How to Win CFPB Favor? Self-Report Misconduct, Like American Express Did
American Express became the latest company to benefit from the CFPB's sympathy for self-reporters.
August 23, 2017 at 06:55 PM
3 minute read
Four years ago, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau told companies it would look fondly on industry players that police themselves, promptly make harmed consumers whole and self-report any potential violations to the agency.
Those activities—detailed in a June 2013 bulletin titled “Responsible Business Conduct: Self-Policing, Self-Reporting, Remediation, and Cooperation”—were factors the CFPB said it “may favorably consider in exercising its enforcement discretion.”
On Wednesday, American Express became the latest company to benefit from the CFPB's sympathy for self-reporters.
Citing the company's decision to self-report disparities in its credit offerings, the CFPB declined to impose a civil penalty in a settlement with two American Express subsidiaries over allegations they discriminated against consumers in Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories by offering credit card terms inferior to those available in the 50 states.
The American Express subsidiaries, according to the CFPB, also discriminated against consumers with Spanish-language preferences by not extending them debt collection offers that were available to consumers who did not indicate a similar preference in the states.
“American Express discriminated against consumers in Puerto Rico and the U.S. territories by providing them with less-favorable financial products and services. They have ceased this practice and are making consumers whole,” CFPB Director Richard Cordray said in a prepared statement. “In particular, because they self-reported the problem and fully cooperated with our investigation, no civil penalties are being assessed in this matter.”
More than 200,000 consumers suffered from the company's discriminatory practices, which included charging higher interest rates and providing less debt forgiveness, the CFPB said. American Express has returned about $95 million to harmed consumers in the course of its internal review and the CFPB's review, according to the settlement agreement, which requires the company to pay an additional $1 million in redress.
In the six-year history of the CFPB, it's been rare for a company to self-report misconduct and evade otherwise more tough enforcement.
The CFPB in 2014 declined to assess civil penalties against GE Capital Retail Bank—now known as Synchrony Bank—in a settlement over allegedly discriminatory credit practices. The bank was, however, ordered to pay $169 million to borrowers who were allegedly excluded from debt relief offers because they listed addresses in Puerto Rico or said they preferred to communicate in Spanish. In the same settlement, the bank was ordered to refund credit card consumers $56 million and pay a $3.5 million penalty over deceptive advertising allegations.
The CFPB said it declined to assess a penalty over the alleged discrimination because the bank “self-reported the violation, self-initiated remediation for the harm done to affected consumers, and fully cooperated with the bureau's investigation.”
Related Articles:
|- The CFPB Is Losing a Trial Court Ally in the US Justice Department
- Justice Department Gets Chance to Whack the CFPB in Florida Court
- Mayer Brown's Andy Pincus, Defender of Arbitration, Takes on CFPB Rule
- Kentucky Law Firm Beats CFPB's Kickback Claims
- The CFPB Wants to Create an Arbitration Database. Companies Will Hate That.
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 AllThe FTC's Rebecca Slaughter Wants Fair Competition, and a Good Night's Sleep
Google Fails to Secure Long-Term Stay of Order Requiring It to Open App Store to Rivals
FTC Goes After AI Tool That Has Capability to Mass Produce Fake Reviews
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Infant Formula Judge Sanctions Kirkland's Jim Hurst: 'Overtly Crossed the Lines'
- 2Preparing Your Law Firm for 2025: Smart Ways to Embrace AI & Other Technologies
- 3Abbott, Mead Johnson Win Defense Verdict Over Preemie Infant Formula
- 4Greenberg Traurig Initiates String of Suits Following JPMorgan Chase's 'Infinite Money Glitch'
- 5It's Time Law Firms Were Upfront About Who Their Salaried Partners Are
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