Online Lenders Should Be Subject to State Regulations, DFS Says
The proposal is the result of a survey the DFS sent to 48 online lenders in New York state. Thirty-five of those lenders responded to the survey.
July 11, 2018 at 05:24 PM
4 minute read
Maria Vullo of the New York state Department of Financial Services. Photo: Rick Kopstein Online lenders should be licensed and supervised by the state to “prevent risk" to the state's financial markets, the New York State Department of Financial Services said Wednesday. The recommendation was part of a report released by the agency on the online lending industry. Legislation mandating the report was signed by Gov. Andrew Cuomo in June. The proposal is the result of a survey the DFS sent to 48 online lenders in New York. Thirty-five of those lenders responded to the survey. One easy conclusion from the report: the online lending industry is growing. Those 35 lenders had 235,320 customers in New York last year, which was up 79 percent from 2015, the report said. Those customers were lent more than $2.9 billion in 2017, a 42 percent increase from 2015. That amount is still 17 times less than what consumers borrowed in non-mortgage loans from banks, credit unions and other lenders chartered by the state in 2017, according to the report. DFS Superintendent Maria Vullo said in a statement that while traditional banks still serve the majority of the state's residents, online lenders should still be subject to the state's rules. “DFS supports the promise that new technologies are able to reach more consumers, but innovation must also be responsible, and all associated risks must be appropriately managed, including by strong underwriting standards, compliance with usury laws, and capital requirements,” Vullo said. “All lenders must operate on a level playing field and address market risk. As the regulator of the financial services industry in New York, DFS has and will continue to be a leader in enforcing robust market safeguards and consumer protections through strong state regulation, licensing and supervision.” Unlike traditional banks, there is no requirement that online lenders be licensed and supervised by the state. Some are, but many are not, the DFS said in the report. The DFS also recommended that online lenders be subject to the state's usury limits, which cap the annual interest rates lenders can offer on consumer loans under $250,000. Lenders can currently bypass that regulation by operating exclusively online or by partnering with an out-of-state bank that's not subject to the state's laws, according to the DFS. The report found that online lenders were regularly offering annual interest rates ranging from 14.8 percent to 25.9 percent. The limit on consumer loans from financial institutions chartered by the state is 16 percent. Payday loans are especially problematic in that area, the DFS said. According to the report, interest rates on payday loans can reach as high as 400 percent on an annual basis. That can lead to a cycle of debt where consumers are taking out new payday loans to pay for the old ones, the report said. That's partly related to the third recommendation in the report, which suggests online lenders be subject to the state's consumer protection laws and regulations. The state's laws mandate transparency in pricing, fair lending, fair debt collection practices, and protection of consumer data. The bill mandating the study was sponsored by Assemblyman Kenneth Zebrowski, D-Rockland County, and State Sen. Jesse Hamilton, a Democrat from Brooklyn.
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 Elliott Management vs. Southwest Airlines Faceoff: Who Won and What Determined the Outcome?
7 minute readNot All Secrets Are Trade Secrets: SDNY Examines the Limits of NDA Protection
13 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Corporate Counsel's 2024 Award Winners Performed Legal Wizardry, Gave a Hand Up to Others
- 2Goodwin, Polsinelli, Fox Rothschild Find New Phila. Offices
- 3Helping Lawyers Move Away from ‘Grinding’ and Toward a ‘Flow’
- 4How GC-of-Year Sam Khichi Has Helped CVS Barrel Through Challenges
- 5A Website is Not a ‘Place.’ What Took So Long To Get This Right?
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