Consumer Financial Protection Bureau To Oversee Nonbank Auto Finance Companies

cfpb

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau To Oversee Nonbank Auto Finance Companies
Bureau Publishes Exam Procedures for Supervised Companies in $900 Billion Market

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 10, 2015

Washington, D.C. – The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) published a rule today that will allow the agency to supervise larger nonbank auto finance companies for the first time. The CFPB also released the examination procedures that examiners will use to ensure that auto finance companies are following the law.
“Auto loans and leases are among the most significant and complex financial transactions in a typical consumer’s life,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray. “Today’s rule will help ensure that larger auto finance companies treat consumers fairly.”

Auto loans are the third largest category of household debt, behind mortgages and student loans. American consumers had about $900 billion in auto loans outstanding in the fourth quarter of 2014. The automobile leasing market also continues to grow as more than a quarter of new cars are acquired through leases.

Auto loans are financed by both banks and nonbanks. Consumers can either get a loan through direct financing, where they seek credit directly from a lender, or through indirect financing, where an auto dealer typically enters into a retail installment sales contract that it then sells to a third-party. Banks, credit unions, and nonbank auto finance companies provide credit to consumers both directly and indirectly. Some nonbank finance companies are “captive” nonbanks, meaning they are owned by auto manufacturers and generally do only indirect lending.

Currently, the Bureau supervises auto financing at the largest banks and credit unions. Today’s rule extends that supervision to any nonbank auto finance company that makes, acquires, or refinances 10,000 or more loans or leases in a year. Under the rule, those companies will be considered “larger participants,” and the Bureau may oversee their activity to ensure they are complying with federal consumer financial laws, including the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Truth in Lending Act, the Consumer Leasing Act, and the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act’s (Dodd-Frank Act) prohibition on unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices.

Under today’s final rule, which was proposed in September 2014, the Bureau estimates that it will have authority to supervise about 34 of the largest nonbank auto finance companies and their affiliated companies that engage in auto financing. These companies together originate around 90 percent of nonbank auto loans and leases, and in 2013 provided financing to approximately 6.8 million consumers. The final rule also defines additional automobile leasing activities for coverage by certain consumer protections of the Dodd-Frank Act.

The Bureau is finalizing the rule largely as proposed, with minor changes. The final rule broadens the category of transactions involving asset-backed securities that are not counted toward the 10,000 transaction threshold. It also makes a minor modification to the definition of refinancing for the purpose of the threshold.

To coincide with this new authority, the Bureau has also updated its Supervisory and Examination Manual to provide guidance on how the Bureau will monitor the bank and nonbank auto finance companies that it supervises. Examiners will be assessing potential risks to consumers and whether auto finance companies are complying with requirements of federal consumer financial law. Among other things, examiners will be evaluating whether auto finance companies are:

  • Fairly marketing and disclosing auto financing terms: The Bureau will be examining auto finance companies that market directly to consumers to ensure they are not using deceptive tactics to market loans or leases. The Bureau would be concerned if consumers are being misled about the benefits or terms of financial products. The Bureau is also looking to ensure that consumers understand the terms they are getting.
  • Providing accurate information to credit bureaus: The Bureau will assess whether information auto finance companies provide to credit bureaus is accurate. The CFPB recently took an enforcement action against an auto finance company that distorted consumer credit records by inaccurately reporting information like the consumers’ payment history and delinquency status to credit bureaus. The CFPB is looking to prevent inaccurate information from being reported in the future.
  • Treating consumers fairly when collecting debts: The Bureau will assess whether auto finance companies are using illegal debt collection tactics. The Bureau will be looking to ensure that collectors are relying on accurate information and using legal processes when they collect on debts. The Bureau also will review the repossession process, including the practices of third-party service providers that are employed to repossess autos.
  • Lending fairly: The Bureau will assess whether auto finance companies’ practices comply with the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and other Bureau authorities protecting consumers.

Today’s rule will take effect 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.

A copy of the rule published today can be found at: http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/201506_cfpb_defining-larger-participants-of-the-automobile-financing-market-and-defining-certain-automobile-leasing-activity-as-a-financial-product-or-service.pdf

The Examination Procedures for Auto Finance can be found at: http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/201506_cfpb_automobile-finance-examination-procedures.pdf

CONTACT: Office of Communications Tel: (202) 435-7170

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Related Articles

Copy of Hildebrand-2016
December 5, 2021
Although a Chapter 13 debtor has the absolute right to voluntarily dismiss her Chapter 13 case, even after a motion to convert is filed, the Court retains the rights to impose restrictions on the dismissal. (Waites) In re Brittany Frances Minogue, 2021 WL 4453589 (Bankr. D. S.C. September 29, 2021) Summary Brittany Minogue filed a voluntary petition under Chapter 13...
Members
Danielle headshot (2)
January 30, 2022
Gambling is inherently risky, but that rings even more true when a bankruptcy is involved. Section 727(a)(5) allows for denial of discharge if “the debtor has failed to explain satisfactorily, …. any loss of assets or deficiency of assets to meet the debtor’s liabilities.” 11 U.S.C. §727(a)(5). Recently, Bankruptcy Judge Timothy A. Barnes in Chicago wrote an opinion in which...
Members
November 7, 2021
By Sean G. O'Hair, Staff Attorney to Chapter 13 Standing Trustee Nancy Curry (Los Angeles, CA) Recent changes to the Handbook for Chapter 13 Standing Trustees promise to bring renewed scrutinyto the reasonableness of document requests by a chapter 13 trustee for documents that are not otherwise required to be provided by law.1 The basic idea appears to be that...
Members
June 2, 2019
By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the Middle District of Tennessee If a Chapter 13 debtor does not list a creditor on the creditor matrix when filing the petition and makes no effort to provide supplemental notice to the creditor, the provisions of Rule 3002 allow the extension of time for the creditor to file a...
Members
M Joseph Photo 2-1-22
January 21, 2024
“Is it possible to voluntarily convert a chapter 13 case to chapter 7, and later reconvert back to chapter 13? There is a split of authority on whether this maneuver is allowed.”
Members
July 21, 2019
By John P. Gustafson, United States Bankruptcy Judge, Northern District of Ohio, Western Division Click here for Part 1 B. The Duty To Disclose Post-Petition Causes Of Action. 1. The Waldron Decision. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals considered the issue of whether or not a post-petition cause of action is . . . It looks like you are not...
Members
May 12, 2019
By Judge Michael A. Fagone & Career Law Clerk Ciera S. Dye III. Policy Considerations Where the statute does not provide definitive guidance, courts often turn to policy considerations. How do those considerations weigh out here? One answer is that policy considerations cut against imposing any sort of requirement of preapproval for postpetition borrowing by a consumer debtor. Several reasons...
Members
August 15, 2021
After the CARES Act’s 120-day moratorium on evictions ended, the Centers for Disease Control (“CDC”) extended the moratorium, with the CDC’s order based on authority under the Public Health Service Act of 1944. CDC stepped into the landlord-tenant arena to make and enforce regulations necessary to prevent spread of COVID-19, citing 42 U.S.C. § 264(a). Subsequent to CDC’s action, Congress...
Academy Circle Logo Final
February 18, 2024
FFIEC Issues Statement on Examination Principles Related to Valuation Discrimination and Bias in Residential Lending
Jeffrey-Fraser
August 13, 2023
In this brief synopsis, Fraser compares Lac du Flambeauto a case from the Middle District Court of North Carolina and its connection to the automatic stay.
Members

Looking to Become a Member?

ConsiderChapter13.org offers a forum to advance continuing education of consumer bankruptcy via access to insightful articles, informative webinars, and the latest industry news. Join now to benefit from expert resources and stay informed.

Webinars

These informative sessions are led by industry experts and cover a range of consumer bankruptcy topics.

Member Articles

Written by industry experts, these articles provide in-depth analysis and practical guidance on consumer bankruptcy topics.

Industry News

The Academy is the go-to source for the latest news and analysis in the Chapter 13 bankruptcy industry.

To get started, please let us know which of these best fits your current position: