Final CFPB Arbitration Rule could increase risk of litigation for a variety of financial services companies
The Consumer Financial Protection Board (CFPB) recently published its much-anticipated final mandatory arbitration rule. It prohibits certain consumer financial products and services companies from using consumer arbitration agreements to bar the consumer from filing or participating in a class action. If Congress fails to intervene, the rules would increase the risk of litigation, particularly class-action lawsuits, for a variety of financial services companies.
As previously discussed on this blog, the Dodd-Frank Act ordered the CFPB to study the use of arbitration clauses in consumer financial markets. It also authorized the agency to issue regulations that “prohibit or impose conditions or limitations on the use of an agreement between a covered person and a consumer for a consumer financial product or service providing for arbitration of any future dispute between the parties” if the regulation is “in the public interest and for the protection of consumers.”
After concluding that pre-dispute arbitration agreements are being widely used to prevent consumers from seeking relief from legal violations on a class basis, the CFPB published its proposed rulemaking in May, 2016. Not surprisingly, the proposal received harsh criticism from a number of key players in the financial industry, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, American Bankers Association, and Consumer Bankers Association. The same groups are now speaking out against the final rule, arguing that arbitration is essential to preventing frivolous and costly lawsuits.
CFPB’s Final Rule Proposal
The CFPB’s final class-action rule prohibits covered providers, including companies that provide credit cards, checking and deposit accounts, prepaid cards, money transfer services, certain auto loans, auto title loans, small dollar or payday loans, private student loans, and installment loans, from using a pre-dispute arbitration agreement to block consumer class actions in court. It requires most providers to insert language into their arbitration agreements reflecting this limitation.
Under the rule, a covered provider must ensure that any pre-dispute arbitration agreement contains the following provision: “We agree that neither we nor anyone else will rely on this agreement to stop you from being part of a class action case in court. You may file a class action in court or you may be a member of a class action filed by someone else.”
Businesses that elect to use arbitration clauses for individual disputes must submit certain information to the CFPB, including the arbitration claims filed and awards issued. According to the CFPB, it will use the information it collects to “continue monitoring arbitral and court proceedings to determine whether there are developments that raise consumer protection concerns that may warrant further Bureau action.”
Arbitration Rule Could Be Short-Lived
The new rule is scheduled to take effect 60 days following publication in the Federal Register and applies to contracts entered into more than 180 days after that. However, Congress may act to overturn the rule before it ever takes effect.
The Financial Choice Act, which aims to undo many provisions of Dodd-Frank, provides: “Section 1028 of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (12 U.S.C. 5518) is hereby repealed.” The CFPB’s authority to restrict mandatory arbitration is set forth in Section 1028.
Even more likely, lawmakers could rely on the Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to overturn any federal regulation enacted within the past 60 days. Republicans previously relied on the statute to undo many regulations passed in the waning days of the Obama Administration.
The question remains whether enough Republicans are willing to suffer at least some fallout with voters who support the consumer protections provided under the new rule. We will continue to track the status of the CFPB arbitration rule, so please check back for updates.
Do you have any questions regarding the final CFPB arbitration rule? Would you like to discuss the matter further? If so, please contact me, Joel Kreizman, at 201-806-3364.
Breaking Down New Jersey’s “Mansion” Tax: What Buyers and Sellers Need to Know
For many years, the New Jersey Mansion Tax has been a significant consideration in high-value real estate transactions. Recent legislative changes, however, have substantially altered how the tax operates, including who is responsible for paying it and the amount owed in certain transactions. Whether you are purchasing, selling, or investing in New Jersey real estate, […]
Estate Planning for Digital Assets Under New Jersey Law
As our personal and financial lives increasingly move online, estate planning must evolve to address a new category of property: digital assets. From email accounts and social media profiles to cryptocurrency and cloud-stored business records, these assets often carry both financial and sentimental value. Yet, without proper planning, they can become inaccessible—or even lost—upon incapacity […]
The Role of Representation and Warranty Insurance in M&A Transactions
In today’s mergers and acquisitions market, representation and warranty (R&W) insurance has become a common feature of deal negotiations. Once used primarily in larger transactions, R&W insurance is now frequently incorporated into middle-market deals as buyers and sellers look for efficient ways to allocate risk and close deals. When structured properly, R&W insurance can help […]
You Just Received a Federal Grand Jury Subpoena in New Jersey: Now What?
Receiving a federal grand jury subpoena is not something most businesses or individuals anticipate. While it can be concerning, a federal grand jury subpoena does not necessarily mean that you are being accused of wrongdoing. It does, however, mean that a federal criminal investigation is underway and that federal prosecutors believe you may possess information […]
Why Every Business Should Conduct an Annual Insurance Coverage Review
Most New Jersey business owners purchase insurance policies, file them away, and assume they are protected if a claim arises. Without a regular insurance coverage review, many companies discover gaps only after a lawsuit, cyberattack, property loss, or other significant event occurs. An annual insurance coverage review can help businesses identify potential risks, ensure their […]
Demand Letters & Cease and Desist Letters: When to Send One (and When Not To)
Businesses and individuals often encounter situations where another party breaches a contract, fails to pay a debt, or continues harmful conduct. In many such disputes, a precisely drafted demand letter or cease-and-desist letter serves as a powerful legal tool. It can frequently resolve the dispute and avoid litigation. While demand or cease-and-desist letters can resolve […]
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
