Consumer Law & Policy Blog

Coordinators

  • Allison Zieve
    Public Citizen Litigation Group
  • Jeff Sovern
    St. John's University School of Law
  • Brian Wolfman
    Georgetown University Law Center and Harvard Law School

Other Contributors

  • Richard Alderman
    University of Houston Law Center
  • Paul Bland
    Public Justice
  • Stephen Gardner
    Consultant
  • Mike Landis
    US Public Interest Research Group
  • Paul Alan Levy
    Public Citizen Litigation Group
  • Scott Nelson
    Public Citizen Litigation Group
  • Ira Rheingold
    National Association of Consumer Advocates
  • Jon Sheldon
    National Consumer Law Center

About Us

www.clpblog.org

The contributors to the Consumer Law & Policy blog are lawyers and law professors who practice, teach, or write about consumer law and policy. The blog is hosted by Public Citizen Litigation Group, but the views expressed here are solely those of the individual contributors (and don't necessarily reflect the views of institutions with which they are affiliated). To view the blog's policies, please click here.

Blogs On Consumer Issues

  • Alabama Consumer Law Blog
  • Arnold & Porter Consumer Advertising Law Blog
  • CAFA Law Blog
  • Caveat Emptor
  • Citizen Vox
  • Consumer Affairs with Sheryl Harris
  • THE CONSUMERIST
  • Credit Slips
  • Home Equity Theft Reporter
  • Fair Arbitration NOW Blog
  • UCL Practitioner
  • U.S. PIRG Consumer Blog

Other Interesting Legal Blogs

  • American Constitution Society Blog
  • Balkinization
  • Concurring Opinions
  • The Conglomerate
  • Electronic Frontier Foundation DeepLinks
  • Empirical Legal Studies
  • How Appealing
  • Legal Theory Blog
  • Mass Tort Litigation Blog
  • Opinio Juris
  • PrawfsBlawg
  • Rebecca Tushnet's 43(B)log
  • SCOTUSblog
  • TortsProf Blog
  • Trademark Blog
  • Truth on the Market
  • The Volokh Conspiracy

Consumer Law & Policy Links

  • AAAP Foundation Litigation
  • American Collectors' Association
  • Americans for Financial Reform
  • American Tort Reform Association
  • American Association of Justice
  • Center for American Progress
  • Center for Justice and Democracy
  • Center for Responsible Lending
  • Center for Science in the Public Interest
  • Center for Study of Responsive Law
  • Consumer Action
  • Consumer Federation of America
  • Consumers Union
  • Electronic Frontier Foundation
  • Electronic Privacy Information Center
  • EU Consumer Policy Page
  • Fair Arbitration NOW
  • Federal Trade Commission
  • International Association of Consumer Law
  • National Association of Consumer Advocates
  • National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys
  • National Community Reinvestment Coalition
  • National Consumer Law Center
  • Public Citizen
  • State PIRGs
  • Public Justice (formerly Trial Lawyers for Public Justice)
  • Treasury Department, Regulatory Reform Agenda
  • U.S. Chamber Legal Reform
  • U.S. Public Interest Research Group

« April 2008 | Main | June 2008 »

Friday, May 30, 2008

BK Court: Lender Can't Rely on Liar Loan App

LiarloanA California couple with income of about $65,000 recently lost their home to foreclosure after having refinanced their mortgage debt up to about $680,000. How did they manage to borrow that much? Stated income (no-doc) mortgages, of course. After they lost their home, the lender took the rather aggressive tack of objecting to the couple's Chapter 7 discharge of the deficiency (the $250,000 alleged difference between the foreclosure proceeds and the mortgage debt.) The bank claimed that the couple had procured their mortgages by fraud, namely by lying about their income, and therefore were barred from discharging the debt under Section 523 of the Bankruptcy Code.

The couple claimed that they knew nothing of the false statements in their application, but the Bankruptcy Court's decision (Download) did not find their testimony credible on this point. However, the judge went on to find that the inflated income was so obviously implausible, given the borrowers' occupations, that the bank could not reasonably have relied on their stated income. The result was a finding against the bank, and a discharge of the unpaid debt.

HT to April Charney.

Posted by Alan White on Friday, May 30, 2008 at 11:28 AM in Foreclosure Crisis | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, May 29, 2008

Loan Modifications and PSA contract limits

One of the obstacles to preventing foreclosures through loan modifications has been the restrictions in securitization contracts. The pooling and servicing agreements ("PSAs") that create securitization trusts usually limit the servicer's authority to rewrite mortgage terms on behalf of the investors, even when the modification will prevent a foreclosure and produce a higher return than foreclosure. PSA provisions vary, but it is not uncommon for the servicer's discretion to be limited by a percent-of-pool cap on modifications.

Residential Funding Corp., an affiliate of GMAC and securitizer of subprime mortgages, recently requested and obtained approval from bond rating agency Moody's (Download) to increase the 5% cap on loan modifications in seven loan pools.

The particular contract term in one of the RFC-sponsored trust agreements (Download) is interesting because although it contains a 5% modification cap, it permits the cap to be increased, with the consent of the rating agencies and the insurer (and without the need for consent of the investors). This farsighted PSA contract term solves at least one of the problems that has prevented mutually beneficial mortgage modifications by other servicers. Kudos to whoever drafted this contract! The pool in question has reached a 20% foreclosure rate and cumulative net losses of 2.38%.

HT to Kevin Byers for spotting this on HousingWire.

Posted by Alan White on Thursday, May 29, 2008 at 02:35 PM in Foreclosure Crisis | Permalink | Comments (16) | TrackBack (0)

House and Senate Vote to Amend FCRA to Block Credit Card Truncation Suits

Congressional Quarterly's Weekly Report reports that the Senate has passed a bill, H.R. 4008, that would block credit card slip truncation suits--that is, the many suits that have been filed for violation of the FCRA provision added by FACTA barring retailers from printing on credit card receipts the full credit card number or credit card expiration date.  Because the House had already passed the bill, it now goes to the President for signature.  Blocking such suits makes sense, but if Congress was going to amend the FCRA, wouldn't it also have made sense to fix some of the other problems with the FCRA? (hat tip to Ira Rheingold)

Posted by Jeff Sovern on Thursday, May 29, 2008 at 11:26 AM in Other Debt and Credit Issues | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Justice Department Forces Traditional Realtors To Give Up Stranglehold on Internet Home Listings

This article in yesterday's Washington Post discusses the National Association of Realtors' agreement with the U.S. Justice Department that will facilitation the listing of home sales by Internet-based realtors - - properties that were sometimes listed only by traditional brokers. The agreement may ultimately foster competition about realtors that will bring down real estate commissions.  Here's a taste of the article:

The National Association of Realtors has agreed to change its policies on Internet home-sale listings to settle a long legal battle with federal regulators who have accused the group of anti-competitive behavior that harms consumers.  The settlement, which awaits court approval, would resolve a 2005 Justice Department [antitrust] lawsuit that accused the association of undermining newer, lower-priced rivals by hampering their ability to post home-sale listings online. The Realtors association, which did not admit liability or wrongdoing and faces no fines, agreed not to treat Internet-based brokerages differently than traditional ones.

Posted by Brian Wolfman on Thursday, May 29, 2008 at 08:10 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, May 28, 2008

Upcoming Journal of Consumer Affairs Issue on Financial Literacy

Here is the table of contents for the upcoming Summer 2008 issue of the Journal of Consumer Affairs, Volume 42, Number 2 :

Special Issue on Financial Literacy: Public Policy and Consumers’ Self-Protection

Editorial Prelude: Financial Literacy, Public Policy, and Consumers’ Self-Protection—More Questions, Fewer Answers by John Kozup and Jeanne M. Hogarth

A Framework for Promoting Retirement Savings by Josh Wiener and Tabitha Doescher

Toward a General Model of Consumer Empowerment and Welfare in Financial Markets with an Application to Mortgage Servicers by Paula Fitzgerald Bone

Is Ignorance Bliss? Consumer Accuracy in Judgments about Credit Ratings by Vanessa Gail Perry

Saving for Retirement: The Effects of Fund Assortment Size and Investor Knowledge on Asset Allocation Strategies by Maureen Morrin, Susan Broniarczyk, J. Jeffrey Inman, and John Broussard

The Role of Self-Regulation, Future Orientation, and Financial Knowledge in Long-Term Financial Decisions by Elizabeth Howlett, Jeremy Kees, and Elyria Kemp

The Financial Rationality of Consumer Loan Choices: Revealed Preferences Concerning Interest Rates, Down Payments, Contract Length, and Rebates by Nicholas Wonder, Wendy Wilhelm, and David Fewings

Consumer Financial Literacy and the Impact of Online Banking on the Financial Behavior of Lower-Income Bank Customers by Lisa J. Servon and Robert Kaestner

Editorial Postlude: Financial literacy by Herbert Jack Rotfeld

Posted by Jeff Sovern on Wednesday, May 28, 2008 at 03:23 PM in Consumer Law Scholarship | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

April 2008 Auto Safety Recalls

Go here to view the National Highway Traffic Safety Administrations recalls for April 2008.

Posted by Brian Wolfman on Wednesday, May 28, 2008 at 11:51 AM in Consumer Product Safety, Privacy | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

A Lowest Common Denominator Approach to Insurance Regulation?

Check out this interesting and scary post by Elizabeth Warren over at Credit Slips.  Here are two key paragraphs to whet your appetite:

The effective repeal of usury laws in the US was accomplished in the quietest possible way:  In 1978, the Supreme Court interpreted an century-old banking law to determine that federally-chartered banks to lend to people in other states so long as they complied with their home state's usury rate.  It wasn't long until the Chairman of Citibank paid a call on the governor of South Dakota, who rammed through a new, high ceiling on interest rates.  Now Citibank was free to charge whatever it wanted--and states lost the right to protect their own citizens.

The usury story is old and famliar to commercial law types, but it is taking on a new importance.  It seems that John McCain wants to borrow the idea for use with insurance regulation.  According to a terrific piece by Robert Gordon in Slate, Senator McCain thinks federal law should be changed so that insurance companies in one state (say, South Dakota) could sell their products in all the other states, even if those insurance products don't meet the local standards for care.  In other words, just as exporting interest rates became a way to deregulate credit cards, exporting health insurance licensing can be a way to deregulate health insurance.

Posted by Brian Wolfman on Wednesday, May 28, 2008 at 10:17 AM in Consumer Legislative Policy | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)

Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Plaintiffs in Two Key Employment Discrimination Cases

Although a bit off this blog's beaten path, I thought readers might want access here to the Supreme Court's important decisions issued yesterday in CBOCS West, Inc. v. Humphries, No. 06-1431, and Gomez-Perez v. Potter, No. 06-1321. CBOCS held by a 7 to 2 vote that 42 U.S.C. 1981 authorizes a plaintiff to claim that he was retaliated against for asserting a co-worker's right to be free from racial discrimination. Gomez-Perez held by a 6 to 3 vote that a federal employee may maintain a retaliation claim under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act -- specifically, the plaintiff claimed that her federal agency employer retaliated because she filed an administrative complaint alleging age discrimination. The decisions, taken together, seem to stand for the proposition that both private and federal employees have claims for retaliation even when the relevant anti-discrimination statute is silent on the question of retaliation. The majority in both cases rebuffed the defendants' arguments that the Court should narrow or effectively overrule the Court's earlier decisions in Sullivan v. Little Hunting Park (1968) and Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education (2005), recognizing retaliation-based claims under 42 U.S.C. 1982 and Title IX, respectively.

Posted by Brian Wolfman on Wednesday, May 28, 2008 at 09:46 AM in U.S. Supreme Court | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Consumer Banktruptcies Soar Despite Restrictions Enacted by Congress in 2005

Check out this front page article in today's Washington Post discussing the significant increase in consumer bankruptcies, despite Congress's enactment in 2005 of legislation intended to tighten eligibility for bankruptcy.  As the article puts it:  "Despite the 2005 passage of a law that made it more difficult and expensive to file for personal bankruptcy, more Americans are choosing bankruptcy over destitution. Filings -- including Chapter 7, which wipes out debt, and Chapter 13, which reorganizes it -- totaled 822,590 last year, up 38 percent from 2006." The article discusses particular examples of working families so hard-pressed that bankruptcy was their only option.

Posted by Brian Wolfman on Wednesday, May 28, 2008 at 09:06 AM in Other Debt and Credit Issues | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, May 27, 2008

Consumer advocate fights off trademark arbitration claim

by Greg Beck

Train_2 Robert Arkow runs a website at the domain names metrolinkrider.com and metrolinksucks.com (no longer active) where riders and employees of Metrolink, the Southern California commuter rail system, share their gripes about services and fares. Metrolink filed a complaint under the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy (UDRP), an agreement imposed by ISPs that subjects domain-name owners to mandatory arbitration for challenges to their ownership of domain names. Metrolink claimed that the domain names were confusingly similar to its own and were registered in bad faith. Metrolink was particularly peeved about postings on the site "with such statements as 'Stupid Metrolink Tricks---Seen something really dumb on Metrolink?' and 'Are the Engineers that stupid?'"

The arbitration panel denied the complaint, siding with the pro se domain name owner. Noting a split in past decisions on the issue, the panel held that noncommercial use of a trademark in a domain name for purposes of comment or criticism did not violate the UDRP. It wrote: "[S]omething more than criticism is required to establish illegitimacy and bad-faith for purposes of the [UDRP]."

Use of trademark law to squelch criticism is an ongoing problem, and is of particular concern when claims are brought in international tribunals that aren't bound by the First Amendment. Here, it looks like the panel reached the right result. Public Citizen successfully defended another web critic against a similar UDRP claim by a homebuilder earlier this year.

The Citizen Media Law Project drew my attention to this case, and has lots more background on the UDRP.

Posted by Greg Beck on Tuesday, May 27, 2008 at 06:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Older »

Subscribe to CL&P

RSS/Atom Feed

To receive a daily email of Consumer Law & Policy content, enter your email address here:

Search CL&P Blog

Recent Posts

  • My latest paper: Not-So-Smartphone Disclosures
  • Maryland seeking applications for consumer law endowed faculty position
  • FTC issues ANPR on consumer privacy and data security
  • Today at the CFPB
  • Cal Chief Judge calls for stronger oversight of "private judging," after scandal involving JAMS
  • Maybe it's the Chamber that needs to be held accountable: comments on their ad attacking the CFPB
  • Bruckner & Ryan paper compares complaints about fintech and traditional student loan lenders & servicers
  • GOP legislators accuse CFPB of colluding with states, as Kraninger did
  • WSJ: Equifax Sent Lenders Inaccurate Credit Scores on Millions of Consumers
  • Unfairness and Disparate Effects
  • CFPB analysis of potential impacts of medical debt credit reporting changes
  • OCC CFP: THE IMPLICATIONS OF FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGY FOR BANKING
  • Dan Solove gives the pending privacy bill a B+ but pans preemption
  • Paper responds to Wilf-Townsend's Assembly-Line Plaintiffs
  • CFP: Berkeley Consumer Law Conference
  • The National Consumer Law Center is hiring a LITIGATION DIRECTOR
  • WSJ: CFPB working on guidance to force banks to cover more scams on Zelle and similar apps
  • Consumer law and the "major questions" doctrine
  • Will Congress pass an online privacy bill?
  • Distracted driving kills thousands of people every year
  • Chao paper suggests unjust enrichment claims confer standing, even after TransUnion
  • CFPB issues advisory to protect privacy when companies compile personal data
  • Regulators fine BofA $225 million over botched disbursement of unemployment benefits
  • Consumer protection and the Supreme Court's new "major questions doctrine"
  • CFPB moves to reduce fees charged by debt collectors
  • Vijay Raghavan Essay: Shifting Burdens at the Fringe
  • FTC sues Walmart for facilitating money transfer fraud
  • CFPB affirms states' ability to police credit reporting markets
  • Can you solve the mystery of why the Credit CARD Act treats penalty fees differently from penalty interest rates and other fees?
  • CFPB Spring Regulatory Agenda is up and arbitration isn't on it
  • CFP: CFPB consumer finance research conference
  • My Daughter’s @Delta Disaster Story: The Last Chapter (I hope)

Categories

  • Advertising
  • Arbitration
  • Auto Issues
  • Book & Movie Reviews
  • Books
  • CL&P Blog
  • CL&P Roundups
  • Class Actions
  • Conferences
  • Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
  • Consumer History
  • Consumer Law Scholarship
  • Consumer Legislative Policy
  • Consumer Litigation
  • Consumer Product Safety
  • Credit Cards
  • Credit Reporting & Discrimination
  • Debt Collection
  • Federal Trade Commission
  • Food and Nutrition
  • Foreclosure Crisis
  • Free Speech, Intellectual Property & Consumer Issues
  • Global Consumer Protection
  • Identity Theft
  • Internet Issues
  • Law & Economics
  • Other Debt and Credit Issues
  • Predatory Lending
  • Preemption
  • Privacy
  • Student Loans
  • Teaching Consumer Law
  • Television
  • U.S. Supreme Court
  • Unfair & Deceptive Acts & Practices (UDAP)
  • Web/Tech
  • Weblogs

Archives

  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021

August 2022

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31