Advertisement
Debt collectors are regulated by the FTC on the federal level. At the state level, attorneys general are typically responsible for enforcing state and federal laws. A few local governments also separately regulate debt collectors.
The laws that govern the ARM industry are civil, meaning that liability is almost always monetary. So a state’s attorney general will not file criminal charges against a debt collector accused of violating the law, rather, he/she will sue for damages. Collection laws include federal and state statutes that govern the proper operation of companies and personnel that work in the debt collection industry. The most comprehensive collection law is the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). Other federal laws that collectors must follow include the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and the data security requirements of the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLBA).
New York City’s Department of Consumer Affairs in 2009 passed onerous requirements for ARM companies operating in the city. The new regulations have been widely discussed in the debt collection community ever since. But now that the rules are in full swing, the Department is taking action against collection agencies and debt buyers.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and the Conference of State Bank Supervisors (CSBS), acting on behalf of state financial regulatory authorities, announced Tuesday a framework which establishes a process for coordination on supervision and enforcement matters. The framework will apply in situations where the CFPB and state regulators share concurrent supervisory jurisdiction.
So, where does this leave us and what does all of this mean? Clearly, the TCPA and the interpretation thereof are in flux. Creditors and debt collectors have come to rely upon the 2008 FCC ruling as a means in which to establish prior express consent under the TCPA. Mais now holds that neither a creditor nor a debt collector have consent to call a cell phone number via automated dialing equipment or to leave prerecorded messages under the TCPA merely by obtaining a phone number provided on a credit application.
Two bills in major Western U.S. states aimed at reining in debt collection practices have recently advanced in their respective legislative chambers. One targets debt buyers specifically while the other is designed to more tightly control debt collectors working for government clients.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) this week announced the launch of a site designed to provide Spanish-speaking Americans with “clear, unbiased information about financial products and services.”
A United States District Court recently concluded that certain states’ judicial structures provide that the Circuit Courts are considered “judicial districts” for purposes of the required venue provisions in the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692i, but township small claims courts are not.
The latest rumblings about the debt collection and accounts receivable management industry are a mixed bag for credit and collection professionals.
Ontario Systems and the Columbia Ultimate family of companies announced today a limited partnership to deliver accounts receivable management (ARM) and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) compliance solutions to their clients.
Higher contact rates – it’s the stat every collections operation strives for. More contacts means more promises. And more promises means more revenue. So it’s no surprise agencies, healthcare offices, asset purchasers, law firms, and every other collections operation under the sun are investing in technology that they hope will dial more lines and waste [...]
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has been very busy lately, of course. Most of its attention seems to be focused on various sectors of the consumer finance industry. But the agency did recently reveal its intention to return some focus to the debt collection industry.