Should the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau issue guidance about what it considers appropriate attorney oversight when filing debt collection lawsuits? According to a recent insideARM.com home page poll, readers are split on the issue.
According to the poll, 64 percent of poll participants generally believe that the CFPB should provide guidance on attorney oversight. But in taking a closer look at the numbers, 36 percent of readers think the CFPB should issue the guidance because not enough exists, while 27 percent of poll participants want there to be official Bureau guidance because they want to avoid any potential lawsuits. 34 percent of readers disagree, saying the practice of law is best left in the hands of the judiciary system, not regulators.
“The precedent for meaningful review has been set,” one reader commented. “It’s just a wonder it took so long.”
In July, the CFPB filed a lawsuit against Frederick J. Hanna & Associates, a debt collection law firm, alleging that the firm was a “lawsuit mill” that churned out debt collection actions and violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. These alleged practices make it seem as though collection attorneys weren’t really reviewing cases before sending them to court. However, some debt industry experts warned that the CFPB’s involvement with the issue was a violation of the separation of powers.
The impact of CFPB oversight on all players in the debt industry is going to be a hot topic at ARM-U, insideARM.com’s first ever training and networking seminar covering the latest compliance and operations issues. Expert attorneys Ronald Canter, Kim Phan and Anita Tolani will outline what the regulatory future looks like for debt collectors – and how agencies can prepare for the future right now.
You can attend ARM-U live in Washington, DC, or enroll as an online “student” and watch a live simulcast of all the panels and presentations from your office. (Online simulcast sponsored by NARCA.)
Registration powered by RegOnline