InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
Illinois governor suspends consumer garnishment and wage deductions
On November 13, the Illinois governor re-issued over 30 previous Covid-related executive orders that had previously been suspended. Of note, Executive Order 2020-55, which suspended portions of the Illinois Code of Civil procedure permitting service of a garnishment summons, wage deduction summons or a citation to discover assets on a consumer debtor, was reissued in its entirety and extended through December 12, 2020.
9th Circuit affirms dismissal of bank’s quiet-title action against HOA
On November 5, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court judgment, which had dismissed for failure to state a claim a national bank’s quiet-title action against the purchaser of real property at a foreclosure sale, a Nevada homeowners association (HOA), and the HOA’s agent (collectively, “defendants”). According to the opinion, borrowers financed the purchase of a home located within the HOA through the bank, but fell behind on their HOA dues. The HOA recorded a lien on the property for the delinquent assessments, foreclosed on the home to satisfy the lien, and ultimately sold the property at a public auction to a trust, which extinguished the bank’s deed of trust. The bank filed the quiet-title action against the defendants, alleging, among other things, that the foreclosure sale was invalid and that the bank’s “deed of trust continues as a valid encumbrance against the [p]roperty.” In addition, the bank claimed that applying Nevada Revised Statutes section 116.3116 “produces a harsh result” because it prioritizes an HOA lien over “all other liens, including the first deed of trust held by the mortgage lender,” and also violates the Takings Clause and the Due Process Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The bank further argued that the foreclosure sale was not valid because it did not receive adequate notice of the sale. The district court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss, ruling, among other things, that the HOA had the right to foreclose on the property and that the bank had received adequate notice of the property’s sale.
On appeal, the 9th Circuit concluded that the bank’s constitutional rights under the Takings Clause—which provides that private property cannot be taken for public use “without just compensation”—were not violated. “Because the enactment of section 116.3116 predated the creation of [the bank’s] lien on the property, [the bank cannot] establish that it suffered an uncompensated taking,” the appellate court wrote, additionally noting that “the foreclosure proceeding itself was not a ‘taking’ because the Takings Clause governs the conduct of the government, not private actors.” With respect to the alleged violation of the Due Process Clause, the appellate court agreed with the district court’s determination that the bank had received adequate, actual notice of the delinquent assessment and the foreclosure sale.
Regulators update Senate on Covid-19
On November 10, the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs held a hearing entitled “Oversight of Financial Regulators,” which primarily focused on Covid-19-related actions taken by the Federal Reserve Board (Fed), OCC, FDIC, and NCUA since the federal financial regulators last testified in May (covered by InfoBytes here). Committee Chairman Mike Crapo (R-ID) opened the hearing by applauding the actions taken by the regulators after the passage of the CARES Act to help mitigate the economic impact of the pandemic. Crapo cautioned, however, that the regulators should continue to review and adjust their regulatory and supervisory frameworks to support economic recovery, including by “alleviat[ing] the regulatory burdens associated with a variety of asset-based regulatory thresholds on [] banks and credit unions temporarily experiencing growth from participation in recovery-orientated programs” such as the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP).
In his written statement, Fed Vice Chair for Supervision Randal K. Quarles discussed actions taken by the Fed, such as (i) issuing a set of key principles concerning Covid-related credit accommodations; (ii) updating guidance on bank examinations to “consider the unique, evolving, and potentially long-term issues that institutions face”; (iii) clarifying the Fed’s approach to Covid-related activity under the Community Reinvestment Act; and (iv) supporting the ability of banks to meet customer needs by issuing PPP loans, underwriting loans in the Main Street Lending Program, and acting as counterparties in several other facilities.
OCC Acting Comptroller Brian Brooks also discussed activities undertaken by the agency, and noted that the regulators are working on an interagency basis “on a set of rule[s] that would relieve for a period of time certain asset thresholds being tripped that trigger heightened scrutiny and heightened compliance requirements at different levels.” According to Brooks, this relief would “cap out at $10 billion, most likely, based on current conversations.” Brooks agreed with Quarles that while larger banks are “fully capable of managing those risks,” smaller banks will face difficulties.
FDIC Chairman Jelena McWilliams also provided an update on actions undertaken to provide banks flexibility while maintaining safety and soundness. McWilliams discussed five key areas: (i) responding to Covid-19 economic risks; (ii) “enhancing [] resolution readiness”; (iii) supporting communities; (iv) “fostering technology solutions and encouraging innovation”; and (v) “finalizing outstanding rulemakings,” including approving an interim final rule to provide regulatory relief to insured depository institutions that have experienced significant, but temporary, asset growth due to government stimulus efforts (covered by InfoBytes here).
NCUA Chairman Rodney E. Hood also discussed updated agency measures in response to the pandemic, such as adjusting supervision priorities to ensure that credit unions’ good-faith efforts to comply with the CARES Act are reviewed. Hood further emphasized in his written statement that “NCUA’s examiners will not criticize a credit union’s efforts to provide prudent relief for members when such efforts are conducted in a reasonable manner with proper controls and management oversight.” Hood also discussed, among other things, NCUA’s cybersecurity efforts in response to the pandemic and significant rulemaking actions, including an interim final rule that provides relief to credit unions that temporarily fall below the well-capitalized level.
The House Financial Services Committee also held a hearing later in the week to discuss the regulators' responses to the pandemic.
FHFA extends GSEs’ ability to buy mortgages in forbearance
On November 12, the FHFA announced an extension of a temporary policy related to the Covid-19 pandemic that allows Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (GSEs) to purchase qualified single-family mortgages in forbearance that meet specific eligibility criteria. The policy is now extended for loans originated through December 31. As previously covered by InfoBytes, in an effort to provide liquidity to ensure continued lending during the Covid-19 pandemic, FHFA is allowing the GSEs to buy certain mortgages that enter forbearance within the first month after loan closing, prior to delivery to the GSEs.
New York requires financial institutions to provide written notice prior to charging account inactivity fees
On November 11, the New York governor signed S4188, which requires financial institutions to provide written notice to an account holder 30 days prior to charging any fee based on account inactivity. The provision applies to financial institutions as well as mortgage brokers, mortgage bankers, or other investment entities, “whether headquartered within or outside the state.” E-mail notifications will also satisfy the written notice requirement. The act will take effect 90 days after it was signed.
OFAC sanctions Syrian individuals and entities
On November 9, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctioned 10 entities and seven individuals, including Syrian military officials, members of the Syrian Parliament, Syrian government entities, and various Syrian and Lebanese persons for allegedly supporting Bashar al-Assad regime’s petroleum industry. The individuals and entities were designated pursuant to Executive Orders 13852, 13573, and 13572. As a result, all property and interests in property belonging to the designated individuals and entities subject to U.S. jurisdiction are blocked and must be reported to OFAC. OFAC noted that its regulations “generally prohibit all dealings by U.S. persons or within (or transiting) the United States that involve any property or interests in property of blocked or designated persons,” and warned that non-U.S. persons that engage in transactions with the designated persons may expose themselves to designation.
OFAC sanctions network for procuring goods for Iranian military firm
On November 10, the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) announced sanctions against a network of six companies and four individuals for allegedly facilitating the procurement of sensitive goods—including U.S.-origin electronic components—for an Iranian military firm that was previously designated by the U.S. and the European Union for being owned or controlled by Iran’s Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces Logistics. The designations are being taken pursuant to Executive Order 13382, which aims to freeze the assets of proliferators of weapons of mass destruction along with their supporters. As a result, all property and interests in property belonging to, or owned by, the designated persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction are blocked, and U.S. persons are also generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with them. OFAC further warned foreign financial institutions that knowingly facilitating significant transactions or providing significant support to the designated persons may subject them to U.S. sanctions.
Concurrent with OFAC’s designations, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia filed a criminal complaint against two of the designated entities and one of the designated individuals for conspiring to violate U.S. export laws and sanctions against Iran.
District court holds no private right of action under E-SIGN Act
On October 26, the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado denied, in relevant part, an individual’s motion for summary judgement, holding that no private right of action exists under the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce (E-SIGN) Act. The plaintiff had asserted a violation of E-SIGN by an auto-dealership, who allegedly failed to advise the plaintiff of: (i) the right to receive paper copies (rather than electronic copies) of certain records; and (ii) the right to withdraw previously provided consent to receiving records in electronic form.
In ruling against the plaintiff’s motion, the court noted that where Congress creates specific means for enforcing a statute, a court will assume that Congress did not intend to allow any additional rights of action beyond those specified. When applied to the E-SIGN Act, the court found that no standalone remedy is necessary, as any violation of the E-SIGN Act would be “self-effectuating.” Any failure to “[d]emonstrate the proper consent for electronic service would only expose the party required to deliver the information in writing to whatever sanctions the law requiring written disclosure provides.” Therefore, the court found that “Congress appears to have provided no separate remedial scheme for violation of the E-SIGN Act's consent provisions, as no standalone remedy is necessary.”
FHA proposes private flood insurance option
On November 10, the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) issued a proposed rule which would allow mortgagors the option to purchase private flood insurance on FHA-insured mortgages for properties located in Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs). Under the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, property owners located in an SFHA, and a community participating in the National Flood Insurance Program, are required to purchase flood insurance as a condition of receiving a mortgage backed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, the Department of Veterans Affairs, the United States Department of Agriculture, or the FHA. The proposed rule would allow the purchase of private mortgage insurance for properties in SFHAs for the first time. Additionally, the proposed rule seeks comment on a compliance aid, which would “help mortgagees evaluate whether a flood insurance policy meets the definition of ‘private flood insurance.’” According to the FHA, between three and five percent of FHA borrowers could obtain a private flood insurance policy if the option becomes available.
FTC requires video conferencing provider to improve security safeguards
On November 9, the FTC announced a settlement with a video conferencing provider, resolving allegations that the company violated the FTC Act by misleading users about the levels of encryption and security offered for securing communications during meetings. The FTC’s complaint alleges that, since at least 2016, the company engaged in a series of deceptive and unfair practices by claiming it offered end-to-end encryption to secure users’ communications and—according to the FTC’s press release—“tout[ing] its level of encryption as a reason for customers and potential customers to use [its] videoconferencing services.” The FTC contends that the company actually maintained a lower level of security, which allowed the company access to the contents of users’ meetings, including sensitive personal information, and allegedly secured these meetings with a lower level of encryption than promised. Users who wanted to store recorded meetings using cloud storage provided by the company were told that the meetings were immediately encrypted, but in certain instances, unencrypted meeting recordings were allegedly stored on company servers for up to 60 days before being transferred to the secure cloud storage. In addition, the company allegedly compromised some users’ security by secretly installing software that would allow users to join a meeting by bypassing a browser safeguard designed to protect users from a common type of malware. According to the FTC, the company, among other things, failed to implement any measures to protect users’ security, failed to monitor service providers who had access to the network, lacked a systematic process for incident response, and allegedly increased users’ risk of remote video surveillance by strangers.
The proposed settlement order requires the company to (i) assess and document security risks; (ii) develop ways to manage and safeguard against such risks; (iii) deploy additional methods, including multi-factor authentication, to protect against unauthorized access of the network; and (iv) take other steps, such as implementing data deletion controls and preventing known compromised user credentials from being used. Company personnel must also review any software updates for security flaws to “ensure the updates will not hamper third-party security features.” Furthermore, the company is prohibited from misrepresenting its privacy and security practices, and is required to obtain biennial third-party assessments of its security practices (which the FTC has the authority to approve) and notify the FTC if it experiences a data breach.