On December 10, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced that it is distributing more than $540,000 in refunds to victims of an abusive debt collector group. The debt collectors allegedly threatened consumers with lawsuits or arrest for debts that they might not have even owed.
On December 6, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) announced an order asserting supervisory authority over Google Payment Corp. (GPC), a subsidiary of Google LLC. This decision was based on alleged “risks to consumers” associated with GPC’s retired peer-to-peer (P2P) payment product. The CFPB’s order, however, does not assert that GPC violated any laws or engaged in wrongdoing. Instead, it relies on a relatively small number of unverified consumer complaints to justify future examinations, even though GPC stopped offering the product.
In a significant development in the ongoing litigation over the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB or Bureau) Final Rule on credit card late fees, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas denied the CFPB’s motions to dismiss the Fort Worth Chamber of Commerce, transfer the case to the District of Columbia, and dissolve the preliminary injunction. This ruling follows the court’s earlier request for further briefing on the issue of associational standing, as discussed in our prior blog post, here.
Late last year, we discussed the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB or Bureau) proposed rule aimed at supervising larger technology companies offering digital wallets and payment apps. On November 21, the CFPB finalized this rule, which will bring significant changes to the oversight of nonbank digital payment companies. This final rule is set to take effect 30 days after its publication in the Federal Register.
Yesterday, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (FRB), Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), National Credit Union Administration (NCUA), Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), and state financial regulators issued a joint statement to provide covered financial institutions with strategies and examples of effective risk management and other practices to identify, prevent, and respond to elder financial exploitation. The agencies emphasized that the joint statement does not establish new supervisory expectations or impose new regulatory requirements.
On December 3, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) issued a proposed rule for public comment aimed at amending Regulation V, which implements the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The proposed rule seeks to redefine (and, in some cases, rewrite) key terms and provisions within the FCRA, particularly focusing on the activities of purported “data brokers.”
In a shocking development yesterday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit issued a per-curiam, single-sentence order purporting to “clarify” its prior stay of the compliance date for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) payday loan rule. The new order provides that the rule will go into effect on March 30, 2025, 286 days after the Supreme Court entered its judgment in the CFSA lawsuit and not 286 days after the Fifth Circuit’s subsequent decision not to rehear the case en banc. The new order does not even attempt an explanation on how it conforms with the earlier order that the rule would be stayed “until 286 days after resolution of the appeal.”
California is famously inhospitable to arbitration. In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down California laws disfavoring arbitration on no fewer than six occasions between 1987 and 2022.
Last month, we discussed the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation’s (DFPI) newly approved regulations for direct-to-consumer earned wage access (EWA) products. These regulations, approved by the Office of Administrative Law, marked a significant shift in the regulatory landscape for EWA providers, classifying these products as loans under the California Financing Law and imposing new registration requirements. The regulations are set to become effective on February 15, 2025, however, if you are a financial service provider operating in California in one of the four industry categories listed below, you must complete an application and register with DFPI before Feb. 15, 2025 to continue operating legally in the state.
Earlier this month, we discussed the lawsuit filed by ACA International, LLC and Collection Bureau Services, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) and Director Rohit Chopra. The lawsuit challenges the CFPB’s October 1, 2024 advisory opinion on medical debt collection practices. The plaintiffs are seeking an order vacating the advisory opinion and a stay of the effective date pending the conclusion of the case.