Dodd-Frank Act – Page 2 – Consumer Financial Services Watch

New CFPB/DOJ Enforcement Action Incentivizes Indirect Auto Lenders to Limit Discretionary Dealer Markups

Jul 16 2015

On July 14, 2015, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced a joint settlement of allegations that American Honda Finance Corporation (“Honda”), an indirect auto lender associated with the car manufacturer of the same name, violated the federal Equal Credit Opportunity Act by discriminating against African-American, Hispanic, and Asian and Pacific Islander borrowers in the pricing of auto loans. Notably, the terms of the CFPB’s consent order may indicate how indirect auto lenders in the future can avoid the most onerous financial penalties associated with allegedly unlawful pricing practices.

Webinar: Is Your Institution Ready for Federal Scrutiny of Diversity Practices?

Jun 25 2015

Section 342 of the Dodd-Frank Act – which established additional federal oversight over the diversity policies and practices at financial services institutions – has become a reality for regulated institutions with the release on June 9th of an interagency policy statement establishing the final standards. The standards impact a broad swathe of business activity and focus on self-assessment and voluntary disclosure of diversity practices. What do legal, compliance and risk management leaders at regulated financial services institutions need to do to comply?

CFPB Targets Pre-Dispute Arbitration Agreements in Consumer Financial Services Contracts in New Report to Congress

Mar 16 2015

By: Andrew C. Glass, Robert W. Sparkes, Roger L. Smerage

In the wake of the Great Recession, numerous federal government actors have sought to limit, and in some cases, eliminate, the inclusion of pre-dispute arbitration agreements in consumer financial services contracts. For instance, in 2010, as part of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”), Congress amended the federal Truth-in-Lending Act to prohibit the use of pre-dispute arbitration provisions in residential mortgage contracts and home-equity line-of-credit agreements. See 15 U.S.C. § 1639c(e)(1). Now, acting pursuant to a mandate provided by the Dodd-Frank Act, see 12 U.S.C. § 5518(a), the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) has joined the hunt. On March 9, 2015, the CFPB issued a report to Congress that appears to put the use of such agreements in all consumer financial services agreements – including credit card, checking account, and payday loan agreements – in the agency’s cross-hairs.

Federal Agencies Propose AMC Minimum Standards

Mar 28 2014

By: Nanci L. Weissgold, Morey Barnes Yost

The April 9 Federal Register contains the announcement for which the appraisal management industry has been waiting for months: the federal banking and finance regulatory agencies’ proposal of minimum standards for appraisal management companies (“AMCs”). Section 1473 of the Dodd-Frank Act requires the agencies – the OCC, FRB, FDIC, NCUA, CFPB, and FHFA (the “Agencies”) -to adopt standards for states to apply in their registration and supervision of AMCs.

The CFPB Defines Foreign Remittance Transfer “Larger Participants”

Feb 24 2014

By: David L. Beam, Christopher G. Smith

The Dodd-Frank Act provided the CFPB with examination authority over, among others, “larger participants” of consumer financial product and service markets. Almost three years ago, the CFPB issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking targeting various industries whose larger participants it was eyeing for regular examination, including money transmission. In January 2014, the CFPB issued a proposed larger participants rule for a subset of money transmitters – those engaged in foreign remittances. Read More

Preemption Decision is Great News for National Banks and Federal Savings Associations

Jun 25 2012

By: David L. Beam

Last Thursday, the California Supreme Court handed down what arguably is the most important decision on federal preemption for national banks since the Dodd-Frank Act was passed in mid-2010. The specific issue in Parks v. MBNA America Bank, N.A., 2012 Cal. LEXIS 5795 (Cal. June 21, 2012), was whether California could require national banks to place certain disclosures on credit card “convenience checks.” MBNA, the defendant, argued that the California law was preempted for national banks by the National Bank Act. The state court of appeals had disagreed. Read More

CFPB Proposes Method for Extending Supervisory Power to “Risky” Nonbanks

Jun 01 2012

By: Eric Mitzenmacher

The Dodd-Frank Act empowers the CFPB to supervise three classes of nonbank covered persons: (1) participants in certain enumerated consumer financial markets including consumer mortgages, private education loans, and payday loans; (2) larger participants in other consumer financial markets, as further defined by CFPB rulemaking; and (3) other nonbanks engaging in “conduct that poses risks to consumers with regard to the offering or provision of consumer financial products or services.”

Force-Placed Insurance Standards in the Global Foreclosure Settlement

Apr 20 2012

By: Steven M. Kaplan, Rebecca Lobenherz

Force-placing insurance could be a hazardous practice if not done appropriately. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) has made force-placed insurance a main focus of its desired mortgage servicing reforms and new rules on the issue are expected to be released by the CFPB as soon as this week. This is in addition to high-profile investigations into force-placed insurance by New York and California. Therefore, it should be no surprise that a significant section of the March 2012 Global Foreclosure Settlement lays out new force-placed insurance standards for parties to the settlement agreement. Read More

Customary and Reasonable Appraisal Rates Rule Faces State Opposition

Dec 15 2011

By: Nanci L. Weissgold and Kerri M. Smith

It is old news that the Dodd-Frank Act sets standards for pricing appraisals and subjects appraisal management companies, known as AMCs, to federal and state oversight. The news for 2012 is that lenders may need to contend with alternate state law requirements addressing the payment of fee appraisers, some of which may be inconsistent with federal law.

AMCs – the business entities that administer networks of independent appraisers to procure real estate appraisal assignments on behalf of lenders – are now subject to supervision by state governments through their appraisal boards. Under the Dodd-Frank Act, the federal banking agencies must jointly by rule establish minimum requirements to be applied by a state, including state registration and supervision of AMCs, and that appraisals be conducted in compliance with Section 129E of TILA. While states have three years from the date the federal agencies finalize their rules establishing minimum requirements, AMC registration laws now exist in 28 states.

CFPB and Other Federal Banking Agencies Issue Joint Supervisory Statement Clarifying $10 Billion Asset Determination: Regulatory Uncertainty Remains

Dec 05 2011

By: Andrew Caplan* and Stephanie C. Robinson
*Mr. Caplan is not yet admitted to practice; admission to the NY Bar pending.

The Dodd-Frank Act gives the CFPB exclusive supervisory authority and primary enforcement authority of federal consumer financial protection laws over depository institutions with total assets greater than $10 billion and their affiliates (“Large Institutions”). Under Dodd-Frank, the federal banking agencies maintain supervisory and enforcement authority over other institutions with respect to federal consumer financial protection laws. On November 17, 2011, the federal banking agencies and the CFPB issued a joint supervisory statement delineating how and when these Agencies will determine the total assets of an insured depository institution or an insured credit union for purposes of their supervisory and enforcement responsibilities. This is because sections 1025 and 1026 Dodd-Frank, which establish the basic threshold regarding who will regulate whom, do not specify how and when an institution’s assets are assessed for purposes of determining “Large Institution” status. That task was left to the Agencies themselves to determine.

Tag:Dodd-Frank Act