On July 25, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) released an Issue Spotlight focusing on the fees associated with electronic payment platforms used by school districts to process school lunch payments. In its report, the CFPB emphasized the costs of electronic payments in K-12 schools and the potential financial strain these fees could place on lower income families.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) recently released its semi-annual regulatory agenda, outlining its planned rulemaking initiatives. The CFPB releases regulatory agendas twice a year in voluntary conjunction with a broader initiative led by the Office of Budget and Management to publish a Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory actions across the federal government. This agenda includes a mix of rules in the pre-rulemaking, proposed rule, and final rule stages, covering a wide range of topics from mortgage closing costs to financial data transparency. The CFPB has not yet posted a blog or issued a press release about the agenda.
Yesterday, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) filed a brief in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas in support of its motion to dissolve the preliminary injunction that has stayed the implementation of its credit card late fee rule. Concurrently, the Bureau also filed a notice of supplemental authority in support of their motion to dismiss or transfer on the grounds that the Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce does not have associational standing to bring the suit. Within hours, the court issued an order requiring further briefing on the issue of associational standing.
On April 17, 2024, Virginia enacted HB 1519 taking a significant step towards amending the Virginia Consumer Protection Act (VCPA) to prohibit creditors from charging fees for accepting electronic payments in connection with credit transactions in Virginia. However, this amendment will not become effective unless the Virginia General Assembly reenacts the bill in 2025. Between now and then, the Virginia State Corporation Commission will assess this change and report its findings to the General Assembly by December of this year.
On June 18, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals granted the plaintiffs’ petition for a writ of mandamus, effectively halting the transfer of the lawsuit challenging the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB or Bureau) credit card late fee rule from a Texas federal district court to the District of Columbia. This decision marks another pivotal moment in the ongoing legal battle over the CFPB’s Final Rule, which has seen a complex procedural history unfold over the past few months.
Yesterday, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) announced it has finalized a rule outlining the qualifications to become a recognized industry Standard Setter body (Standard Setter Rule). These bodies will be instrumental in issuing standards that assist companies in complying with the forthcoming Personal Financial Data Rights Rule under Section 1033 of the Consumer Financial Protection Act (Section 1033 Rule). The Standard Setter Rule outlines the attributes that these bodies must exhibit to gain recognition from the CFPB. It also provides a comprehensive guide detailing the application process for recognition and the CFPB’s evaluation methodology.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) has issued a circular warning covered persons that including unlawful or unenforceable terms and conditions in consumer contracts can violate the prohibition on deceptive acts or practices in the Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA).
Yesterday, the lawsuit challenging the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB or Bureau) credit card late fee rule (Final Rule) was ordered to be transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas to the District Court for the District of Columbia (D.D.C.) for the second time in as many months. The court’s decision was largely based on the same analysis as the first transfer order.
On May 10, a Texas federal court granted a preliminary injunction enjoining the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) from implementing the credit card late fee rule, most recently discussed here. The court found the plaintiffs demonstrated a likelihood of success based on their reliance on the Fifth Circuit’s decision in CFPB v. Community Financial Services Association of America, Ltd. finding that the CFPB’s “double-insulated funding scheme is unconstitutional.” The court further found that the balance of interest test weighed in the plaintiffs’ favor because if the court denied the injunction, “[p]laintiffs face an enormous undertaking based upon a potentially unconstitutional rule,” whereas if the court granted the injunction “the CFPB is relatively unaffected because the Final Rule has not yet gone into effect.”
Today, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) published an Issue Spotlight focusing on consumer complaints relating to credit card rewards programs. The report notes that credit card companies often focus marketing efforts on rewards, like cash back and travel, instead of on interest rates and fees. However, the CFPB has previously reported that consumers who carry debt from month to month earn just 27% of rewards at major credit card companies, while paying 94% of the interest and fees that those companies charged. In its analysis of several hundred complaints relating to these rewards programs, the Bureau identified four recurring themes: 1) vague or hidden promotional conditions; 2) devalued rewards; 3) customer service issues that delay or block reward redemption; and 4) issuers unilaterally revoking reward balances.