InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
Special Alert: Second Circuit Will Not Rehear Madden Decision That Threatens To Upset Secondary Credit Markets
Two months ago we issued a Special Alert regarding the decision of the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in Madden v. Midland Funding, LLC, which held that a nonbank entity taking assignment of debts originated by a national bank is not entitled to protection under the National Bank Act (“NBA”) from state-law usury claims. We explained that the Second Circuit’s reasoning in Madden ignored long-standing precedent upholding an assignee’s right to charge and collect interest in accordance with an assigned credit contract that was valid when made. And, because the entire secondary market for credit relies on this Valid-When-Made Doctrine to enforce credit agreements pursuant to their terms, the decision potentially carries far-reaching ramifications for securitization vehicles, hedge funds, other purchasers of whole loans, including those who purchase loans originated by banks pursuant to private-label arrangements and other bank relationships, such as those common to marketplace lending industries and various types of on-line consumer credit.
After the decision, Midland Funding, the assignee of the loan at issue, petitioned the Second Circuit to rehear the case either by the panel or en banc – a petition that was broadly supported by banking and securities industry trade associations in amicus briefs. On August 12, the court denied that petition.
Click Here to View the Full Special Alert
***
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.
- Walter E. Zalenski, (202) 461-2910
- Jeffrey P. Naimon, (202) 349-8030
- John P. Kromer, (202) 349-8040
Illinois Governor Signs Reverse Mortgage Act
On August 10, Illinois Governor Bruce Rauner signed into law Senate Bill 1440, the Reverse Mortgage Act which provides new consumer protections for borrowers with respect to reverse mortgage loan transactions. Among other things, the legislation establishes a regulatory framework to govern reverse mortgage loan transactions made within the state including provisions that (i) require lenders to provide certain mortgage disclosures to potential borrowers; and (ii) implement a three-day “cooling off” period in which a potential borrower can rescind the loan. The Act also grants the Illinois Attorney General sole enforcement authority to pursue any violations of the Reverse Mortgage Act, which would constitute as an unlawful practice under the state’s Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act. The law becomes effective January 1, 2016.
District Court Invalidates NYC Ordinance Making Banks Service Under-Served Areas as Requirement to Receive Municipal Deposits
On August 7, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granted summary judgment for the New York Bankers Association (NYBA) in a case challenging the City of New York’s Local Law 38, entitled the Responsible Banking Act (RBA). New York Bankers Ass’n, Inc. v. City of New York, No. 15-CV- 4001, 2015 WL 4726880 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 7, 2015). Passed in 2012, the RBA imposes various requirements on banks operating within New York City, including, as a prerequisite to receiving certain municipal deposits, requirements to document efforts to provide affordable housing, access to credit for small businesses, and other services. The court held that the RBA was preempted both by (i) federal law (including the National Bank Act, the Community Reinvestment Act, and OCC regulations) because, among other reasons, the RBA “stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objectives of Congress”; and (ii) New York state law, because the New York Banking Law “evinces an intent to preempt the field of regulating state-chartered banks.” Thus, the RBA was “void in its entirety.”
CFPB, FDIC, and OCC Order Large Financial Institution and Subsidiaries to Pay Nearly $40 Million for Deposit Discrepancies
On August 12, in coordinated enforcement actions, the CFPB, FDIC, and OCC ordered a large financial institution and two of its banking subsidiaries to pay nearly $40 million in fines and restitution for failing to credit consumers the full amounts of their deposited funds. The regulators allege that, from 2008 through 2013, the bank entities (i) failed to credit consumers the full amount of their deposits when the amount scanned on the deposit slip was less than the amount of the checks and cash deposited; and (ii) falsely claimed that they would verify the deposits. The CFPB consent order requires the bank entities to pay approximately $11 million in restitution and a $7.5 million civil money penalty. The FDIC order requires one of the banking subsidiaries to pay nearly $5.8 million in restitution and a $3 million civil money penalty, while the OCC consent order assessed a $10 million civil money penalty on the other banking subsidiary.
FTC Announces Action Against Data Brokers for Fraud Allegations, Settles with Three Defendants
On August 12, the FTC announced an action against a data broker enterprise for violations of the FTC Act. The FTC’s complaint alleges that, from at least 2011 to 2013, the data broker enterprise (i) sold payday loan applications to Ideal Financial Solutions and other non-lender third party companies for less than market value; and (ii) knew or had reason to know that Ideal Financial used the information to make unauthorized debits from consumers’ bank accounts. The complaint further alleges that the financial information of over 500,000 consumers was provided to Ideal Financial, which resulted in over $7.1 million of unauthorized debits to consumers’ accounts. Three of the defendants have agreed to settle the FTC’s allegations. The proposed settlement orders prohibit all three defendants from selling or otherwise benefitting from consumers’ personal information, and impose a $7.1 million judgment against two defendants and a $3.7 million judgment against the third. The settlement orders are subject to approval by the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada.
Former SAP Executive Pleads Guilty to Paying "Necessary" Bribes
On August 12, the DOJ and SEC announced joint enforcement actions against software giant SAP International’s former head of Latin American sales, Vicente Garcia. Garcia pleaded guilty to conspiracy to violate the FCPA and will be sentenced on December 16, 2015 in the Northern District of California. The DOJ alleges that SAP paid bribes to Panamanian officials to secure software license sales in late 2009, using sham contracts and fake invoices. Garcia “admitted that he believed paying such bribes was necessary” to secure the contracts.
The SEC simultaneously issued an administrative cease and desist order against Garcia describing a scheme by which Garcia, in violation of SAP’s internal controls, gave discounts to a local business partner to generate excess earnings, which were used to create the slush fund used to pay at least $145,000 in bribes to secure approximately $3.7 million in sales. Garcia and others also arranged to receive kickbacks from the sales. Garcia agreed to pay disgorgement of the kickbacks he received plus prejudgment interest, totaling $92,395.
Orthofix Deferred Prosecution Agreement Extended for Two Months
In a recently-filed status report, the DOJ and medical device manufacturer Orthofix revealed that the company’s Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) will be extended by two months. The DPA was due to expire on July 17, 2015, but the status report states that Orthofix agreed to the extension in June to give DOJ “additional time to (1) evaluate Orthofix’s compliance with the internal controls and compliance undertakings in the DPA and (2) further investigate potentially improper conduct the company disclosed during the term of the DPA.” The report continued that DOJ intended to complete its investigation in August and inform Orthofix “of its proposed course of action shortly thereafter.”
Orthofix entered into the DPA on July 10, 2012 to resolve allegations that a Mexico-based subsidiary paid bribes to employees of Mexico’s government-operated health system (see prior FCPA scorecard coverage).
Earlier this year, another medical device manufacturer, Biomet, announced that its DPA would be extended for one year after it disclosed additional potential FCPA violations to the DOJ and SEC.
PetroChina Class Action Dismissed
On August 3, a federal district court in New York dismissed with prejudice a securities class action suit filed against Chinese oil and gas company PetroChina Co. Ltd. The suit alleged that statements in the company’s 2011 and 2012 financial statements claiming the company was in compliance with its internal rules and securities regulations were false or misleading. The plaintiffs filed the suit after the Chinese government announced that it was investigating four of the company’s top executives for corruption.
The court dismissed the complaint in its entirety, finding that the plaintiffs failed to allege any acts of bribery or corruption that predated the filing of the 2011 and 2012 financial statements. The court wrote: “[T]his Court is not requiring that Plaintiffs allege a detailed account of the particular illicit deals that PetroChina officials were allegedly engaged in. Plaintiffs are required, nonetheless, to establish—at a bare minimum—that the underlying fraud took place during the time period covered by the purportedly false public statements and that someone at PetroChina knew or had reason to know about it.”
Similar class action suits against Wal-Mart and Avon have also been dismissed in the past year.
SEC Sues 32 Defendants Involved in Insider Trading Operation; DOJ Files Criminal Charges Against Leaders
On August 10, the SEC filed a complaint against 32 defendants in the District of New Jersey for their alleged involvement in an international scheme to profit from stolen, confidential information regarding corporate earnings announcements. According to the SEC, the defendants hacked at least two newswire services’ computer servers to retrieve unpublished corporate press releases, subsequently using it to make trades generating over $100 million in profits. The SEC further asserted that the two leaders of the scheme designed a “secret web-based location to transmit the stolen data to traders in Russia, the Ukraine, Malta, Cyprus, France, and three U.S. states, Georgia, New York, and Pennsylvania.” The SEC contends that, for five years, the two leaders of the scheme (i) disguised their identity by posing as newswire service employees, using proxy servers, and/or using backdoor access-modules; and (ii) recruited traders by making a video that displayed their ability to steal earnings information prior to public release. In return for information, the traders paid the hackers either a percentage of the profits obtained from trading the stolen information, or a flat fee. The SEC Director called the scheme “one of the most intricate and sophisticated trading rings [the agency has] ever seen.” The U.S. Attorneys’ offices for New Jersey and the Eastern District of New York also announced criminal charges against nine of the same defendants, including the two leaders of the scheme.
OCC Comptroller Talks Future of Financial Services, Eyes FinTech Industry
On August 7, OCC Comptroller Thomas Curry delivered remarks at the Federal Home Loan Bank of Chicago, which was hosting a conference highlighting the future of financial services. Specifically, Curry discussed innovation in the emerging financial technology industry, or “fintech,” noting the risks and benefits associated with mobile payments, virtual currency, and peer-to-peer lending products within the U.S. banking system. With respect to virtual currency, Curry stressed how important it is for financial institutions to implement adequate procedures to deter money laundering and terrorist financing. Curry also recognized that the OCC is “still early in the process” of evaluating a regulatory framework to examine some new and innovative products and services. Rounding out his remarks, Curry expressed his growing concerns with so called “neobanks,” which operate primarily online but provide similar services to brick and mortar retail branch banks, including the heightened privacy risks that neobanks present in light of recent cybersecurity attacks.