Top News

CPS to Pay $5.5 Million to Settle FTC Charges

May 29, 2014

IRVINE, Calif. — Consumer Portfolio Services Inc. (CPS) will pay more than $5.5 million to settle Federal Trade Commission (FTC) charges that it used illegal tactics to service and collect on consumer loans. According to the agency’s complaint, the subprime finance source collected money consumers did not owe, harassed consumers and third parties, and disclosed debts to friends, family and employers of victims.

The firm agreed to refund or adjust 128,000 consumer accounts totaling more than $3.5 million and forebear collections on an additional 35,000 accounts to settle charges that it violated the FTC Act. Additionally, CPS will pay $2 million in civil penalties to settle FTC charges that it violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA)’s Furnisher Rule.

“At the FTC, we hold loan servicers responsible for knowing their legal obligations and abiding by them,” said Jessica Rich, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “The law is very clear: Loan servicers can’t charge consumers more than they owe. And they can’t threaten and harass consumers about delinquent debts.”

The order settling the charges requires CPS change its business practices to comply with the requirements of the appropriate laws. In addition, the company is required to establish and maintain a comprehensive data integrity program to ensure the accuracy, integrity and completeness of its loan servicing processes, and the data and other information it services, collects or sells. CPS must also provide the FTC with periodic independent assessments of its data integrity program for 10 years.

“We are pleased to have resolved the matter with the FTC,” CPS President and CEO Charles E. Bradley stated in a company press release. “We cooperated fully with the FTC during their inquiry and made several system and procedural changes related to their comments. Furthermore, we are pleased that the final settlement is consistent with our expectations. Accordingly, the amount we’ve agreed to pay for customer refunds and the civil penalty are covered entirely by the legal provision we’ve previously recognized.”

According to the FTC’s complaint, CPS’ loan-servicing violations included misrepresenting fees consumer owed in collection calls, monthly statements, payoff notices and bankruptcy filings. The FTC also charged the subprime finance source with making unsubstantiated claims about the amounts consumer owed, improperly assessing and collecting fees, and failing to disclose financial effects of loan extensions, among other claims.

The company’s collections violations include disclosing the existence of debts to third parties; calling consumers at work when not permitted or inconvenient; calling third parties repeatedly with intent to harass; making unauthorized debits from consumer bank accounts; falsely threatening car repossession; and deceptively manipulating Caller ID systems. Because for many of its accounts CPS is a creditor, the complaint charged that these practices violated Section 5 of the FTC Act. For those accounts where CPS is a debt collector, the complaint charged these practices violated the FDCPA.

CPS is also charged with failure to establish and implement reasonable written procedures and failure to reasonably investigate and respond timely to consumer disputes under the Furnisher Rule.

Under the order, the company will begin sending refunds to consumers and adjusting affected account balances within 90 days.

The commission’s vote to authorize the staff to refer the complaint to the U.S. Department of Justice and to approve the proposed consent decree was 4-0-1, with Commissioner Terrell McSweeny not participating. The DOJ filed the complaint and proposed consent decree on behalf of the commission in the Central District of California on May 28, 2014. The proposed consent decree is subject to court approval.

Comments

  1. 1. Chuck Candler [ May 29, 2014 @ 05:52PM ]

    Do dealers who arranged loans with through CPS have any liability exposure?

  2. 2. T. Fradenburgh [ May 29, 2014 @ 11:20PM ]

    CPS was the worst subprime lender in the market. They made Drive at its worst in the old programs look like a super prime lender.
    All success they had were on the backs of Secondary F&I mgrs. CPS 'hey would you mind waiting until we get some money to fund your deal' Bank.

  3. 3. Charles Kiser [ May 30, 2014 @ 12:48PM ]

    I stopped doing loans with them in 2003. Never could get the trust back.

  4. 4. Lou Killean [ May 30, 2014 @ 03:50PM ]

    A buyer at CPS asked me "are these customers Native American?" I couldn't believe how uneducated their employees were.

  5. 5. Tim armstrong [ July 29, 2014 @ 05:15PM ]

    Obviousley it did no good ,they are still doing the caller id number change ,and even calling non stop to my ph .yet still have not learned to be civil ,but no definatley how to be rude . And myself streight sick of it

 

Your Comment

Please note that comments may be moderated. 
Leave this field empty:
Your Name:  
Your Email:  

CLOSE [X]

READ NEXT

CFPB Engaged in Fair-Lending Actions Against Six Auto Lenders

Citing an unnamed source, Auto Finance News reported earlier this month that the CFPB is engaged in fair-lending actions against six finance sources. Bureau officials decline to comment.