On October 9, 2024, at 4 p.m. CT, the Fifth Circuit will hear oral arguments in the ongoing litigation challenging the FTC’s Combating Auto Retail Scams (CARS) Rule. The National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA) and the Texas Automobile Dealers Association (TADA) have raised significant procedural and data-based objections to the rule, which purportedly aims to curb deceptive sales practices and eliminate “junk fees” in the car-buying process.
A recent ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirming a decision compelling arbitration provides a “how to” guideline for using online terms and conditions to form a binding agreement.
Yesterday, the League of Southeastern Credit Unions (LSCU) and the Virginia Credit Union League (VCUL) announced plans to merge, marking the first state league consolidation since 2022. According to the leagues’ combined website, this strategic partnership will provide a larger, more diverse membership base and will have a stronger voice in industry discussions and advocacy efforts. Additionally, by implementing a modernized dues formula, the leagues’ members will benefit from increased efficiencies and cost savings.
Yesterday, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) announced it had entered into a consent order with NewDay USA, a Florida-based non-bank direct mortgage lender, over allegations that the lender misled veterans and military families about the costs associated with cash-out refinance loans. According to the Bureau, NewDay USA gave misleading and incomplete cost comparisons to borrowers refinancing in North Carolina, Maine, and Minnesota, which made the company’s loans appear less expensive relative to the borrowers’ existing mortgages.
Any business involved in motor vehicle installment financing in New Hampshire needs to assess the multiple and significant changes to a key law that have been enacted with immediate effect.
Yesterday, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas granted the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB or Bureau) motion for summary judgment on all Administrative Procedure Act (APA) challenges brought by several trade associations to the CFPB’s Final Rule under § 1071 of the Dodd-Frank Act, the “Small Business Lending Data Collection Rule” (Final Rule).
In a recent decision, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia denied a retailer’s motion to compel individual arbitration of a claim brought in a putative class action lawsuit. The complaint alleges that the retailer used deceptive sales tactics to induce the plaintiff to make an unnecessary online purchase. The court denied the retailer’s motion to compel arbitration, finding that a unilateral modification provision in its terms and conditions rendered the arbitration agreement illusory.
Yesterday, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the State of Arizona announced a joint action against Coulter Motor Company, an Arizona-based motor vehicle dealership, and its former general manager, for allegedly engaging in deceptive pricing practices and discriminatory financing treatment of Latino consumers. The complaint alleges violations of the FTC Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, and the Arizona Consumer Fraud Act. The defendants have agreed to a $2.6 million settlement, most of which will be used to provide refunds to affected consumers.
This week, the Biden-Harris Administration launched a comprehensive initiative aimed at addressing what it describes as everyday hassles that waste Americans’ time and money. This new government-wide effort, called “Time Is Money,” seeks to regulate various business practices that the administration claims add unnecessary burdens to consumers’ lives. The initiative includes actions from multiple federal agencies, including the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit recently dismissed an appeal in the case of Lewis v. Becerra, Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The appellants sought to challenge the district court’s denial of class certification despite having won their individual claims for Medicare reimbursement. The court dismissed the appeal for lack of Article III standing, emphasizing that the appellants did not demonstrate a concrete, individual injury from the denial of class certification.