Section 1071 was to facilitate the enforcement of fair lending laws. The CFPB is beginning the process of writing regulations to implement Section 1071.
The CFPB’s Outline describes the various proposals that are being considered to implement Section 1071, the relevant law, the regulatory process, and an economic analysis of the potential impacts on small entities that will be directly impacted.
In late August, the California legislature passed Assembly Bill 1864, creating a Department of Financial Protection and Innovation and bolstering legal protections for consumers.
The new Department is intended to be a state-level version of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).
For example, similar to the CFPB, the commissioner of the Department is authorized