Skip to main content
Menu Icon
Close

InfoBytes Blog

Financial Services Law Insights and Observations

Filter

Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.

  • Maryland regulator reminds student loan servicers of obligation to report suspended payments as current

    State Issues

    On May 18, the Office of the Maryland Commissioner of Financial Regulation issued an advisory to student loan servicers and credit reporting agency registrants to remind them of their furnishing obligations under the federal CARES Act to ensure that suspended payments are not reported as delinquent. The advisory notes that it has come to the office’s attention that a student loan servicer of a significant amount of federal student loan debt was not accurately furnishing information and reminds servicers that under Maryland’s Student Loan Servicing Bill of Rights, it is a violation of Maryland law to knowing or recklessly provide inaccurate information or refuse to correct it.

    State Issues Covid-19 Maryland Student Lending Student Loan Servicer Credit Reporting Agency CARES Act

  • FinCEN advisory warns of Covid-19 medical scams, provides guidance on reporting suspicious activity

    Federal Issues

    On May 18, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued an advisory and companion notice on medical scams related to the Covid-19 pandemic that provide detailed instructions for financial institutions filing reports of Covid-19-related suspicious activities. The advisory outlines numerous red flag indicators and case studies addressing Covid-19 medical-related fraudulent activity to assist financial institutions in detecting, preventing, and reporting suspicious transactions. FinCEN also encourages financial institutions to consider additional contextual information, such as a customer’s historical financial activity and whether a customer exhibits multiple indicators, before making a determination that a transaction is suspicious. FinCEN further advises financial institutions—when taking a risk-based approach to Bank Secrecy Act compliance—to perform additional inquiries and conduct investigations as necessary.

    The companion notice provides, among other things, that suspicious activity reports (SAR) should only include Covid-19 statements tied to suspicious activity and that statements related to Covid-19’s impact on SAR filing abilities should not be included. However, FinCEN states that filers who previously included these references are not required to file corrected reports. For fraud schemes, including those that exploit the Covid-19 pandemic, FinCEN reiterates that full details related to SAR filings and supporting documentation should be submitted as quickly as possible. The notice also addresses information sharing among financial institutions and provides contact information for reporting Covid-19-related criminal activity to other agencies.

    Federal Issues FinCEN Covid-19 Financial Crimes Bank Secrecy Act SARs Of Interest to Non-US Persons

  • Washington amends and extends proclamations regarding state of emergency, garnishments, and accrual of interest

    State Issues

    On May 15, the Washington governor issued Proclamation 20-49.1, which amends and extends Proclamations 20-05 (declaring a state of emergency) and 20-49 (regarding garnishments and accrual of interest). Proclamation 20-49 was previously covered here. Proclamations 20-05 and 20-49 are amended to (i) recognize the extension of statutory waivers and suspensions by the Washington legislature until the sooner of the termination of the Covid-19 state of emergency or 11:59p.m. on May 21, 2020, whichever is first, and (ii) similarly extend the prohibitions contained in those proclamations until the earlier of the aforementioned dates.

    State Issues Covid-19 Washington Debt Collection

  • New Mexico issues public health order

    State Issues

    On May 15, the New Mexico Department of Health issued an order directing that essential businesses must operate in accordance with the applicable Covid-Safe Practices section of the All Together New Mexico: Covid-Safe Practices for Individuals and Employers. Essential businesses include banks, credit unions, insurance providers, brokerage services, and investment management firms, among others.

    State Issues Covid-19 New Mexico Credit Union Insurance Broker-Dealer Investment Adviser

  • Colorado Banking and Financial Services commissioners provide guidance on Safer at Home orders

    State Issues

    On May 15, the Colorado Banking and Financial Services commissioners provided additional guidance on the Safer at Home orders. The commissioners continue to encourage Colorado state-chartered financial institutions to work with affected borrowers and customers, and provide payment relief to consumers impacted by Covid-19. For example, financial institutions are encouraged to waive fees for services (e.g., overdraft fees, ATM fees) and provide accommodations such as eliminating minimum balance requirements on accounts and increasing daily withdrawal limits on ATMs.

    State Issues Covid-19 Colorado Financial Institutions Consumer Finance Overdraft ATM

  • FINRA updates guidance on verification of Form U4 for individual registration

    Federal Issues

    On May 15, FINRA updated its response to a frequently asked questions regarding verification on Form U4 for individual registration. Under FINRA Rule 3110(e), members are required to have written procedures to verify the accuracy and completeness of an applicant’s initial or transfer Form U4 within 30 calendar days after the Form U4 is filed with FINRA. In light of challenges posed by Covid-19, if a firm is unable to verify the information within 30 days following submission, the firm must document which information could not be verified and the reasons and maintain an appropriate record, including steps taken to verify the information. For an initial or transfer Form U4, firms should make reasonable efforts to verify the information contained therein by June 30, 2020, and, if necessary, file an amended Form U4 to correct any discrepancies.

    Federal Issues Covid-19 FINRA

  • Texas regulator urges credit access businesses to consider emergency measures, extends reporting deadlines

    State Issues

    On May 15, the Texas Office of the Consumer Credit Commissioner revised an advisory bulletin to credit access businesses, extending the deadline to file 2020 first quarter reports until May 31, 2020 (previously covered here). The office also encouraged credit access businesses to work with third-party lenders to provide relief to consumers negatively impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic.

    State Issues Covid-19 Texas Third-Party

  • Texas regulator extends annual report deadline for regulated lenders

    State Issues

    On May 15, the Texas Office of Consumer Credit Commissioner revised an advisory bulletin extending the deadline for regulated lenders to file 2019 annual reports from May 1, 2020 to June 1, 2020 (previously covered here). The regulator also urged regulated lenders to work with borrowers negatively impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic.

    State Issues Covid-19 Texas Lending

  • 7th Circuit: CRAs not required to determine legal validity of disputed debt

    Courts

    On May 11, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirmed a district court’s dismissal of a putative class action, holding that the FCRA does not compel a consumer reporting agency (defendant) to determine the legal validity of a debt when investigating a dispute. The plaintiffs alleged that they obtained payday loans with allegedly usurious interest rates from online entities affiliated with Native American tribes. After both plaintiffs stopped making monthly payments, the lenders reported the delinquent amounts to the defendant. One of the plaintiffs disputed the accuracy of his credit report, arguing that because the loan was “illegally issued” he was not obligated to make payments. The defendant conducted an investigation and verified the furnished information was accurate. However, the defendant did not investigate whether the debt was legal. The plaintiffs filed suit, alleging two FCRA violations: (i) Section 1681e(b) which requires consumer reporting agencies “to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information” contained in credit reports; and (ii) Section 1681i(a) which “requires consumer reporting agencies to reinvestigate disputed items.” According to the plaintiffs, the defendant’s credit reports “contained ‘legally inaccurate’ information because they posted ‘legally invalid debts.’” The district court granted judgment on the pleadings to the defendant, ruling that the plaintiffs’ FCRA claims fell short because they never alleged that the information that was reported was factually inaccurate and, “until a formal adjudication invalidates the plaintiffs’ loans,” the reported information would not be factually inaccurate.

    On appeal, the 7th Circuit held, among other things, that only furnishers—“such as banks, credit lenders, and collection agencies”—are required under the FCRA to correctly report liability, stating it is not the defendant’s responsibility to determine the enforceability of the debt because the “power to resolve these legal issues exceeds the competencies of consumer reporting agencies.” Moreover, the appellate court determined that the defendant cannot be liable under either of the plaintiffs’ FCRA claims if it did not report inaccurate information.

    Courts Appellate Seventh Circuit Credit Reporting Agency FCRA

  • 6th Circuit denies stay of injunction against PPP Ineligibility Rule

    Federal Issues

    On May 15, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied the SBA’s emergency motion for a stay of the district court’s injunction against the agency’s Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) Ineligibility Rule. As previously covered by InfoBytes, the district court granted a preliminary injunction against the SBA’s PPP Ineligibility Rule—which, in relevant part, excludes from PPP loan eligibility “sexually oriented businesses that present entertainment or sell products of a ‘prurient’ (but not unlawful) nature.” The district court concluded that the Rule was in conflict with the Congressional purpose of the CARES Act, which houses the PPP, to protect workers in need during the Covid-19 pandemic, including workers for businesses that have been historically excluded from SBA financial assistance.

    The 6th Circuit agreed with the district court, denying the motion for a stay. The court noted that the CARES Act specifies that eligibility “is conferred on ‘any business concern,’” which “encompasses sexually oriented businesses.” It went on to state that “the public interest is served in guaranteeing that any business, including plaintiffs, receive loans to protect and support their employees during the pandemic.”

    In dissent, one judge argued that it is “unclear whether Congress meant that any business concern was eligible for a PPP loan regardless of SBA restrictions,” and therefore, the injunction should be stayed pending a decision on the merits.

    Federal Issues Courts SBA Covid-19 Small Business Lending Appellate Sixth Circuit CARES Act

Pages

Upcoming Events