DFPI Second Rulemaking Proposal On Debt Collection Licensing

SM
Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton
Contributor
Sheppard Mullin is a full service Global 100 firm with over 1,000 attorneys in 16 offices located in the United States, Europe and Asia. Since 1927, companies have turned to Sheppard Mullin to handle corporate and technology matters, high stakes litigation and complex financial transactions. In the US, the firm’s clients include more than half of the Fortune 100.
On July 15, the California DFPI released draft text for a proposed second rulemaking under the Debt Collection Licensing Act (DCLA) relating to the scope, annual report, and bond amount...
United States Finance and Banking
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

On July 15, the California DFPI released draft text for a proposed second rulemaking under the Debt Collection Licensing Act (DCLA) relating to the scope, annual report, and bond amount increase provisions of the DCLA.

Some examples of the proposed amendments include:

  • a new definition of "engage in the business of debt collection" that expressly includes advertising or otherwise offering the service of debt collection;
  • an exclusion that employees of debt collectors are not required to be licensed if acting within the scope of their employment with a debt collector licensed in California;
  • conditions under which a creditor, in its own name, seeking repayment of a consumer debt arising from credit the creditor extended could be considered as engaging in the business of debt collection for purposes of licensure in California;
  • disclosure requirements for annual reports; and
  • recordkeeping requirements, including a requirement to maintain records of any contact with, or attempt to contact, anyone associated with a debtor account, regardless of who initiated the contact and whether the attempt is successful.

The DFPI Commissioner is inviting interested parties to submit comments on the proposed rulemaking, which must be submitted by Monday, August 29, 2022.

Putting It Into Practice: These proposed amendments appear to be part of the California regulator's larger effort to address unlawful and deceptive acts and practices around debt collection. According to a consumer alert issued on July 21, the DFPI has recently seen an increase in complaints involving fake debt collectors attempting to collect on false debts. The DFPI also recently issued three enforcement actions against multiple debt collectors for unlawful and deceptive debt collection activity (see the complaints here, here and here). Given the recent regulatory focus on debt collection, businesses that are engaged in debt collection should ensure that their business practices are inline with California law.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

DFPI Second Rulemaking Proposal On Debt Collection Licensing

United States Finance and Banking
Contributor
Sheppard Mullin is a full service Global 100 firm with over 1,000 attorneys in 16 offices located in the United States, Europe and Asia. Since 1927, companies have turned to Sheppard Mullin to handle corporate and technology matters, high stakes litigation and complex financial transactions. In the US, the firm’s clients include more than half of the Fortune 100.
See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More