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.

  • Noncash Payment Growth Highlighted in Sixth Federal Reserve Payments Study

    Fintech

    On June 30, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve issued its sixth payments study entitled The Federal Reserve Payments Study 2016: Recent Developments in Consumer and Business Payment Choices. The study includes data on business and consumer noncash payments made in the United States in 2015. Among other things, the study details the differences between business and consumer payments in 2015 compared to those from 2000, general-purpose payment card use in 2015, and increases in use of alternative payment methods.

    According to the report, the most popular noncash payment types among consumers were, in descending order: non-prepaid debit cards, general-purpose credit cards, checks, and finally, ACH debit transfers. For businesses, however, ACH credit transfers were the most popular, then checks, general-purpose credit cards, and non-prepaid debit cards. Consumers wrote fewer than half the number of checks in 2015 than they did in 2000 but almost doubled the number of noncash payments that they made. Businesses also cut check-writing by more than half but differed from consumers by more than doubling the number of ACH transfers that they initiated during the same period.

    General-purpose or “network-branded” cards accounted for more than 65 percent of noncash payments in 2015. The data showed that 60 percent of these card accounts carried revolving debt, while 40 percent of accounts were paid in full each month.

    Information on fraudulent payments also was collected and should be available in the third quarter of this year.

    Fintech Digital Commerce Federal Issues Federal Reserve Electronic Fund Transfer ACH Payments Credit Cards

  • Special Alert: CFPB Issues Arbitration Rule Banning Future Use of Mandatory Arbitration Clauses

    Agency Rule-Making & Guidance

    On July 10, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued its Arbitration Agreements Rule (Rule), which prohibits the use of mandatory pre-dispute arbitration clauses in certain contracts for consumer financial products and services.  The Rule is a product of the CFPB’s rulemaking process, which received more than 110,000 comments on its May 2016 proposed arbitration rule, and the CFPB’s March 2015 Arbitration Study.  The Rule is set to take effect 60 days after publication in the Federal Register, and will generally apply to contracts entered into on or after the 241st day after publication in the Federal Register. The Rule has the potential to profoundly impact the way disputes concerning consumer financial products and services are resolved. Thus, today’s action by the CFPB will likely lead to an effort pursuant to the Congressional Review Act to overturn the Rule before it becomes effective.

    ***
    Click here to read full special alert.

    If you have questions about the rule or other related issues, please visit our Consumer Financial Protection Bureau practice page, or contact a Buckley Sandler attorney with whom you have worked in the past.

    Agency Rule-Making & Guidance CFPB Arbitration Consumer Finance

  • Special Alert: CFPB Finalizes Amendments to Know Before You Owe/TRID Rule and Proposes Additional Changes to Address “Black Hole”

    Agency Rule-Making & Guidance

    On July 7, the CFPB issued amendments to the KBYO/TRID rule.  The Bureau billed the changes as clarifying and technical in nature but stated that the final rule “also makes a limited number of additional substantive changes where the Bureau has identified discrete solutions to specific implementation challenges.”  The rule becomes effective 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register, but compliance is not mandatory until October 1, 2018.

    Importantly, however, instead of finalizing proposed amendments to address the “black hole” that prevents creditors from resetting tolerances using the Closing Disclosure except in very limited circumstances, the Bureau issued a concurrent proposal to address the issue.  The proposal would close the black hole by allowing creditors to reset tolerances using the Closing Disclosure regardless of when closing is scheduled to occur, although the Bureau sought comment on whether doing so would have unintended consequences.  Comments on the proposal must be received 60 days after it is published in the Federal Register.

    ***
    Click here to read full special alert.

    If you have questions about the rule or other related issues, please visit our TRID Resource CenterConsumer Financial Protection Bureau practice page, or contact a Buckley Sandler attorney with whom you have worked in the past.

    Agency Rule-Making & Guidance TRID Mortgage Origination Mortgages Disclosures

  • Maine Passes Law to Notify Secretary of State About Abandoned Motor Vehicles

    State Issues

    On June 21, LD 1251, “An Act Regarding Certain Abandoned Vehicles and Notice to the Secretary of State Regarding Those Vehicles” became law in Maine. The law applies to a vehicle left at a business after authorized repairs were made at the request of the vehicle owner, and to a vehicle left in storage when the vehicle owner has not paid the storage fee. The law requires the owner of a repair or storage facility or the owner’s agent to notify the Secretary of State within 14 days after the earliest date that the vehicle owner becomes responsible for unpaid repair or storage and towing fees. After notice is provided by the facility (or facility’s agent), the Secretary of State must notify the vehicle’s owner and lienholder that the vehicle is being claimed unless the charges against the vehicle are paid. If the Secretary of State is not notified within 14 days using the prescribed form, the owner of the auto repair business or storage facility cannot charge the vehicle owner more than 14 days of storage fees. The law will take effect 90 days following the adjournment of the legislative session.

    State Issues State Legislation Auto Finance Debt Collection

  • FDIC Releases List of Enforcement Actions Taken Against Banks and Individuals in May 2017

    Federal Issues

    On June 30, the FDIC released its list of 36 orders in administrative enforcement actions taken against banks and individuals in May. Several of the orders on the list assess civil money penalties for violations of the Flood Disaster Protection Acts of 1973 and 1968 and their flood insurance requirements including: (i) failing to obtain flood insurance before loan origination; (ii) failure to maintain adequate insurance coverage on loans; (iii) failure to provide the required notification and failure to provide timely notification on loans; (iv) failing to maintain adequate flood insurance during the term of the loan; (v) allowing flood insurance to lapse during the term of the loan; and (vi) failing to provide written notice to the borrower concerning flood insurance before renewing a loan.

    Also on the list are 14 assessments of civil money penalties, three of which are coupled with orders of restitution. Additionally, there are six orders for removal and prohibition for bank employees breaching fiduciary duties and using positions of control to “facilitate and conceal schemes perpetrated by Bank customers” that caused the bank to violate the Bank Secrecy Act.

    There are no administrative hearings scheduled for July 2017.

    Federal Issues FDIC Enforcement Bank Secrecy Act Banking Flood Insurance Flood Disaster Protection Act

  • Former DOJ Fraud Compliance Counsel Resigns, Criticizes President

    Financial Crimes

    Hui Chen, formerly Compliance Counsel Expert in the DOJ Fraud Section, is speaking out about the reasons for her May 2017 resignation, which she has attributed to unacceptable conduct by the President and his Administration. Chen was hired by DOJ in November 2015 after serving as Global Head for Anti-Bribery and Corruption and Standard Chartered Bank. She was the first lawyer to hold this position at the DOJ.

    In a June 25 LinkedIn post, Chen unleashed several criticisms against the President, including regarding lawsuits, conflicts of interest, and ongoing investigations. She said that she would “not tolerate” those conducts in a company, but “worked under an administration that engaged in exactly those conduct.” Chen further elaborated on her criticisms in a July 4, 2017 interview with CNN, stating that the firing of FBI James Comey tipped the scales in favor of resignation. 

    The DOJ had previously posted an opening to hire a new Compliance Counsel, but that listing has now expired. It is not clear if anyone has been hired to replace Ms. Chen.

    Financial Crimes DOJ Trump Fraud

  • CFPB Monthly Complaint Snapshot Focuses on State-Level Consumer Complaints

    Consumer Finance

    On June 27, the CFPB released its monthly complaint report, highlighting complaints from around the country. According to the Bureau, it has handled over 1.2 million complaints from 2011 through June 1 of this year. The report shows nationwide complaint statistics and statistics for service members and older consumers. In addition, the report breaks down statistics on the state level covering financial products and services, company responses to complaints, as well as number of complaints. The vast majority of consumers report high company response rates to complaints averaging in the high 90 percent range, although the volume of complaints is trending upward. The top five products receiving complaints across the country in descending order are: (i) debt collection; (ii) mortgages; (iii) credit reporting; (iv) credit cards; and (v) bank accounts or services.

    Consumer Finance Lending Consumer Complaints Internet Lending CFPB Debt Collection Credit Cards Mortgage Servicing

  • Debt Collector Liable for Violating FDCPA and TCPA

    Courts

    On July 3, the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed that a debt collector violated the Telephone Consumer Practices Act (TCPA) when it called a consumer’s cell phone without the consumer’s consent, resulting in a damages award of $34,500. Additionally, the appellate court reversed the district court’s decision regarding a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) claim for sending a collection letter to the consumer without taking proper precautions to ensure the consumer’s account number would remain private. The debt collector put forth the defense of bona fide error regarding its alleged violations of the FDCPA. The appellate court, citing Supreme Court precedent, rejected the defense, holding that bona fide error could be claimed only in the case of a clerical or factual error, but a “mistaken interpretation of the law is inexcusable under the FDCPA’s bona fide error defense.” The Third Circuit remanded the FDCPA claim to the district court to enter judgment for the consumer and calculate the damages the debt collector must pay.

    Courts Privacy/Cyber Risk & Data Security Third Circuit Debt Collection TCPA FDCPA Appellate

  • FINRA Fines Financial Firms $2.4 Million for Improper Customer Records Storage

    Securities

    On July 5, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) announced that several investment firms agreed to pay fines totaling $2.4 million for allegedly failing to maintain customer records in an electronic format that cannot be altered or destroyed. The firms all signed FINRA’s letters of Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent (AWC) containing allegations and proposed settlement terms for the alleged violations. See agreements here, here, and here.

    In the agreements, FINRA emphasizes that financial firms are storing more and more sensitive customer data. FINRA asserts that broker-dealer electronic records must be complete and accurate to assist FINRA and other regulators in examinations and to ensure that member firms can conduct audits. Increasingly aggressive hacking attempts also enhance the need for firms to keep these records in the required format. According to the allegations in the agreements, the firms violated Section 17(a) of the Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act"), NASD Rule 3110 and FINRA Rule 4511 by not maintaining electronic brokerage records in non-erasable and nonrewritable format, known as “WORM” format. The electronic records contained information about millions of securities transactions, millions of customer account records, numerous financial records, and records regarding anti-money laundering compliance.

    FINRA also asserts that the firms: (i) failed to give 90-day advance notice to FINRA before storing records electronically; (ii) failed to set up audit systems for retaining records electronically; (iii) failed to obtain attestation letters from vendors agreeing to provide all firm records to regulators, if needed; and (iv) failed to set up and enforce written procedures to ensure electronically stored records were retained in compliance with FINRA and federal securities laws.

    In addition to monetary sanctions, the firms agreed to review and update policies and procedures to ensure compliance with FINRA and federal securities laws. Additionally, the firms must submit remediation plans to FINRA for approval.

    Securities Privacy/Cyber Risk & Data Security FINRA Enforcement Settlement Investment Adviser

  • OCC Issues Branch Closings Booklet, General Policies and Procedures Booklet

    Agency Rule-Making & Guidance

    On June 29, the OCC issued Bulletin OCC 2017-24, announcing its revised Comptroller’s Licensing Manual booklet, “Branch Closings,” replacing the booklet issued in April 2003. According to the Bulletin, the revised booklet describes the 90-day advance notice to the OCC and branch customers that a bank must observe before closing a branch. It also explains the specific timing, procedures, and forms of notice the bank must supply. The booklet, which applies to all national banks and federal savings associations, summarizes the different notice requirements for each under Section 42 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act. It also lists steps for filing branch closing notices including: (i) sending advance notice to the OCC at least 90 days before closing; (ii) mailing notices to customers at least 90 days in advance; (iii) posting conspicuous notices at the branch at least 30 days in advance; and (iv) sending final closing notice to the OCC after the branch closes.

    The notice requirement of Section 42 assists the OCC in assessing a bank’s record of opening and closing branches. The OCC reviews this record in examinations for compliance with Section 42 and in assessing performance under the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). The OCC, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) adopted a “Joint Policy Statement on Branch Closing Notices and Policies” (Joint Policy Statement) in June 1991 to provide guidance regarding the requirements of the branch closing statute.

    On July 5, the OCC issued an additional bulletin, OCC Bulletin 2017-25, revising the “General Policies and Procedures” booklet of the Comptroller’s Licensing Manual issued in March 2008. This booklet explains how to file applications or notices with the OCC, requirements of the filings, and the OCC processes for licensing filings. The revised booklet applies to national banks, federal savings associations, and other entities that are involved in certain transactions including: (i) organizing a new bank; (ii) opening or closing a branch; (iii) establishing subsidiaries; (iv) some changes to capital or debt; and (v) certain other transactions. The booklet describes important policies and includes sample forms, filing requirements, and fees. It also covers the OCC’s review, approval or denial, and subsequent consummation requirements and appeal procedures.

    Agency Rule-Making & Guidance OCC Banking Licensing Comptroller's Licensing Manual

Pages

Upcoming Events