Mulvaney's CFPB Turns Down Loan Company's Bid to Reshape Settlement
Ballard Spahr, representing the New Jersey-based loan marketing company Top Notch Funding, pushed the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau for an alternative settlement amid the turmoil over the agency's leadership in recent months. The CFPB's revised settlement didn't significantly alter the terms.
January 30, 2018 at 06:22 PM
4 minute read
Ballard Spahr offices in Washington. Credit: Diego M. Radzinschi / NLJ
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau this week slightly increased the civil penalty a loan marketing company must pay to resolve accusations that it scammed former National Football League players and 9/11 first responders, rebuffing its push for more favorable settlement terms from the Trump-appointed leadership at the agency.
The company, New Jersey-based Top Notch Funding, agreed in September to pay $70,000 in penalties and to be permanently prohibited from offering loans or advances to consumers awaiting payments from settlements or victim-compensation funds. The CFPB had accused Top Notch of lying about the costs of loans it was offering to consumers, including former NFL players who were awaiting payments from the landmark concussion settlement and first responders entitled to payments from a victim-compensation fund created by Congress.
“It is reprehensible that Top Notch and its owner sought to scam NFL concussion victims, 9/11 heroes, and others to turn a quick profit,” the CFPB's then-director, Richard Cordray, said in a statement in September. “We allege that this company, its owner, and its associate misled vulnerable consumers by lying about the terms of the deals they offered. Our proposed order seeks to knock these parties out of this business altogether, and impose penalties on them.”
Gregory Woods (2013) Photo by Diego M. Radzinschi/ NLJThe CFPB submitted the settlement to U.S. District Judge Gregory Woods of the Southern District of New York. In October, Woods, reviewing the merits of the agreement, asked for more information to justify signing off on the terms. Cordray's resignation from the agency in November offered Top Notch a window to try to rework the terms of the deal, court papers show. And the company's lawyers at Ballard Spahr pushed to seize on it by returning to the bargaining table.
“Given these highly unusual and significant circumstances and ongoing developments that may immeasurably impact defendants, we respectfully request 45 days to revisit discussions with [the CFPB] and attempt to reach an alternative resolution,” James Kim, of counsel at Ballard Spahr, wrote in a December letter to Woods.
Kim's letter pointed to the feud over the acting leadership of the Obama-era agency. After Cordray's resignation, his would-be successor, Leandra English, sued the interim leader the Trump administration installed—Mick Mulvaney, the White House budget director.
A new proposed settlement, disclosed Tuesday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, shows that renewed discussions did not provide Top Notch with a discount.
Instead, the company and related individuals will pay a $75,000 penalty. The new settlement proposal, like the one from September, will also permanently prohibit Top Notch from providing credit or advances to consumers entitled to payments from legal settlements or victim compensation funds.
The CFPB and Kim declined to comment.
Kim, in his December letter, cited the company's “limited financial means” and wrote that Top Notch had agreed to the earlier settlement terms based on “pragmatic decisions reflecting the extreme uneven bargaining power between the parties and the desire to avoid protracted and costly litigation with a powerful federal agency.” Kim's letter also noted that Mulvaney had imposed a freeze on new rules and pending enforcement actions.
Kim also pointed to a similar matter pending in Manhattan federal court in which RD Legal Funding, a company the CFPB accused of scamming concussion victims and 9/11 first responders with costly advances on settlement payouts, was challenging the CFPB's authority to bring the case.
The case filed by RD Legal Funding is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Read more:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHolland & Knight, Akin, Crowell, Barnes and Day Pitney Add to DC Practices
3 minute read'There Is No Time to Waste': Matt Gaetz Withdraws From AG Nomination
3 minute readRead the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome,' DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250