Consumer Finance Monitor

On January 17, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in two cases in which the question presented is whether the Court should overrule its 1984 decision in Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc. That decision produced what became known as the "Chevron judicial deference framework" - the two-step analysis that courts typically invoke when reviewing a federal agency’s interpretation of a statute. This two-part episode repurposes our webinar held in February 2024 and brings together as our guests three renowned administrative law professors, Kent Barnett, Jack Beermann, and Craig Green, and a leading Supreme Court practitioner, Carter Phillips, all of whom are experts on Chevron. In Part II, our guests share their reactions to the oral arguments, including their views on what the Justices’ questions and comments reveal about the Justices’ thinking, their predictions for how the Court will rule, and potential implications of the Court’s ruling on existing and future regulations. Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel in Ballard Spahr’s Consumer Financial Services Group, leads the discussion.

On January 17, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in two cases in which the question presented is whether the Court should overrule its 1984 decision in Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc. That decision produced what became known as the "Chevron judicial deference framework" - the two-step analysis that courts typically invoke when reviewing a federal agency’s interpretation of a statute. This two-part episode repurposes our webinar held in February 2024 and brings together as our guests three renowned administrative law professors, Kent Barnett, Jack Beermann, and Craig Green, and a leading Supreme Court practitioner, Carter Phillips, all of whom are experts on Chevron. In Part I, we first review the Chevron decision and judicial deference framework and the background of the two cases now before the Supreme Court. We then look at the history of judicial review of agency action culminating with the current challenge to Chevron deference, including the origins of judicial deference to agency action, the political shift away from judicial deference, and key post-Chevron decisions. We conclude with a discussion of the principal arguments made to the Supreme Court for upholding Chevron and for overruling Chevron. Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel in Ballard Spahr’s Consumer Financial Services Group, leads the discussion.

Our special guest is Brad Blower, Principal and Founder of Inclusive-Partners LLC, and author of a recent blog post titled “The CFPB Has An Opportunity to Greatly Advance the Ethical and Non-Discriminatory Use of AI in Financial Services and Should Take It.” We first discuss the lack of clear guidance from the CFPB on the non-discriminatory use of AI and the possible reasons for the CFPB’s apparent reticence to provide more specific guidance. We then identify the specific areas where additional guidance from the CFPB could be helpful and specific steps the CFPB could take to address the lack of clarity. We conclude with a discussion of where industry, in the absence of clear guidance from the CFPB, is heading in its efforts to achieve fairness when using AI without compromising the accuracy of underwriting models and what the CFPB will likely be doing over the next year to address fairness concerns. Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel in Ballard Spahr’s Consumer Financial Services Group, hosts the conversation.

Our special guest is Richard (“Rick”) Hackett, former Assistant CFPB Director responsible for auto finance regulation and presently a member of the Board of F&I Sentinel, which supports lender compliance in the auto finance and insurance industry. In December 2023, the FTC announced its final Combatting Auto Retail Scams Rule, otherwise known as the “CARS Rule,” which sets new requirements on the sale, financing, and leasing of new and used vehicles by motor vehicle dealers. This two-part podcast episode repurposes a recent webinar. In Part II, we begin with a discussion of how the Rule impacts the sale of add-on products. We then discuss the Rule’s impact beyond motor vehicle dealers covered by the Rule and the Rule’s intersection with other laws and regulations, including state law and the FTC’s Used Car Rule and Proposed Rule on Unfair or Deceptive Fees. We conclude with a discussion of best practices for auto sales finance companies to help navigate the Rule’s new requirements. Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel in Ballard Spahr’s Consumer Financial Services Group, moderates the discussion, joined by John Culhane and Michael Guerrero, Partners in the Group, and Brian Turetsky, Of Counsel in the Group.

Our special guest is Richard (“Rick”) Hackett, former Assistant CFPB Director responsible for auto finance regulation and presently a member of the Board of F&I Sentinel, which supports lender compliance in the auto finance and insurance industry. In December 2023, the FTC announced its Combatting Auto Retail Scams Rule, otherwise known as the “CARS Rule,” which sets new requirements on the sale, financing, and leasing of new and used vehicles by motor vehicle dealers. This two-part podcast episode repurposes a recent webinar. In Part I, we begin with a discussion of the legal challenge filed by the National Automobile Dealers Association seeking judicial review of the CARS Rule, the FTC’s postponement of the Rule’s effective date, and potential legislative challenges to the Rule. We then discuss the Rule’s scope and key definitions, the misrepresentations that are expressly prohibited under the Rule, and the Rule’s new disclosure requirements on dealer advertising and sales communications. Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel in Ballard Spahr’s Consumer Financial Services Group, moderates the discussion, joined by John Culhane and Michael Guerrero, Partners in the Group, and Brian Turetsky, Of Counsel in the Group.

In October 2023, the CFPB issued a groundbreaking proposal on personal financial data. This episode, which repurposes a webinar, begins with a review of the background of the rulemaking. We then discuss key provisions of the proposal, including the entities, data, and financial products and services that would be covered, the obligations that would be imposed on covered entities, and exceptions to the proposal’s requirements. We also look at the compliance timeline, practical takeaways, and the proposal’s operational impact on covered entities. We conclude with a discussion of the CFPB’s advisory opinion dealing with consumer requests for information. Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel in Ballard Spahr’s Consumer Financial Services Group, moderates the discussion joined by Ronald Vaske, a partner in the Group, Kristen Larson, Of Counsel in the Group, and Gregory Szewczyk, a Ballard Spahr partner and Practice Leader of the firm’s Privacy and Data Security Group.

Our special guest is Zarik Khan, Founder of Finsolute Advisors. In October 2023, the Federal Reserve Board issued a proposal to lower the maximum interchange fee that a large debit card issuer can receive for a debit card transaction. We first look at the roles of the various parties involved in a typical transaction in which a consumer uses a debit card to make a purchase from a merchant and the various fees imposed in connection with the transaction. We then discuss how the current debit interchange fee cap contained in the Fed’s final rule implementing the Durbin Amendment (Regulation II) that went into effect in October 2011 has impacted each of the parties involved in a typical debit card transaction, the Fed’s rationale for its new proposal and related study, and the proposal’s implications for each of the parties. We conclude with a discussion of the proposal’s prospects and the potential impact of a U.S. Supreme Court decision overruling Chevron on the proposal if implemented. Alan Kaplinsky, Senior Counsel in Ballard Spahr’s Consumer Financial Services Group, hosts the conversation.

This special podcast episode, hosted by Senior Counsel and former Consumer Financial Services Practice Leader Alan Kaplinsky, sets the stage for the upcoming oral argument in the two U.S. Supreme Court cases where the fate of Chevron deference hangs in the balance. This episode provides an essential roadmap for anyone who will listen to the oral argument or is following this critical challenge to this important doctrine. Our special guest is Kent Barnett, Associate Dean of Academic Affairs and J. Alton Hosch Professor at the University of Georgia School of Law. On January 17th, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral argument in two cases, Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v. U.S. Department of Commerce, presenting the question of whether the Court should overrule, or at least clarify, its 1984 decision in Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc. As discussed in our earlier blog, that decision established what became known as “Chevron deference”, which requires judges to accept an agency’s interpretation of federal law if indicated by the outcome of a two-step analysis defined in the Chevron decision. In this special podcast, we first discuss the importance of Chevron deference, specifically with respect to the consumer financial services industry. We follow with an explanation of the background of the two cases to be argued, and a detailed explanation of the question now before the Court. Professor Barnett provides fascinating historical insights about the Chevron doctrine, and the political influences that first elevated it and then, more recently, have called it into question. We then explore why the Court now has agreed to reconsider Chevron, and the impact of the Chevron doctrine on the courtroom success of federal agencies. Finally, we venture predictions as to the likely outcome of the Loper Bright and Raimondo cases, including possible clarifications that would give courts further guidance on how to apply the Chevron framework, and the potentially seismic effects that might ensue if the Court should decide to overrule Chevron completely.

We discuss various issues faced by lenders and servicers when attempting to foreclose on “zombie” mortgages, meaning second mortgages on which the borrower has not made a payment for a considerable length of time and the lender or servicer has not previously taken action to foreclose. First, we look at the CFPB’s May 2023 advisory guidance on the enforcement of time-barred mortgage loans. We then discuss defenses to foreclosure raised by borrowers, specifically that the loan was charged-off, discharged in a bankruptcy, or time-barred, and look at decisions in the states of Washington, Colorado, and Utah in which courts have addressed these defenses. We conclude with a discussion of steps that lenders and servicers should consider taking before attempting to foreclose on a “zombie” mortgage. Melanie Vartabedian and Matthew Morr, partners in Ballard Spahr’s Consumer Financial Services Group, discuss the issues.