Corporate Counsel
  • Home
  • News
  • Surveys
  • Resources
  • Lawjobs
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Bookstore
  • Contact

Topics » IP Insider | Labor & Employment | From the Experts | On the Job | Moves | DC Watch | International

Home > Top 5 Questions About the CFPB's 'Larger Participant Rule'

Font Size: increase font decrease font

Previous

  • 1
  • 2

Top 5 Questions About the CFPB's "Larger Participant Rule"

January 14, 2013

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 

4.    Who Else May be Affected by the Rule?

“Service Providers”

Importantly, the new rule also covers “service providers”: any person who provides a material service to a larger participant in connection with their offering of a consumer financial product or service. The CFPB’s investigation and enforcement power over service providers, however, is not governed by the amount of their annual receipts.

As a result, the new rule threatens to affect many more debt collection firms than the CFPB’s projected estimate of 175. Law firms that provide services to a larger participant’s debt collection activities especially should be concerned with this broad CFPB reach, since they could be vulnerable despite limited engagement in debt collection activities.

“Risky” Businesses

While the CFPB has made strides in its attempt to supervise as many financial service companies as possible, the agency in May announced a proposal for a rule where a “riskiness” determination will allow it to supervise non-banks that it would otherwise not be able to reach. Likewise, the CFPB could theoretically try to assert supervision over entire industries based on its riskiness assessment. The bureau will be able to do so merely because of a subjective decision based upon company or industry conduct. This is an obvious and troublesome back door around the larger participant rule, which limits the CFPB’s supervision to non-banks offering consumer reporting whose annual receipts from consumer reporting exceed $7 million, and non-banks providing consumer debt collection whose annual receipts from such activity exceed $10 million.

5. What Should Companies and Firms Do Now?

While the CFPB has fundamentally altered the consumer protection regulatory landscape, the CFPB also is busy defining the scope of its direct examination and supervision powers, which will have a dramatic impact on the surprisingly broad sweep of the powers being claimed by the agency. At this stage, the force of the CFPB’s new supervisory authority over debt collectors still is being determined. Based on its recent enforcement actions, however—resulting in large settlements and fines of up to $250 million—any company under the CFPB’s purview must be knowledgeable about its practices and procedures. A CFPB investigation not only creates the risk of enormous compliance costs and settlement amounts, but also the danger of disclosing confidential documents and other privileged information. That disclosure presents a major risk of future litigation, especially given the high-profile nature of the CFPB enforcement actions.

For law firms engaging in debt collecting, moreover, the compliance pitfalls associated with a CFPB investigation are particularly significant. Legal professionals have heightened duties of confidentiality to their clients and must maintain certain ethical standards in their practices. These standards are established and regulated by state bars and could potentially be implicated during a CFPB enforcement action.

Although the CFPB contends that state bar regulations and conduct rules of federal consumer finance law are never in conflict, the legal basis for that claim has yet to be endorsed by any court. So law firms need to review their collection practices, including litigation involving security interests or other potentially defaulting assets. An internal audit by all companies potentially affected by the rule may be wise.

Ultimately, the takeaway for all “larger” debt collectors is that a CFPB investigation is no minor event. Establishing efficient compliance and response procedures now will only save more time and money in the future. Internal compliance audits should be under way to ensure preparedness for CFPB oversight in 2013 and beyond.

David N. Anthony and Alan D. Wingfield are partners in the Richmond, Virginia, office of Troutman Sanders and members of the firm’s CFPB team. Anthony also heads the firm’s financial services litigation practice group. Virginia Bell Flynn and H. Scott Kelly are associates with the CFPB team. They can be reached at
cfpb@troutmansanders.com.

Previous

  • 1
  • 2


Subscribe to Corporate Counsel

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Firms mentioned

    
  • Troutman Sanders

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • FTC
  • Consumer Sentinel
  • CFPB Consumer Response Center
  • IRS
  • Better Business Bureau

Key categories

    
  • Banking & Finance
  • Corporate & Business Law
  • Executive Agencies

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Safeguarding Brand Reputation In Social Media
    •      
  2. Another SEC Whistleblower, More On the Way
    •      
  3. Patent Board's SAP Ruling is First Under New AIA Rules
    •      
  4. Are GCs More Than Just Legally Trained Executives?
    •      
  5. What to Look for in a Board's Risk Director
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

In-House Counsel Go to Privacy Boot Camp

In-House Changes at News Corp Ahead of Corporate Split

Proskauer, Former CFO Settle Bias Suit

Global Firms Cope With Istanbul Unrest

D.C. Circuit Nominations a Defining Moment

D.C. Circuit Nominees Widely Respected Within the Bar

Nine Tips to Avoid Starring in a Spreadsheet Horror Story

Snapshot: Tom Gelbmann

The Recorder 25: California Golden Again for Many Firms
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Capital Accounts: Judicial Branch's Brothers Don't See Eye to Eye
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Miami Photographer Sues Pop Star Justin Bieber
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Jeremy Alters Settles With Argentinian Firm For $1 Million
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Alcotest Should Be Discontinued Right Away, DWI Lawyers Say

Lawyer's Fudging of Forms Draws N.J. High Court Censure
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Ties to Senecas Cannot Shield Golf Course Developer, Panel Says
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Circuit Decision Costs Prevailing Attorneys $200,000 Fee Award
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Corbett Signs Bill to Eliminate Traffic Court

Christian College Granted Injunction In Obamacare Suit
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Sorry, Charlie, Your Wife Won't Support You

Top Reasons to Take Your Husband's Name

Interim Dean Named at Texas Wesleyan University School of Law
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Water Works: H2O Kept Lawyer-Lobbyists Busy
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Boosting Lawyers And Saving Lives
  •      
    • Subscription Required

11th Circuit Conflicted On Juveniles Stance
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Chimp Attack Victim Is Denied $150M State Lawsuit

Auto Body Case May Lead To CUTPA Reassessment

  • About Corporate Counsel   |
  • Contact Corporate Counsel   |
  • Advertise with Us   |
  • Sitemap
  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy (updated 6/14/13) |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media