InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
Department of Labor Guidance Clarifies Classification of Employees Under Fair Labor Standards Act
On July 15, the Wage and Hour Division of the Department of Labor (DOL) issued guidance to employers in determining whether a worker should be classified as an employee or independent contractor under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The Guidance first noted the “problematic trend” in misclassifying workers as independent contractors and the potential adverse effects of such misclassification, including the loss of workplace protections such as minimum wage, overtime compensation, unemployment insurance, and workers’ compensation, as well as the loss of tax revenues and the creation of an uneven playing field for employers. Beginning with the expansive FLSA definition of “employ” and applying a detailed six factor “economic realities” test, rather than a narrower common law control test, the Guidance concludes that most workers are employees under the FLSA’s broad definitions.
Special Alert: CFPB Launches First Monthly Complaint Report Providing Snapshot of Consumer Trends
On July 16, 2015, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB” or “Bureau”) launched the first in a new series of monthly complaint reports highlighting key trends from consumer complaints submitted to the CFPB. Importantly, its monthly report provides significant detail on the complaints the CFPB has received, including the names of the companies that received the largest number of complaints.
Currently, the most-complained-about companies are also the largest bank and nonbank financial institutions in the country. Since these institutions have the highest numbers of customers, it is only natural that they have received the highest number of complaints. On the same day as the monthly report’s release, CFPB Director Richard Cordray provided remarks at an Americans for Financial Reform event in Washington, D.C. Director Cordray noted that in future monthly reports, the CFPB hopes to “normalize” its consumer complaint data by accounting for financial institutions’ respective size and volume. To that end, the CFPB issued a Request for Information seeking input on ways to enable the public to more easily understand company-level complaint information and make comparisons. The comment period closes August 31, 2015.
The report also provides data on complaint volume, state and local complaint information, and trends relating to specific consumer financial products or services. In June 2015, for example, debt collection was the most-complained-about product or service with the 32% of complaints filed with the Bureau, while complaints relating to mortgages and credit reporting were next in line.
Going forward, each monthly report will spotlight a particular financial product and geographic area. In the first report, the CFPB closely examines debt collection complaints and complaints from consumers in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
The CFPB began accepting complaints in July 2011 and launched its Consumer Complaint Database in June 2012, which is the nation’s largest public collection of consumer financial complaints. As of July 1, 2015, the CFPB has handled 650,700 complaints.
In its press release for the monthly report, the Bureau issued a reminder that it expects companies to respond to CFPB complaints within 15 days. The Bureau also expects companies to describe the steps they have taken or intend to take to resolve each consumer complaint. In fact, in its monthly report, the Bureau provided statistics on how often certain debt collection companies were “untimely” in responding to complaints.
Notably, the CFPB stressed that complaints inform the Bureau’s work and can directly feed into its supervision and enforcement prioritization process. “Consumer complaints are the CFPB’s compass and play a central role in everything we do. They help us identify and prioritize problems for potential action,” said CFPB Director Cordray. The publication of this monthly report, together with continuing consumer complaint initiatives from the CFPB, highlights the critical importance of developing an effective complaint management program.
* * *
Questions regarding the matters discussed in this Alert may be directed to any of our lawyers listed below, or to any other BuckleySandler attorney with whom you have consulted in the past.
- Clinton R. Rockwell, (310) 424-3901
- Jeffrey P. Naimon, (202) 349-8030
- John P. Kromer, (202) 349-8040
- Joseph M. Kolar, (202) 349-8020
Treasury Deputy Secretary Raskin Delivers Remarks on Cybersecurity in the Financial Sector
On July 14, Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Sarah Bloom Raskin delivered remarks at the American Bankers Association Summer Leadership meeting in Baltimore. Speaking on cybersecurity and cyber-resiliency in banking and the financial sector generally, Raskin’s remarks continued her December 2014 remarks in Austin at the Executive Leadership Cybersecurity Conference regarding three main areas, including (i) baseline protections, (ii) information sharing, and (iii) response recovery. According to Raskin, since December the growing number of cyberattacks – including against health insurers and the federal government’s Office of Personnel Management – has made the government and public more mindful of the serious threat posed by cyberattacks. Accordingly, cybersecurity has seen a “profoundly positive cultural change,” moving beyond just the purview of IT specialists. Deputy Secretary Raskin’s most recent remarks added 10 follow-up questions for banks and financial entities to consider, including whether cybersecurity is incorporated into the bank’s governance systems, security controls are tailored to specific cyber risks presented (as opposed to a “one-size fits all” approach), enhanced controls are implemented and adequate training provided, and basic “cyber hygiene” practices (including multi-factor authentication) are followed. Raskin also emphasized the need to appropriately tailor cyber risk insurance.
New York AG Schneiderman Settles with Auto Dealers Over Alleged Deceptive Auto Advertising
On July 14, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman announced two settlements with auto dealers over allegedly deceptive advertising practices. The first settlement was reached with a White Plains-based auto dealer that allegedly misled consumers by promoting, in its print and online ads, illusory sale and lease prices by including “discounts or rebates that were not available to most consumers, and thus, did not represent the actual sale or lease prices.” According to the Attorney General, rebates or discounts offered to “military” or “college graduates” were among the deceptive advertisements used by the auto dealer. An investigation by the AG’s Office revealed that the dealership would only make the rebates or discounts available to certain military personnel and recent college graduates. In addition to failing to comply with the Attorney General’s Advertising Guidelines for Automobile Dealers, the Attorney General alleged that the ads used footnotes and asterisks that contradicted or materially modified the principal message of the advertisements. The dealership will pay $32,500 to the state and has agreed to reform its advertising practices.
In a separate action, the Attorney General announced a settlement resolving allegations that 22 dealerships “persistently defrauded consumers with misleading promotions and fraudulent sales tactics.” According to the Attorney General’s office, the dealers’ advertisements included certain game cards that led consumers to believe that they would be guaranteed winners of certain items – such as cash, a free vehicle, or an Apple iPad – if they received a winning ticket containing three matching symbols. However, virtually none of the consumers won a prize when they brought in their winning tickets to the dealers. In addition to misleading game cards, the dealers were alleged to have charged unauthorized fees for vehicle maintenance plans that had not been requested by purchasers and to have upcharged the retail sales price on cars to effectively nullify discounts offered to consumers. Under the terms of the settlement agreement, the dealers will pay $310,000 in penalties and restitution.
DC Circuit Bars Retroactive Application of Dodd-Frank Act Provisions Permitting SEC to Bar Association with Municipal Advisors and Rating Organizations
On July 14, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that Dodd-Frank Act provisions authorizing the SEC to punish certain misconduct by barring association with municipal advisors and rating organizations may not be applied with respect to misconduct that took place prior to the effective date of the provisions. Koch et al. v. SEC, No. 14-1134 (D.C. Cir. Jul. 14, 2015). The Koch appeal arose from an SEC finding that the defendants had violated the securities laws by engaging in a market manipulation practice known as “marking the close,” and the SEC’s imposition of sanctions that, among others, prohibiting Koch from associating with municipal advisors and rating organizations. The DC Circuit upheld the finding of violations, but vacated the part of the order barring Koch from associating with municipal advisors and rating organizations on the basis the relevant Dodd-Frank provisions authorizing that sanction had not been enacted at the time of the misconduct. The court determined that applying those provisions was impermissibly retroactive, as there was no showing that Congress intended the provisions to apply retroactively and because it triggered additional legal consequences not existing at the time of the misconduct. The court did not disturb the other remedial orders in the case, including bars to association with other securities industries.
OFAC Publishes Venezuela Sanctions Regulations
On July 10, OFAC published regulations to implement the Venezuela Defense of Human Rights and Civil Society Act of 2014 and Executive Order 13692. The Act required the President to impose targeted sanctions on certain persons determined to be responsible for significant acts of violence or serious human rights abuses against antigovernment protesters in Venezuela, and to have ordered, or otherwise directed, the arrest or prosecution of certain persons in Venezuela. The Executive Order set forth standards for designating and suspending entry into the United States of corresponding persons in Venezuela. The regulations provide the framework for blocking property or interests in property of persons designated according to the Executive Order. According to OFAC, the regulations are currently in “abbreviated form” and the agency will issue a more comprehensive set of regulations that may provide further interpretive guidance, general licenses, and statements of licensing policy.
Mortgage Company Owner and Others Plead Guilty to Mortgage Fraud Scheme Involving FHA-Insured Loans
On July 14, the DOJ, in coordination with HUD’s Office of Inspector General and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida, announced that a Miami-area real estate developer and mortgage company owner, his business partner, and a senior underwriter with the mortgage company each pleaded guilty to a mortgage fraud scheme that resulted in $64 million in losses to the FHA. According to the August 2014 indictment, the three defendants knowingly participated in a scheme to alter important information contained in potential borrowers’ loan applications so that they appeared qualified for FHA-insured loans when, in reality, they were not qualified. According to the DOJ, the developer/owner and his business partner “admitted to pressuring their employees to approve and close loans using earnings statements and verification of employment forms that made it appear as if the borrowers had higher incomes and more favorable work histories than they actually did, and documents falsely improving or explaining borrowers’ credit histories.” The senior underwriter admitted to providing false information to her co-workers and endorsing borrowers’ applications when she knew that they did not qualify for the loans. Eventually, many of the loans went into foreclosure and HUD was obligated to pay the outstanding loan balances to the financial institution investors. To date, 25 individuals have pleaded guilty to offenses related to this mortgage fraud scheme.
HUD Issues Guidance Based On Equal Access Rule
On July 13, HUD announced guidance regarding discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, and marital status. The guidance on Multifamily Assisted and Insured Housing Programs was intended to clarify the 2012 Equal Access to Housing in HUD Programs Regardless of Sexual Orientation or Gender Identity Rule (“Equal Access Rule”). HUD clarified that, in addition to individual program eligibility requirements established by HUD, a determination of eligibility for housing that is assisted by HUD or subject to a mortgage insured by the FHA “will be made available without regard to actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity, or marital status.” The guidance also clarifies that owners, administrators, and other recipients and sub-recipients of HUD funds associated with HUD-assisted housing or housing whose financing is insured by HUD may not inquire about the sexual orientation or gender identity of an applicant for, or occupant of, such housing, and notes that the rule is applicable whether such housing is renter or owner occupied. HUD noted that future Management and Occupancy Reviews may include a review for compliance with the Equal Access Rule. The guidance was coordinated with the July 13 White House Conference on Aging, with the White House emphasizing that the Equal Access Rule also applies to Section 202 Supportive Housing for the Elderly.
SEC Settles with Post It-Eating Middleman in Law Firm Insider Trading Case
On July 13, the SEC announced a settlement with Frank Tamayo, who acted as a middleman in a $5.6 million insider trading scheme. According to the SEC, a law firm clerk used the firm’s internal databases to access confidential information concerning clients’ pending corporate transactions, and tipped Tamayo at coffee shops to the pending transactions. Tamayo wrote ticker symbols of target companies on a Post-It note or napkin, met a stockbroker in Grand Central Terminal’s main concourse, flashed the Post-It or napkin to the stockbroker, and then immediately chewed up and swallowed it. Tamayo also conveyed additional information about the pending deals, in total passing information on over a dozen companies. The stockbroker then traded in the shares of the subject companies on behalf of the co-conspirators and other customers. The settlement involved no monetary penalties based on Tamayo’s extensive cooperation with the SEC. A $1 million disgorgement as part of the settlement can be satisfied by forfeiture or restitution in a parallel criminal proceeding pending in the District of New Jersey, where Tamayo has already pleaded guilty.
OFAC Provides Overview of Agreement with Iran Regarding Sanctions Relief
On July 14, OFAC released a statement regarding the agreement reached with Iran over its nuclear program. Following months of diplomacy, OFAC stated that the P5 + 1 reached a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran regarding Iran’s nuclear program to ensure that it is exclusively peaceful going forward. Once the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) verifies that Iran has implemented key nuclear-related measures described in the JCPOA (“Implementation Day”), “U.S. sanctions relief will be provided through the suspension and eventual termination of nuclear-related secondary sanctions.” The P5 + 1 and Iran also concluded on July 14 that the sanctions relief provided for in the JPOA of November 24, 2013 would be extended through Implementation Day; until further notice, the JPOA sanctions relief will be the only Iran-related sanctions relief in effect. The White House issued a description of the agreement to demonstrate how the long-term comprehensive nuclear deal with Iran “will verifiably prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon and ensure that Iran’s nuclear program will be exclusively peaceful going forward.” Finally, as decided on July 14, licenses with the following credentials will remain in effect in accordance with their terms until Implementation Day: (i) Issued by OFAC’s Second Amended Statement of Licensing Policy on Activities Related to the Safety of Iran’s Civil Aviation Industry; and (ii) set to expire on or before July 14, 2015. OFAC stated that the U.S. government will publish detailed guidance related to the JCPOA prior to Implementation Day, and will issue revised guidance on the continued JPOA relief shortly.