As the only law firm small entity representative (SER) to participate in a second SBREFA panel, I came to the process with a certain level of comfort, but with preconceived notions of how the process would unfold. The first SBREFA panel in which we participated concerned the CFPB’s proposed arbitration rules. While the process was similar, the overall feel of the panel that convened on August 25, 2016 to engage the CFPB on Debt Collector and Debt Buyer Rulemaking was very different.
Of the nineteen SERs that convened from around the country, only four were law firms. Three of the law firm SERs were in the room, and one was participating on the panel via telephone. The panel consisted of three unique constituencies: debt buyers, collection agencies, and law firms.
Our approach when reviewing the voluminous documents and discussion topics focused on the theme of “clarity.” The law firms that are dedicated to compliance and the ethical treatment of consumers desire to follow the rules that will be ultimately adopted. In order to do that, however, the rules have to be absolutely clear. Rules that are ambiguous and arbitrary open law firms to regulatory sanctions as well as consumer litigation.
View this content by subscribing
Please register to unlock this content
I already have an account. Log in
