There is never a shortage of news in the world of debt collection. At insideARM, we try to help you stay on top of the most crucial news by bringing you one piece of relevant news each day. We publish articles covering topics our editorial team thinks are the most important for ARM industry professionals to stay compliant while increasing revenue. That said, even with a streamlined news source, it can be difficult for even the most organized person to stay on top of what is going on in an industry that is changing rapidly. So, starting today and continuing weekly on Mondays, we are going to bring you the insideARM Weekly Recap, a synopsis of everything we highlighted during the week and why our editorial team thinks you should know about it

Last week, we brought you news on CFPB complaints, a win on FDCPA standing in state court, a state push for further regulation on “abusive conduct,” and we learned the CFPB and FTC’s stance on “Pay-to-Pay” Fees. 

On Monday, we highlighted an article from Troutman Pepper about how credit reporting issues make up the vast majority (over 80%) of CFPB complaints from consumers. We also learned that the three main issues within the credit reporting complaints were: incorrect information, improper use of credit reports, and investigation of complaints. Credit reporting will likely continue to be a hot-button issue throughout 2024.

Tuesday’s news gave an update from The Sessions Firm on FDCPA standing in state court in Florida. In Scott v. Collectco, Inc. d/b/a EOS CCA, a consumer alleged FDCPA violations which only caused fear of future harm as the “injury.” The Court held that the consumer did not have standing to bring the suit as they had failed to plead an actual injury. This may be the beginning of a trend in Florida to dismiss cases with only speculative injuries, and it will be worth watching whether we see similar results regarding standing in other state courts.

On Wednesday, in an article by Ballard Spahr, we informed you that the CFPB is encouraging the state of New York to ban unfair or abusive practices in bills that have been pending in the New York legislature since early 2023. Specifically, the CFPB stressed the importance of an unfairness standard for combating fees and data security issues. They also want the bills to clarify that actions can be deceptive even if they are not aimed at a consumer. States are becoming increasingly active in the debt collection space. It’s important to keep track of these actions and watch the CFPB’s influence on state rules and regulations.

Our Thursday update focused on convenience fees and the lack of consensus on their legality. An article by Alston & Bird discussed the case of Glover and Booze v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC¸ where the CFPB and FTC filed a joint amicus brief arguing that the convenience fees in the case violated the FDCPA. The two agencies argue that this type of fee is prohibited by the FDCPA as a collection and that a convenience fee is not legal simply because it is part of a valid contract. This 11th Circuit case is currently pending and has the potential to affect collections in Alabama, Florida, and Georgia.

Thanks for reading this weekly recap. You can expect recaps like this every Monday.

Questions or comments? Email and let us know what your thoughts!

Next Article: CFPB and FTC Amicus Brief Signals Stance ...