Choose Site
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) issued a Statement of Policy (Statement) on March 8 making it clear that going forward it will exercise its full authority to penalize covered persons found to have engaged in abusive acts or practices, 12 U.S.C. §5536(a)(1)(B), in violation of its core consumer protection authority. In doing so, the Bureau’s acting director rescinded a January 20, 2020, Policy Statement (2020 Statement) issued by a director appointed by former President Donald Trump, in which the Bureau advised, among other things which we have previously discussed, that it would generally not seek civil penalties for “abusive conduct” unless there had been a lack of a good faith effort to comply with the law.
We previously reported on recent mortgage rulemakings that were finalized by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) late last year. Of the two final rules from the Bureau, one drastically simplifies the definition of a “qualified mortgage” (QM) (the General QM Final Rule), and the other provides an alternate pathway to QM safe harbor status for certain seasoned mortgage loans (the Seasoned QM Final Rule). Both of these final rules—with potentially major impacts on the housing market—were published in the Federal Register on December 29, 2020, with effective dates of March 1, 2021 (although the General QM Final Rule contains a mandatory compliance date of July 1, 2021).
We previously reported on recent mortgage rulemakings that were finalized by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) late last year. Of the two final rules from the Bureau, one drastically simplifies the definition of a “qualified mortgage” (QM) (the General QM Final Rule), and the other provides an alternate pathway to QM safe harbor status for certain seasoned mortgage loans (the Seasoned QM Final Rule).
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Acting Director David Uejio has put a special focus on the manner in which responses are made to the CFPB’s consumer complaint system. Signaling the importance of this issue by undertaking it even before President Joe Biden’s nominee for director, Rohit Chopra, is confirmed to the position, Uejio has called out in a publicly released message to CFPB staff the possibility that some responses to complainants are incomplete—and vary by the complainant’s apparent demographic community.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Bureau or CFPB) on January 13 issued a Statement Regarding the Provision of Financial Products and Services to Consumers with Limited English Proficiency (Statement), which is intended to provide compliance principles and guidelines to inform and assist financial institutions in their decisionmaking related to serving limited English proficiency (LEP) consumers in non-English languages.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) on October 20 issued a final rule to extend the government-sponsored enterprises patch (GSE Patch), i.e., the “temporary qualified mortgage” exemption within the qualified mortgage/ability-to-repay rule.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) issued a policy statement on October 5 establishing a process to allow for early termination of consent orders.
Section 1071 of the Dodd-Frank Act amended the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) to require financial institutions to compile, maintain, and submit to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) certain data on applications for credit for women-owned, minority-owned, and small businesses.
The US Supreme Court on June 29 ruled in Seila Law v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB’s) structure unconstitutionally insulates the agency from presidential oversight and must be altered.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) issued an interim final rule (IFR) on June 23, 2020 that temporarily permits mortgage servicers to offer to borrowers impacted by the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic certain loss mitigation options based on the evaluation of an incomplete loss mitigation application.