Consumer Financial Services Law Blog
Dykema Gossett PLLC
Dykema Gossett PLLC

Consumer Financial Services Law Blog

Consumer Financial Services Law Blog

News and analysis regarding Consumer Financial Services litigation and regulation, and activities of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Get updates by email

RSS Subscribe to this blog's feed
Twitter Follow us on Twitter


Showing 3 posts in Unfair and Deceptive Practices.

Verizon and Sprint Agree to Pay Customers $120 Million for Allegedly Unauthorized Wireless Charges

UPDATE: Sprint submitted a brief to the New York federal court on June 15, arguing that the court should approve a $68 million settlement it had reached with the Bureau which the court refused to accept without further explanation last month. Read More ›

Lessons from CFPB’s First “Abusive Practices” Enforcement Action: Few Lessons for the Consumer Financial Services Industry

In settling its first “abusive practices” enforcement action, the CFPB has forced American Debt Settlement Solutions Inc. (ADSS) and its president to agree to pay over one-half million dollars in damages and fines (most of which will be waived due to inability to pay). The settlement also prohibits ADSS from further selling any debt-relief products or services. The CFPB’s complaint against ADSS is remarkable in that it is the first to address “abusive acts or practices” under Sections 1031 and 1036 of Dodd-Frank, but the lessons here are few. Read More ›

Ohio Supreme Court Excludes Mortgage Servicers from Ohio UDAP Liability

The Ohio Supreme Court ruled this week that mortgage servicers are not “suppliers” of consumer services, and mortgage servicing does not constitute a “consumer transaction” under Ohio’s Consumer Sales Practice Act (essentially a UDAP statute).

The issue first arose in late 2009 when Ohio’s then-Attorney General, Richard Cordray (now CFPB Director) filed suit against Barclays Capital Real Estate Inc., alleging unfair loan modification practices and poor customer service toward borrowers seeking modifications. Ohio also filed a similar suit against AHMSI. In addition to filing its own suits, Ohio also joined as an Amicus Curiae in an individual suit brought by a borrower against Barclays alleging misapplication of payments (No. 3:09-cv-02335-JGC, N.D. Ohio). The federal court in the individual suit certified to the Ohio Supreme Court two questions: (1) whether a mortgage servicer is engaged in a “consumer transaction” with borrowers under Ohio’s CSPA; and (2) whether a mortgage servicer is a “supplier” as defined under the CSPA. AHMSI settled with Ohio, but several similar cases were on hold pending the Ohio Supreme Court’s resolution of this question of law.   Read More ›