The Court of Appeals of California, First District, recently held that online digital currency exchange platforms have no obligation, in contract or in tort, to honor "forked" cryptocurrencies unless affirmatively provided for in a user agreement or otherwise.
Posts published in “Banking”
The Northern District of Illinois recently denied a broker’s motion for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction against the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) seeking to stop a scheduled remote arbitration hearing.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) recently issued its Final Rule clarifying the “Permissible Interest on Transferred Loans.”
The Court of Appeals of California, Fourth District, recently held as a matter of law that banks owe no duty to depositors to monitor other depositors’ accounts for fraud.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) recently issued its final rule clarifying the “Permissible Interest on Loans that are Sold, Assigned, or Otherwise Transferred”.
The U.S. Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Eighth Circuit recently affirmed a bankruptcy court’s holding that the contemporaneous exchange for new value defense to a preference action under § 547(c) applied to a creditor bank that released its liens for less than full payment.
The Massachusetts attorney general has adopted a regulation deeming it illegal for a debt collector to telephone a Massachusetts resident to request payment of a debt or for a debt collector or a creditor to file a lawsuit to collect a debt.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently affirmed the dismissal of a consumer’s Truth in Lending Act (TILA) claim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, holding that the claim was barred by the jurisdiction-stripping provision of the federal Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (FIRREA).
In a case of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently held that the protections against default judgment under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA) do not apply to the seizure and sale of real property in in rem proceedings under Louisiana law where the debtors have agreed to a confession of judgment in the mortgage or security agreement.
It has been an extraordinary 365 days for consumer financial services law. I cannot recall a year where so many states introduced legislation or proposed regulations or rules impacting the credit industry. At the federal level, proposed rules for the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act were (finally) released and California also proposed regulations under the California Consumer Privacy Act.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently held that the federal False Claims Act (FCA) applies to persons who present false or fraudulent loan applications to Federal Reserve Banks (FRBs) because the latter are “agents of the United States” within the meaning of the FCA and the loan money is provided by the United States to advance a government program or interest within the meaning of the FCA.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently reversed the dismissal of a pro se consumer’s claims under the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), holding that he stated a plausible claim for relief with his allegations that the defendant creditor obtained his credit report without his consent, and failed to reasonably investigate his credit reporting disputes. However, the Court affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of the consumer’s claim under the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) that the creditor defendant used a “false name” in attempting to collect the debt owed to it.