Tag: CFPB
When running a credit report on a new applicant, you must ensure Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) compliance before accessing, using and sharing the collected data. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act has impacted credit reporting under the FCRA, as has new guidance from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Recent updates include: The CARES Act amended the FCRA to require furnishers who agree to an “accommodation,”1 to report the account as current, although it is permitted to continue to report the account as delinquent if the account was delinquent before the accommodation was made. Although not legally obligated, data furnishers should continue furnishing information to the credit reporting agencies (CRAs) during the COVID-19 crisis, and make sure that information reported is complete and accurate. Below is a brief FCRA-related compliance overview2 covering various FCRA requirements3 when requesting and using consumer credit reports for an extension of credit permissible purpose. For more information regarding your responsibilities under the FCRA as a user of consumer reports, please consult your Legal Counsel and the Notice to Users of Consumer Reports: Obligations of Users Under the FCRA handbook located on our website. Before obtaining a consumer report you have… Reviewed your federal and state regulations and laws related to consumer reports, scores, decisions, etc. Made sure you have a valid permissible purpose for pulling the consumer report. Certified compliance to the CRA from which you are getting the consumer report. You have certified that you complied with all the federal and state requirements. After you take an adverse action based on a consumer report you… Provide the consumer with an oral, written or electronic notice of the adverse action. Provide written or electronic disclosure of the numerical credit score used to take the adverse action, or when providing a “risk-based pricing” notice. Provide the consumer with an oral, written or electronic notice, which includes the below information: Name, address and telephone number of CRA that supplied the report, if nationwide. A statement that the CRA did not make the adverse decision and therefore can’t explain why the decision was made. Notice of the consumer’s right to a free copy of their report from the CRA, if requested within 60 days. Notice of the consumer’s right to dispute with the CRA the accuracy or completeness of any information in a consumer report provided by the CRA. Provide the consumer with a “risk-based pricing” notice if credit was granted but on less favorable terms based on information in their consumer report. We understand how challenging it is to understand and meet all your obligations as a data furnisher – we’re here to make it a little easier. Click below to speak with a representative and gain more insight on how the CARES Act impacts FCRA reporting. Download overview Speak with a representative 1An “accommodation” is defined as “an agreement to defer one or more payments, make a partial payment, forbear any delinquent amounts, modify a loan or contract, or any other assistance or relief” granted to a consumer affected by COVID-19 during the covered period. 2This FCRA overview is not legal guidance and does not enumerate all your requirements under the FCRA as a user of consumer reports. Additionally, this FCRA Overview is not intended to provide legal advice or counsel you regarding your obligations under the FCRA or any other federal or state law or regulation. Should you have any questions about your institution’s specific obligations under the FCRA or any other federal or state law or regulation, you should consult with your Legal Counsel. 3This FCRA overview is intended to be used solely by financial service providers when extending credit to consumers and does not include all FCRA regulatory obligations. You are responsible for regulatory compliance when requesting and using consumer reports, which includes adhering to all applicable federal and state statutes and regulations and ensuring that you have the correct policies and procedures in place.
To provide consumers with clear-cut protections against disturbance by debt collectors, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to implement the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) earlier this year. Among many other things, the proposal would set strict limits on the number of calls debt collectors may place to reach consumers weekly and clarify requirements for consumer-facing debt collection disclosures. A bigger discussion Deliberation of the debt collection proposal was originally scheduled to begin on August 18, 2019. However, to allow commenters to further consider the issues raised in the NPRM and gather data, the comment period was extended by 20 days to September 18, 2019. It is currently still being debated, as many argue that the proposed rule does not account for modern consumer preferences and hinders the free flow of information used to help consumers access credit and services. The Association of Credit and Collection Professionals (ACA International) and US House lawmakers continue to challenge the proposal, stating that it doesn’t ensure that debt collectors’ calls to consumers are warranted, nor does it do enough to protect consumers’ privacy. Many consumer advocates have expressed doubts about how effective the proposed measures will be in protecting debtors from debt collector harassment and see the seven-calls-a-week limit on phone contact as being too high. In fact, it’s difficult to find a group of people in full support of the proposal, despite the CFPB stating that it will help clarify the FDCPA, protect lenders from litigation and bring consumer protection regulation into the 21st century. What does this mean? Although we don’t know when, or if, the proposed rule will go into effect, it’s important to prepare. According to the Federal Register, there are key ways that the new regulation would affect debt collection through the use of newer technologies, required disclosures and limited consumer contact. Not only will the proposed rules apply to debt collectors, but its provisions will also impact creditors and servicers, making it imperative for everyone in the financial services space to keep watch on the regulation’s status and carefully analyze its proposed rules. At Experian, our debt collection solutions automate and moderate dialogues and negotiations between consumers and collectors, making it easier for collection agencies to connect with consumers while staying compliant. Our best-in-class data and analytics will play a key role in helping you reach the right consumer, in the right place, at the right time. Learn more
Earlier this year, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) to implement the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). The proposal, which will go into deliberation in September and won\'t be finalized until after that date at the earliest, would provide consumers with clear-cut protections against disturbance by debt collectors and straightforward options to address or dispute debts. Additionally, the NPRM would set strict limits on the number of calls debt collectors may place to reach consumers weekly, as well as clarify how collectors may communicate lawfully using technologies developed after the FDCPA’s passage in 1977. So, what does this mean for collectors? The compliance conundrum is ever present, especially in the debt collection industry. Debt collectors are expected to continuously adapt to changing regulations, forcing them to spend time, energy and resources on maintaining compliance. As the most recent onslaught of developments and proposed new rules have been pushed out to the financial community, compliance professionals are once again working to implement changes. According to the Federal Register, here are some key ways the new regulation would affect debt collection: Limited to seven calls: Debt collectors would be limited to attempting to reach out to consumers by phone about a specific debt no more than seven times per week. Ability to unsubscribe: Consumers who do not wish to be contacted via newer technologies, including voicemails, emails and text messages must be given the option to opt-out of future communications. Use of newer technologies: Newer communication technologies, such as emails and text messages, may be used in debt collection, with certain limitations to protect consumer privacy. Required disclosures: Debt collectors will be obligated to send consumers a disclosure with certain information about the debt and related consumer protections. Limited contact: Consumers will be able to limit ways debt collectors contact them, for example at a specific telephone number, while they are at work or during certain hours. Now that you know the details, how can you prepare? At Experian, we understand the importance of an effective collections strategy. Our debt collection solutions automate and moderate dialogues and negotiations between consumers and collectors, making it easier for collection agencies to reach consumers while staying compliant. Powerful locating solution: Locate past-due consumers more accurately, efficiently and effectively. TrueTraceSM adds value to each contact by increasing your right-party contact rate. Exclusive contact information: Mitigate your compliance risk with a seamless and unparalleled solution. With Phone Number IDTM, you can identify who a phone is registered to, the phone type, carrier and the activation date. If you aren’t ready for the new CFPB regulation, what are you waiting for? Learn more Note: Click here for an update on the CFPB\'s proposal.
Have you seen the latest Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) class action lawsuit? TCPA litigations in the communications, energy and media industries are dominating the headlines, with companies paying up to millions of dollars in damages. Consumer disputes have increased more than 500 percent in the past five years, and regulations continue to tighten. Now more than ever, it’s crucial to build effective and cost-efficient contact strategies. But how? First, know your facts. Second, let us help. What is the TCPA? As you’re aware, TCPA aims to safeguard consumer privacy by regulating telephone solicitations and the use of prerecorded messages, auto-dialed calls, text messages and unsolicited faxes. The rule has been amended and more tightly defined over time. Why is TCPA compliance important? Businesses found guilty of violating TCPA regulations face steep penalties – fines range from $500 to $1500 per individual infraction! Companies have been delivered hefty penalties upwards of hundreds of thousands, and in some cases, millions of dollars. Many have questions and are seeking to understand how they might adjust their policies and call practices. How can you protect yourself? To help avoid risk for compliance violations, it’s integral to assess call strategies and put best practices in place to increase right-party contact rates. Strategies to gain compliance and mitigate risk include: Focus on right and wrong-party contact to improve customer service: Monitoring and verifying consumer contact information can seem like a tedious task, but with the right combination of data, including skip tracing data from consumer credit data, alternative and other exclusive data sources, past-due consumers can be located faster. Scrub often for updated or verified information: Phone numbers can continuously change, and they’re only one piece of a consumer’s contact information. Verifying contact information for TCPA compliance with a partner you can trust can help make data quality routine. Determine when and how often you dial cell phones: Or, given new considerations proposed by the CFPB, consider looking at collections via your consumers’ preferred communication channel – online vs. over the phone. Provide consumers user-friendly mechanisms to opt-out of receiving communications At Experian, our TCPA solutions can help you monitor and verify consumer contact information, locate past-due consumers, improve your right-party contact rates and automate your collections process. Get started
Consumers and businesses alike have been hyper-focused on all things data over the past several months. From the headlines surrounding social media privacy, to the flurry of spring emails we’ve all received from numerous brands due to the recent General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) going into effect in Europe, many are trying to assess the data “sweet spot.” In the financial services space, lenders and businesses are increasingly seeking to leverage enhanced digital marketing channels and methods to deliver offers and invitations to apply. But again, many want to know, what are the data rules and how can they ensure they are playing it safe in such a highly regulated environment. In an Experian-hosted webinar, Credit Marketing in the Digital Age, the company recently featured a team of attorneys from Venable LLP’s award-winning privacy and advertising practice. There’s no question today’s consumers expect hyper-targeted messages and user experiences, but with the number of data breaches on the rise, there is also the concern around data access. Who has my data? Is it safe? Are companies using it in the appropriate way? As financial services companies wrestle with the laws and consumer expectations, the Venable legal team provided a few insights to consider. While the digital delivery channels may be new, the underlying credit product remains the same. A prescreened offer is a prescreened offer, and an application for credit is still an application for credit. The marketing of these and other credit products is governed by an array of pre-existing laws, regulations, and self-regulatory principles that combine to form a unique compliance framework for each of the marketing channels. Adhere to credit regulations, but build in enhanced policies and technological protocols with digital delivery. With digital delivery of the offer, lenders should be thinking about the additional compliance aspects attached to those varying formats. For example, in the case of digital display advertising, you should pay close attention to ensuring delivery of the ad to the correct consumer, with suitable protections in place for sharing data with vendors. Lenders and service providers also should think about using authentication measures to match the correct consumer with a landing page containing the firm offer along with the appropriate disclosures and opt-outs. Strong compliance policies are important for all participants in this process. Working with a trusted vendor that has a commitment to data security, compliance by design, and one that maintains an integrated system of decisioning and delivery, with the ability to scrub for FCRA opt-outs, is essential. Consult your legal, risk and compliance teams. The digital channels raise questions that can and must be addressed by these expert audiences. It is so important to partner with service providers that have thought this through and can demonstrate a compliance framework. Embrace the multitude of delivery methods. Yes, there are additional considerations to think about to ensure compliance, but businesses should seek opportunities to reach their consumers via email, text, digital display and beyond. Also, digital credit offers need not replace mail and phone and traditional channels. Rather, emerging digital channels can supplement a campaign to drive the response rates higher. In Mary Meeker’s annual tech industry report, she touched on a phenomenon called the “privacy paradox” in which companies must balance the need to personalize their products and services, but at the same time remain in good favor with consumers, watchdog groups and regulators. So, while financial services players have much to consider in the regulatory space, the expectation is they embrace the latest technology advancements to interact with their consumers. It can be done and the delivery methods exist today. Just ensure you are working with the right partners to respect the data and consumer privacy laws.
CFPB and credit invisibles A recent study by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) found that American consumers establish credit differently depending on their economic background. The study revealed that: Consumers in lower-income areas are 240% more likely to become credit visible due to negative information, such as a debt in collection. Those in higher-income areas become credit visible in a more positive way. For example, these consumers are 30% more likely to become credit visible through the use of a credit card. The percentage of consumers transitioning to credit visibility due to student loans more than doubled in the last 10 years. Policymakers can make it easier for consumers to become more credit visible by clearly defining the term alternative data and supporting the use of alternative data sources that meet legal and societal standards for accuracy, validity, predictability and fairness. Learn more >
On June 7, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) released a new study that found that the ways “credit invisible” consumers establish credit history can differ greatly based on their economic background. The CFPB estimated in its May 2015 study \"Data Point: Credit Invisibles\" that more than 45 million American consumers are credit invisible, meaning they either have a thin credit file that cannot be scored or no credit history at all. The new study reviewed de-identified credit records on more than one million consumers who became credit visible. It found that consumers in lower-income areas are 240 percent more likely to become credit visible due to negative information, such as a debt in collection. The CFPB noted consumers in higher-income areas become credit visible in a more positive way, with 30 percent more likely to become credit visible by using a credit card and 100 percent more likely to become credit visible by being added as a co-borrower or authorized user on someone else’s account. The study also found that the percentage of consumers transitioning to credit visibility due to student loans more than doubled in the last 10 years. CFPB’s research highlights the need for alternative credit data The new study demonstrates the importance of moving forward with inclusion of new sources of high-quality financial data — like on-time payment data from rent, utility and telecommunications providers — into a consumer’s credit file. Experian recently outlined our beliefs on the issue in comments responding to the CFPB’s Request for Information on Alternative Data. As a brand, we have a long history of using alternative credit data to help lenders make better lending decisions. Extensive research has shown that there is an immense opportunity to facilitate greater access to fair and affordable credit for underserved consumers through the inclusion of on-time telecommunications, utility and rental data in credit files. While these consumers may not have a traditional credit history, many make on-time payments for telephone, rent, cable, power or mobile services. However, this data is not typically being used to enhance traditional credit files held by the nationwide consumer reporting agencies, nor is it being used in most third-party or custom credit scoring models. Further, new advances in financial technology and data analytics through account aggregation platforms are also integral to the credit granting process and can be applied in a manner to broaden access to credit. Experian is currently using account aggregation software to obtain consumer financial account information for authentication and income verification to speed credit decisions, but we are looking to expand this technology to increase the collection and utilization of alternative data for improving credit decisions by lenders. Policymakers should act to help credit invisible consumers While Experian continues to work with telecommunications and utility companies to facilitate the furnishing of on-time credit data to the nationwide consumer reporting agencies, regulatory barriers continue to exist that deter utility and telecommunications companies from furnishing on-time payment data to credit bureaus. To help address this issue, Congress is currently considering bipartisan legislation (H.R. 435, The Credit Access and Inclusion Act of 2017) that would amend the FCRA to clarify that utility and telecommunication companies can report positive credit data, such as on-time payments, to the nation\' s credit reporting bureaus. The legislation has bipartisan support in Congress and Experian encourages lawmakers to move forward with this important initiative that could benefit tens of millions of American consumers. In addition, Experian believes policymakers should more clearly define the term alternative data. In public policy debates, the term \"alternative data\" is a broad term, often lumping data sources that can or have been proven to meet regulatory standards for accuracy and fairness required by both the Fair Credit Reporting Act and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act with data sources that cannot or have not been proven to meet these standards. In our comment letter, Experian encourages policymakers to clearly differentiate between different types of alternative data and focus the consumer and commercial credit industry on public policy recommendations that will increase the use of those sources of data that have or can be shown to meet legal and societal standards for accuracy, validity, predictability and fairness. More info on Alternative Credit Data More Info on Alternative Financial Services
So many insights and learnings to report after the first full day of 2017 Vision sessions. From the musings shared by tech engineer and pioneer Steve Wozniak, to a panel of technology thought leaders, to countless breakout sessions on a wide array of business topics … here’s a look at our top 10 from the day. A mortgage process for the digital age. At last. In his opening remarks, Experian President of Credit Services Alex Lintner asked the audience to imagine a world when applying for a mortgage simply required a few clicks or swipes. Instead of being sent home to collect a hundred pieces of paper to verify employment, income and assets, a consumer could click on a link and provide a few credentials to verify everything digitally. Finally, lenders can make this a reality, and soon it will be the only way consumers expect to go through the mortgage process. The global and U.S. economies are stable. In fact, they are strong. As Experian Vice President of Analytics Michele Raneri notes, “the fundamentals and technicals look really solid across the countries.” While many were worried a year ago that Brexit would turn the economy upside down, it appears everything is good. Consumer confidence is high. The Dow Jones Index is high. The U.S. unemployment rate is at 4.7%. Home prices are up year-over-year. While there has been a great deal of change in the world – politically and beyond – the economy is holding strong. The rise of the micropreneur. This term is not officially in the dictionary … but it will be. What is it? A micropreneur is a business with 0 to 4 employees bringing in no more than $200k in annual revenue. But the real story is that numbers show microbusiness are improving on many fronts when it comes to contribution to the economy and overall performance compared to other small businesses. Keep an eye on these budding business people. Fraud is running fierce. Synthetic identity losses are estimated in the hundreds of millions annually, with 50% year-over year growth. Criminals are now trying to use credit cleaners to get tradelines removed from used Synthetic IDs. Oh, and it is essential for businesses to ready themselves for “Dark Web” threats. Experts advise to harden your defenses (and play offense) to keep pace with the criminal underground. As soon as you think you’ve protected everything, the criminals will find a gap. The cloud is cool and so are APIs. A panel of thought leaders took to the main stage to discuss the latest trends in tech. Experian Global CIO Barry Libenson said, “The cloud has changed the way we deliver services to our customers and clients, making it seamless and elastic.” Combine that with API, and the goal is to ultimately make all Experian data available to its customers. Experian President of Decision Analytics Steve Platt added, “We are enabling you to tap into what you need, when you need it.” No need to “rip and replace” all your tech. Expect more regulation – and less. A panel of regulatory experts addressed the fast-changing regulatory environment. With the new Trump administration settling in, and calls for change to Dodd-Frank and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), it’s too soon to tell what will unfold in 2017. CFPB Director Richard Cordray may be making a run for governor of Ohio, so he could be transitioning out sooner than the scheduled close of his July 2018 term. The auto market continues to cruise. Experian’s auto expert, Malinda Zabritski, revealed the latest and greatest stats pertaining to the auto market. A few numbers to blow your mind … U.S. passenger cars and light trucks surpassed 17 million units for the second consecutive year Most new vehicle buyers in the U.S. are 45 years of age or older Crossover and sport utility vehicles remain popular, accounting for 40% of the market in 2016 – this is also driving up finance payments since these vehicles are more expensive. There are signs the auto market is beginning to soften, but interest rates are still low, and leasing is hot. Defining alternative data. As more in the industry discuss the need for alternative data to decision, it often gets labeled as something radical. But in reality, alternative data should be simple. Experian Sr. Director of Government Affairs Liz Oesterle defined it as “getting more financial data in the system that is predicted, validated and can be disputed.” #DeathtoPasswords – could it be a reality? It’s no secret we live in a digital world where we are increasingly relying on apps and websites to manage our lives, but let’s throw out some numbers to quantify the shift. In 2013, the average U.S. consumer had 26 online accounts. By 2015, that number increased to 118 online accounts. By 2020, the average person will have 207 online accounts. When you think about this number, and the passwords associated with these accounts, it is clear a change needs to be made to managing our lives online. Experian Vice President David Britton addressed his session, introducing the concept of creating an “ultimate consumer identity profile,” where multi-source data will be brought together to identify someone. It’s coming, and all of us managing dozens of passwords can’t wait. “The Woz.” I guess you needed to be there, but let’s just say he was honest, opinionated and notes that while he loves tech, he loves it even more when it enables us to live in the “human world.” Too much wonderful content to share, but more to come tomorrow …
It’s been a wild ride for the financial services industry over the past eight years. After the mortgage meltdown, the Great Recession and a stagnant economy … well, one could say the country had seen better days. Did you watch The Big Short last winter? It all came crumbling down. And then President Barack Obama entered the scene. Change was needed. More oversight introduced. Suddenly, we had the Affordable Care Act, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act and the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Taxes were raised on the country’s highest earners for the first time since the late-1990s. In essence, the pendulum swung hard and fast to a new era of tightened and rigorous regulation. Fast forward to present day and we find ourselves on the cusp of transitioning to new leadership for the country. A new president, new cabinet, new leaders in Congress. What will it all mean for financial services regulations? It’s helpful to initially take a look back at the key regulations that have been introduced over the past eight years. Mortgage Reform: Long gone are the days of obtaining a quick mortgage. New rules have required loan originators to verify and document the consumer’s income and assets, including employment status (if relied upon), existing debt obligations, mortgage-related obligations, alimony and child support. The CFPB has also expanded foreclosure protections for struggling borrowers and homeowners. Maintaining the health of the mortgage industry is important for the entire country, and updated rules have enhanced the safety and transparency of the mortgage market. Home values have largely recovered from the darkest days, but some question whether the underwriting criteria have become too strict. Combatting Fraud: The latest cyber-attack trends and threats come fast and furious. Thus, regulators are largely addressing the challenge by expecting banks to adhere to world-class standards from organizations such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA) implemented the Red Flags Rule in November 2008. It requires institutions to establish policies and procedures to identify and recognize red flags — i.e., patterns, practices or specific activities that indicate the possible existence of identity theft — that occur during account-opening activities, existing account maintenance and new activity on an account that has been inactive for two or more years. Loss Forecasting: The Dodd-Frank Act Requires the Federal Reserve to conduct an annual stress test of bank holding companies (BHCs), savings and loan holding companies, state member banks, and nonbank financial institutions. In October 2012, the Fed Board adopted the Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review (CCAR) rules. This requires banks with assets of $50 billion or more to submit to an annual review centered on a supervisory stress test to gauge capital adequacy. In January 2016, Dodd-Frank Act Stress Testing (DFAST) was introduced, requiring bank holding companies with assets of $10 billion or more to conduct separate annual stress tests known as “company-run tests” using economic scenarios. Every year regulators expect to see continued improvement in stress-testing models and capital-planning approaches as they raise the bar on what constitutes an acceptable practice. CFPB: No longer the new kids on the block, the CFPB has transitioned to an entity that has its tentacles into every aspect of consumer financial products. Mortgage lending was one of their first pursuits, but they have since dug into “ability-to-pay underwriting” and servicing standards for auto loans, credit cards and add-on products sold through third-party vendors. Now they are looking into will likely be the next “bubble,” – student lending – and educating themselves about online marketplace lending. Data Quality: Expectations related to data quality, risk analytics, and regulatory reporting have risen dramatically since the financial downturn. Inaccuracy in data is costly and harmful, slows down the industry, and creates frustration. In short, it’s bad for consumers and the industry. It’s no secret that financial institutions rely on the accuracy of credit data to make the most informed decisions about the creditworthiness of their customers. With intense scrutiny in this area, many financial institutions have created robust teams to handle and manage requirements and implement sound policies surrounding data accuracy. --- This is merely a sliver of the multiple regulations introduced and strengthened over the past eight years. Is there a belief that the regulatory pendulum might take a swing to other side with new leadership? Unlikely. The agenda for 2017 largely centers on the need to improve debt collections practices, enhance access to credit for struggling Americans, and the need for ongoing monitoring of the fintech space. Only time will tell, but one thing is certain. Anyone involved in financial services needs to keep a watchful eye on the ever-evolving world of regulation and Washington.
At the end of July, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) took a significant step toward reforming the regulatory framework for the debt collection and debt buying industry by announcing an outline of proposals under consideration. The proposals will now be considered by a small business review panel before the CFPB announces a proposed rule for wider industry comment. The CFPB said its proposals will affect only third-party debt collectors pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). However, the CFPB signaled it may consider a separate set of proposals for first-party collectors. The collections industry has long been a focus of the CFPB. In 2012, the bureau designated larger market participants in the debt collections marketplace and placed some of these entities under supervision. In 2013, the CFPB released an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking covering collections. The focus on debt collection is fueled in part by the large number of consumer complaints it receives about the debt collection market (roughly 35% of total complaints). Moreover, the CFPB’s proposals build upon some of the regulatory and enforcement priorities that the CFPB and Federal Trade Commission have pursued for several years around data quality, consumer communication and disclosures. Here are some of the key takeaways for third party debt collectors from the CFPB’s proposals: Address data quality: Collectors would be required to substantiate claims that a consumer owes a debt in order to begin a collection. Collectors would also be required to pass on information provided by consumers in the course of collections activity. New Validation Notice and Statement of Rights: The CFPB’s draft outline would update the information provided to consumers through the FDCPA validation notice, as well as require disclosure of a consumer statement of rights. Changes to frequency of communications: Debt collectors would be limited to six emails, phone calls or mailings per week, including unanswered calls and voicemails. After reaching the consumer, the debt collector would be allowed either one contact or three attempted contacts per week. There would also be a waiting period of 30 days before contacting the family of a debtor who has died. New disclosures on “out of statute” debt and litigation: In the outline, CFPB proposes having debt collectors provide new disclosures to consumers regarding the possibility of litigation and whether the debt is beyond the statute of limitations. Waiting period before sending collection accounts to a consumer reporting agency: Reporting a person’s debt would be prohibited under the draft outline unless the collector has first communicated directly with the consumer about the debt. The CFPB will next hear comments from a panel of small businesses in the industry, complete an analysis of how its proposals would impact small businesses, and take written comments from the public. Following those steps, the agency will issue a proposed rule for comment.
On June 2, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) proposed a rule aimed at “payday lending” that will apply to virtually all lenders, with request for comments by Sept. 14. Here is a summary of the basic provisions of the proposed rule. However, with comments, the proposal is more than 1,300 pages in length, and the proposed rule and examples are more than 200 pages long. It is necessary to review the details of the proposed rule to understand its potential impact on your products and processes fully. You may wish to review your current and future offerings with your institution’s counsel and compliance officer to determine the potential impact if major provisions of this proposed rule are finalized by the CFPB. Coverage The proposal generally would cover two categories of loans. First, the proposal generally would cover loans with a term of 45 days or less. Second, the proposal generally would cover loans with a term greater than 45 days, provided that they have an all-in annual percentage rate greater than 36 percent and either are repaid directly from the consumer’s account or income or are secured by the consumer’s vehicle. Ability to repay For both categories of covered loans, the proposal would identify it as an abusive and unfair practice for a lender to make a covered loan without reasonably determining that the consumer has the ability to repay the loan. Or if the lender does not determine if the consumer can make payments due, as well as meet major financial obligations and basic living expenses during and for 30 days after repayment. Lenders would be required to verify the amount of income that a consumer receives, after taxes, from employment, government benefits or other sources. In addition, lenders would be required to check a consumer’s credit report to verify the amount of outstanding loans and required payments. “Safe Harbor” The proposed rule would provide lenders with options to make covered loans without satisfying the ability-to-repay and payment notice requirements, if those loans meet certain conditions. The first option would be offering loans that generally meet the parameters of the National Credit Union Administration “payday alternative loans” program, where interest rates are capped at 28 percent and the application fee is no more than $20. The other option would be offering loans that are payable in roughly equal payments with terms not to exceed two years and with an all-in cost of 36 percent or less, not including a reasonable origination fee, so long as the lender’s projected default rate on these loans is 5 percent or less. The lender would have to refund the origination fees any year that the default rate exceeds 5 percent. Lenders would be limited as to how many of either type of loan they could make per consumer per year. Outstanding loans The proposal also would impose certain restrictions on making covered loans when a consumer has — or recently had — certain outstanding loans. These provisions are extensive and differ between short- and long-term loans. For example: Payday and single-payment auto title: If a borrower seeks to roll over a loan or returns within 30 days after paying off a previous short-term debt, the lender would be restricted from offering a similar loan. Lenders could only offer a similar short-term loan if a borrower demonstrated that their financial situation during the term of the new loan would be materially improved relative to what it was since the prior loan was made. The same test would apply if the consumer sought a third loan. Even if a borrower’s finances improved enough for a lender to justify making a second and third loan, loans would be capped at three in succession followed by a mandatory 30-day cooling-off period. High-cost installment loans: For consumers struggling to make payments under either a payday installment or auto title installment loan, lenders could not refinance the loan into a loan with similar payments. This is unless a borrower demonstrated that their financial situation during the term of the new loan would be materially improved relative to what it was during the prior 30 days. The lender could offer to refinance if that would result in substantially smaller payments or would substantially lower the total cost of the consumer’s credit. Payments Furthermore, it would be defined as an unfair and abusive practice to attempt to withdraw payment from a consumer’s account for a covered loan after two consecutive payment attempts have failed, unless the lender obtains the consumer’s new and specific authorization to make further withdrawals from the account. The proposal would require lenders to provide certain notices to the consumer before attempting to withdraw payment for a covered loan from the consumer’s account unless exempt under one of the “safe harbor” options. Registered information systems Finally, the proposed rule would require lenders to use credit reporting systems to report and obtain information about loans made under the full-payment test or the principal payoff option. These systems would be considered consumer reporting companies, subject to applicable federal laws and registered with the CFPB. Lenders would be required to report basic loan information and updates to that information. The proposed regulation may be found here.
Ensuring the quality of reported consumer credit data is a top priority for regulators, credit bureaus and consumers, and has increasingly become a frequent headline in press outlets when consumers find their data is not accurate. Think of any big financial milestone moment – securing a mortgage loan, auto loan, student loan, obtaining low-interest rate interest credit cards or even getting a job. These important transactions can all be derailed with an unfavorable and inaccurate credit report, causing consumers to hit social media, the press and regulatory entities to vent it out. Add in the laws and increased scrutiny from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and it is clear data furnishers are seeking ways to manage their data in more effective ways. At Vision 2016, I am hosting a session, Achievements in data reporting accuracy – maximizing data quality across your organization, with several panel guests willing to share their journeys and learnings attached to the topic of data accuracy. Our diverse panel features leaders from varying industries: Jodi Cook, DriveTime Alissa Hess, USAA Bank Tom Danchik, Citi Julie Moroschan, Experian Each will speak to how they’ve overcome challenges to introduce a data quality program into their respective organizations, as well as best practices around assessing, monitoring and correcting credit reporting issues. One speaker will even touch on the challenging topic of securing funding for a data quality program, considering budgets are most often allocated to strategies, products and marketing directly tied to driving revenue. All lenders are advised to maintain a full 360-degree view of data reporting, from raw data submissions to the consumer credit profile. Better data input equals fewer inaccuracies, and an overarching data integrity program, can deliver a comprehensive view that satisfies regulators, improves the customer experience and provides better insight for internal decision making. To learn more about implementing a data quality plan for your organization, check out Vision 2016.
When checking access accounts were first introduced, it wasn’t uncommon for banks to provide new customers “basic” transaction services in starter checking accounts. These services typically included an automatic teller machine (ATM) access card and the ability to withdraw cash at their local branch. As consumers developed a relationship and established financial trust with their bank, they eventually would get a checkbook, which allowed check-writing access. This took time and a consumer demonstrating both the willingness and ability to manage finances to the bank’s expectations. Establishing the financial relationship was a trust-building process. With the onset of general-purpose debit cards and a host of other digital money-movement capabilities, such as online banking, the majority of banks now offer just basic and preferred checking. A minimum acceptance standard leaves many consumers out of the financial transaction system, which is something that concerns regulatory bodies such as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Approval criteria vary across financial institutions, but a typical basic checking account has some form of overdraft feature enabled, and some consumers may not be able to afford these fees even if they elect to opt in for overdraft functionality. Nonetheless, banks still screen applicants to ensure prior accounts at other institutions were managed with no losses incurred by other banks. In today’s modern world, it is difficult to participate fully in our credit-driven society without a checking account at a recognized bank or credit union. The answer in many cases would be checking accounts for consumers that have either overdraft functionality assigned based on the consumer’s wish to opt in or overdraft access that matches that same consumer’s ability to pay. In early February, the CFPB passed new guidelines to increase access to basic check products. While a step towards making checking accounts available to all, the most recent actions still leave unresolved regulatory actions regarding what the CFPB refers to as “affordable” checking access. For instance, for those consumers without disposable income, the issue of fees for overdraft and nonsufficient funds is still an unresolved regulatory matter. In the most recent announcement, the CFPB took several actions related to its focus on increasing consumer access to checking transaction accounts with banks: Sending a letter to CEOs of the top 25 banks encouraging them to take steps to help consumers with affordable checking account access such as “no fee” and/or “no overdraft” checking accounts Providing several new resources to consumers such as a guide to “Low Risk Checking, Managing Checking and Consumer Guide to Checking Account Denial” Introducing the Consumer Protection Principles, which include a drive toward: Faster funds availability Improved consumer transparency into checking account fee structure, funds availability and security Tailoring products to reach a larger percentage of consumers Developing no-overdraft type checking products, which only a handful of large banking institutions had What lurks ahead for banks is the need to develop products that are designed to reach a larger population that includes under banked and unbanked consumers with troubled financial repayment history. Coupling this product development effort with the CFPB desire for no-overdraft-fee type products makes me wonder if we should look to account features from several decades ago, such as creating a 21st century version of the checking account with digital money-movement features that protects consumers’ privacy, but doesn’t put them in a position to rack up large amounts of overdraft fees they can’t afford to pay in the event they overdraw the checking account. Experian® suggests taking the following steps: Conduct a Business Review to ensure that your product offering includes the type of account the CFPB is advocating and your existing core banking platform can operationalize this account Align your checking account prospect and opening procedures to key segments to ensure more consumers are approved and right-sized to the appropriate checking product Enhance your business profitability by cross-selling credit products that fit the affordability and disposable income of various consumer segments you originate These steps will make your journey “back to the future” much less turbulent and ensure you don’t break the bank in your efforts to address CFPB’s well-intentioned focus on check access for consumers.
Time to dust off those compliance plans and ensure you are prepared for the new regulations, specifically surrounding the Military Lending Act (MLA). Last July, the Department of Defense (DOD) published a Final Rule to amend its regulation implementing the Military Lending Act, significantly expanding the scope of the existing protections. The new, beefed-up version encompasses new types of creditors and credit products, including credit cards. While the DOD was responsible for implementing the rule, enforcement will be led by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). The new rule became effective on October 1, 2015, and compliance is required by October 3, 2016. Compliance, however, with the rules for credit cards is delayed until October 3, 2017. While there is no formal guidance yet on what federal regulators will look for in reviewing MLA compliance, there are some insights on the law and what’s coming. Why was MLA enacted? It was created to provide service members and their dependents with specific protections. As initially implemented in 2007, the law: Limited the APR (including fees) for covered products to 36 percent; Required military-specific disclosures, and; Prohibited creditors from requiring a service member to submit to arbitration in the event of a dispute. It initially applied to three narrowly-defined “consumer credit” products: Closed-end payday loans; Closed-end auto title loans; and Closed-end tax refund anticipation loans. What are the latest regulations being applied to the original MLA implemented in 2007? The new rule expands the definition of “consumer credit” covered by the regulation to more closely align with the definition of credit in the Truth in Lending Act and Regulation Z. This means MLA now covers a wide range of credit transactions, but it does not apply to residential mortgages and credit secured by personal property, such as vehicle purchase loans. One of the most significant changes is the addition of fees paid “for a credit-related ancillary product sold in connection with the credit transaction.” Although the MAPR limit is 36 percent, ancillary product fees can add up and — especially for accounts that carry a low balance — can quickly exceed the MAPR limit. The final rule also includes a “safe harbor” from liability for lenders who verify the MLA status of a consumer. Under the new DOD rule, lenders will have to check each credit applicant to confirm that they are not a service member, spouse, or the dependent of a service member, through a nationwide CRA or the DOD’s own database, known as the DMDC. The rule also permits the consumer report to be obtained from a reseller that obtains such a report from a nationwide consumer reporting agency. MLA status for dependents under the age of 18 must be verified directly with the DMDC. Experian will be permitted to gain access to the DMDC data to provide lenders a seamless transaction. In essence, lenders will be able to pull an Experian profile, and MLA status will be flagged. What is happening between now and October 2016, when lenders must be compliant? Experian, along with the other national credit bureaus, have been meeting with the DOD and the DMDC to discuss providing the three national bureaus access to its MLA database. Key parties, such as the Financial Services Roundtable and the American Bankers Association, are also working to ease implementation of the safe harbor check for banks and lenders. The end goal is to enable lenders the ability to instantly verify whether an applicant is covered by MLA by the Oct. 1, 2016 compliance date. --- If you have inquiries about the new Military Lending Act regulations, feel free to email MLA.Support@experian.com or contact your Experian Account Executive directly. Next Article: A check-in on the latest Military Lending Act news
Accuracy matters. It matters in dart throwing, math calculations, and now more than ever, in data reporting. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued a bulletin on Feb. 3 warning banks and credit unions that if they fail to meet accuracy obligations when reporting negative account histories to credit reporting companies, the result could be bureau action. As noted in the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) section 623, data furnishers have an obligation to ensure the accuracy of the information furnished to a Credit Reporting Agency (CRA). Violation of these rules presents a variety of risks, and the regulatory agencies have enforced harsh consequences. Avoiding penalties is certainly a strong incentive for data furnishers to implement a formal compliance management system and data quality program. But there are additional benefits to ensuring accuracy – most notably keeping customers happy and loyal, and maintaining a reputable brand in the marketplace. Today’s consumers increasingly understand the impact of credit scoring and data reporting, and recognize a poor credit score can impact their lives in major ways. Credit is tied to so many milestone financial moments. Securing mortgage loans, auto loans, obtaining low-interest rate interest credit cards and securing private student loans can all be derailed with an unfavorable and inaccurate credit report. Not to mention credit reports can influence one’s eligibility for rental housing, setting premiums for auto and homeowners insurance in some states, or determining whether to hire an applicant for a job. To properly serve customers who simply expect a fair and accurate representation of their financial history, data furnishers must be able to guarantee the credibility of their reported data. Those organizations that cannot ensure accuracy put their reputation at risk and may lose a customer’s trust and business. “Consumers should not be sidelined out of the basic banking services they need because of the flaws and limitations in a murky system,” Cordray said in the bulletin. “People deserve to have more options for access to lower-risk deposit accounts that can better fit their needs.” The CFPB has handled more than 105,000 credit-reporting complaints in its short history, making credit reporting the third most-complained-about consumer issue. By far the most common types of credit-reporting issues identified by consumers is incorrect information on credit report (77 percent).* Certainly these mistakes are not made intentionally. But speak to a consumer battling an inaccuracy, especially someone in the midst of applying for credit for a specific need, and frustrations can soar quickly. All lenders are advised to maintain a full 360-degree view of data reporting, from raw data submissions to the consumer credit profile. Better data input equals fewer inaccuracies. Additionally, there are comprehensive reporting solutions available to assess the accuracy of consumer credit data. The regulatory environment will without a doubt continue to be a hot topic in the media, fueled by announcements such as these by the CFPB, so lenders should take note and identify processes to ensure complete and utter accuracy. It matters in so many ways, so it’s best to make data reporting a priority now, if it’s not already. Source: CFPB August 2015 Monthly Complaint Report
Learn More Image
