InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
FTC and New York Attorney General reach deal with debt collection firm
On July 20, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York issued a judgment to resolve a suit brought by the FTC and the New York Attorney General against a debt collection firm and an affiliated officer (defendants) accused of allegedly engaging in deceptive and abusive practices, including unlawfully threatening to arrest consumers if debts were not paid. (See previous InfoBytes coverage here.) Under the stipulated final order for permanent injunction and settlement of claims pursuant to the FTC Act and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the defendants—who have not admitted to the allegations—are held jointly and severally liable for paying the more than $22.5 million under a suspended judgment should it ever be determined that the financial disclosures provided to the state and the FTC were not completely truthful, accurate, or complete. The defendants are also banned from the debt collection industry and required to file compliance reports with the FTC. The judgment further authorizes the receiver to liquidate the debt collection firm’s assets.
OCC releases additional guidance on state loan-to-deposit ratios
On July 25, the OCC issued Bulletin 2018-21 to provide additional guidance for covered national banks on how state loan-to-deposit ratios are used to determine compliance with Section 109 of the Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994. On June 21, the Federal Reserve, the FDIC, and the OCC released the host state loan-to-deposit ratios for each state or U.S. territory. Section 109, which prohibits banks from establishing or acquiring interstate branches for the primary purpose of deposit production, requires a comparison of a bank’s statewide loan-to-deposit ratio to the yearly host state loan-to-deposit ratios. If a bank’s statewide ratio is less than one-half the yearly published host state ratio, an additional review is required by the appropriate agency.
Conference of State Bank Supervisors supports legislation to coordinate federal and state examinations of third-party service providers
On July 12, the Conference of State Bank Supervisors (CSBS) issued a statement to the Senate Banking Committee, offering support for legislation that would “enhance state and federal regulators’ ability to coordinate examinations of, and share information on, banks’ [third-party technology service providers (TSPs)] in an effective and efficient manner.” H.R. 3626, the Bank Service Company Examination Coordination Act, introduced by Representative Roger Williams, R-Texas, would amend the Bank Service Company Act to provide examination improvements for states by requiring federal banking agencies to (i) consult with the state banking agency in a reasonable and timely fashion, and (ii) take measures to avoid duplicating examination activities, reporting requirements, and requests for information. Currently, 38 states have the authority to examine TSPs, however, according to CSBS, amending the Bank Service Company Act would more appropriately define a state banking agency’s authority and role when it comes to examining potential risks associated with TSP partnerships. In its statement, CSBS also references a recent action taken by eight state regulators against a major credit reporting agency following its 2017 data breach that requires, among other things, a wide range of corrective actions, including improving oversight and ensuring sufficient controls are developed for critical vendors. (See previous InfoBytes coverage here.) The House Financial Services Committee advanced H.R. 3626 on June 24 on a unanimous vote.
District Court holds TCPA covers direct-drop voicemails
On July 16, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan held in a matter of first impression that direct-to-voicemail or direct-drop voicemails are covered by the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). In so holding, the court denied a debt collection agency’s (defendant) motion for summary judgment. According to the opinion, the defendant asserted that the prerecorded voicemails left on the plaintiff’s cell phone in an effort to collect a mortgage did not violate the TCPA because calls were not dialed to the cell phone but rather deposited directly on a voicemail service—an action the defendant claimed was not within the scope of the TCPA and unregulated. However, the court found that the defendant’s use of the voicemail product constituted as a “call” within TCPA’s broadly constructed purview. In addition, the court specifically stated that the direct drop voicemails left by the defendant were “arguably more of a nuisance” to the plaintiff than receiving text messages since she would have to take steps each time to review or delete the message. In denying the defendant’s motion, the court held that “[b]oth the FCC and the courts have recognized that the scope of the TCPA naturally evolves in parallel with telecommunications technology as it evolves, e.g., with the advent of text messages and email-to-text messages or, as we have here, new technology to get into a consumer’s voicemail box directly.”
6th Circuit affirms dismissal of certain TCPA class action claims, reverses decision on survivability issue
On July 20, in a matter of first impression for the Courts of Appeals, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit held that claims under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) survive the death of a plaintiff and may be brought by a successor in interest. In so doing, the court reversed the lower court’s decision that held the opposite and remanded the case back to the lower court for further proceedings. The 6th Circuit opined that the lower court erred in holding that TCPA was penal rather than remedial in nature, and thus could not survive a plaintiff’s death. “The purpose of the TCPA [is] to redress individual wrongs felt by individual consumers . . . [and] recovery under the statute runs to the harmed individual and not the public,” both of which suggest that TCPA claims were remedial, and thus survive a party’s death. Separately, the court affirmed the district court’s order granting a motion to sever and motion to dismiss.
OCC issues update to Comptroller’s Handbook
On July 23, the OCC issued Bulletin 2018-20, which announced revisions to the “Capital and Dividends” booklet of the Comptroller’s Handbook as mandated by the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act. The revised booklet—which applies to all OCC-supervised bank examinations—includes changes to the regulatory capital rule, reflects the integration of the OTS into the OCC, and includes expanded examination procedures for capital, dividends, and capital adequacy.
FHFA pauses credit score initiative, will use formal rulemaking to create new credit score model
On July 23, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) announced that it will not decide this year whether to update the credit score model used by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (the Enterprises), as previously announced. Instead, FHFA will focus on implementing Section 310: Credit Score Competition, of the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act (Public Law 115-174) (the Act). Section 310 requires FHFA to establish, through the rulemaking process, standards and criteria to govern the verification and validation of credit score models used by the Enterprises. According to the press release, prior to Section 310 becoming law, FHFA and the Enterprises had been engaged in an ongoing initiative to evaluate a new credit score model’s potential impact on “access to credit, safety and soundness, operations in the mortgage finance industry, and competition in the credit score market.” However, after Section 310 was enacted in May, FHFA “determined that proceeding with efforts to reach a decision based on our [initiative] and timetable would be duplicative of, and in some respects inconsistent with, the work we are mandated to do under Section 310 of the Act. In light of that, we are communicating to Congress that we are transferring our full efforts to working with the Enterprises to implement the steps required under Section 310.” FHFA will release a proposed rule open for public comment in the future to govern the verification of credit score models.
Freddie Mac updates Selling Guide on lender credit requirements
On July 25, Freddie Mac released Guide Bulletin 2018-12 (Bulletin), which, among other things, updates lender credit requirements to permit sellers to apply excess lender credit as a principal curtailment toward the mortgage when the amount exceeds the borrower’s closing costs. Effective immediately, Freddie Mac stated that this change to the Selling Guide also will include “situations where regulatory requirements do not permit reduction of the amount of the lender credit without re-disclosure to the [b]orrower, which may delay closing.”
Separately, the Bulletin also announces streamlined polices to Freddie Mac’s leasehold estate requirements. The updates are intended to make it simpler for sellers to determine eligibility for leasehold mortgages, and the changes include the elimination and simplification of certain requirements. Additionally, the Bulletin discusses changes to delivery instructions applicable to automated collateral evaluation appraisal waivers and homeownership education delivery instructions, and provides guidance concerning when contingent liability and assigned debt may be excluded from a borrower’s monthly debt payment-to-income ratio.
House passes National Flood Insurance Program extension
On July 25, the House passed a bill by a vote of 366 - 52 to extend the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) through November 30. The “National Flood Insurance Program Extension Act of 2018” (S. 1182) is a short-term fix to extend coverage for lenders and borrowers during the upcoming hurricane season. As previously covered in InfoBytes, last November the House passed H.R. 2874, which would amend and reauthorize the NFIP through fiscal year 2022; however, the Senate Banking Committee has yet to act on the measure. The Senate must now pass S. 1182 to ensure the NFIP does not expire at the end of July.
Global investment bank subsidiaries to settle SEC allegations of mishandled American Depositary Receipts
On July 20, the SEC announced it had reached a settlement with two U.S.-based subsidiaries of a global investment bank to settle allegations that the subsidiaries mishandled the pre-release of American Depositary Receipts (ADRs)—U.S. securities that represent shares in foreign companies. According to the SEC’s separately issued orders, the bank’s depository bank subsidiary and the broker-dealer subsidiary allowed pre-released ADRs to be “used for abusive practices, including inappropriate short selling and inappropriate profiting around dividend payouts.” The SEC explained in its press release that ADRs can only be “pre-released” without the deposit of foreign shares, provided the brokers receiving the ADRs have an agreement with a depository bank and the broker or the broker's customer owns an amount of the underlying shares that corresponds to the number of shares the ADR represents. However, the SEC alleged that the depository bank subsidiary improperly provided thousands of ADRs where neither the broker nor its customers possessed the required shares, and that the broker-dealer subsidiary’s policies, procedures and supervision failed to prevent and detect violations tied to the borrowing and lending of pre-released ADRs. While the two subsidiaries neither admitted nor denied the SEC’s allegations, the depository bank has agreed to pay more than $51 million in disgorgement and prejudgment interest, along with a $22.2 million civil money penalty. The broker-dealer subsidiary has agreed to pay approximately $1.1 million in disgorgement and prejudgment interest and a nearly $500,000 civil money penalty.