On July 11, 2024, the CFPB filed Respondent’s Motion for the Immediate Issuance of the Mandate. In the motion, the CFPB states that they do not plan to seek a rehearing before the same Fifth Circuit or En Banc and requests the Fifth Circuit to issue its mandate forthwith to allow the District Court to entertain further proceedings in the case.… Continue Reading

In an unusual move, the CFPB is coming to the defense of a bank being accused of failing to provide repayment disclosures to a borrower.

U.S. District Judge Manish Shah of the Northern District of Illinois asked for the agency to comment on whether the Bank of Orrick violated federal requirements to provide borrower Jose Lopez with required disclosures, including how long it would take for him to repay his loan if he only paid the monthly minimum payment.… Continue Reading

On July 8, 2024, in the lawsuit challenging the CFPB’s credit card late fee rule (Rule), the CFPB filed a notice of supplemental authority in support of their motion to dismiss or transfer the case, a motion to dissolve the preliminary injunction, and a brief to support their motion.

On July 10, 2024, without addressing the merits of the CFPB’s motions, Judge Pittman issued an order to the Clerk to “STRIKE and UNFILE” the above mentioned filings from the docket due to the district court’s lack of jurisdiction until after the Fifth Circuit issues its mandate.… Continue Reading

The 1978 landmark opinion in Marquette National Bank v. First of Omaha Service Corp held that under the National Bank Act, a national bank has the right to export the interest rate authorized by the state where the bank is located to borrowers located elsewhere. Section 521 of the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 (“DIDMCA”) conferred equivalent rate exportation powers on state-chartered, FDIC-insured banks.… Continue Reading

Shortly after the Supreme Court issued its 7-2 opinion in CFSA v. CFPB, holding that the funding mechanism for the CFPB created in the Dodd-Frank Act (a capped amount each year from the “combined earnings of the Federal Reserve System”) is Constitutional, several scholars, one practitioner (me) and legislators began to focus on a different statutory and constitutional infirmity —namely, the fact that since September 2022, the Federal Reserve System had no combined earnings out of which it could lawfully fund the CFPB.… Continue Reading

The Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) recently announced the release of the Snapshot National Loan-Level Dataset based on Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) data from 2023. The CFPB also addressed the release of the dataset. Previously, we reported on the release by the CFPB of the HMDA Modified Loan Application Data for 2023, which did not include any analysis of the data.… Continue Reading

The Federal Housing Administration (FHA) recently finalized in Mortgage Letter 2024-14, dated July 10, 2024, a revision to its Defect Taxonomy to clarify that fraud or material misrepresentation involving a sponsored Third-Party Originator (TPO) is a Tier 1 severity defect in connection with loans insured under the Title II program.… Continue Reading

The CFPB soon plans to issue a final rule that would require certain supervised nonbank entities to register with it and provide information about their use of certain terms and conditions in standard-form contracts for consumer financial products or services that seek to waive or limit consumer rights or legal protections (“Covered Terms”).… Continue Reading

On June 26, 2024, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB” or the “Bureau”) released its annual Fair Lending Report (the “Report”) for the calendar year 2023. The reporting period ran through December 31, 2023, so any subsequent fair lending developments are not included.

The first section of the Report covers the CFPB’s fair lending enforcement and supervision activities in 2023.… Continue Reading

On July 8, we published a blog about a landmark 7th Circuit opinion involving mass arbitration: Pauline Wallrich v. Samsung Electronics America, Incorporated. In that opinion, the Court dismissed a lawsuit against Samsung seeking an order requiring Samsung to advance AAA’s filing fees. Among other reasons, the Court held that the plaintiffs did not produce evidence documenting that they purchased Samsung devices and were subject to arbitration agreements.… Continue Reading