This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
District Court, District of Columbia, No. District Court, alleges violations of the 1866 Civil Rights Act, Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1963 Equal Pay Act. The case is captioned at, Jones et al v. Mulvaney, U.S. The Complaint, filed on September 13, 2018, in the D.C.
The Consumer Finance Protection Bureau suffered a major blow in Federal Appeals Court yesterday when a three judge panel ruled that parts of its leadership structure are unconstitutional. This decision was taken as part of mortgage lender’s PHH Corp. appeal of the 2014 $109M financial penalty imposed by the CFPB.
Under the leadership of Acting CFPB Director Dave Uejio, the Bureau issued an interpretive rule on March 9, 2021 clarifying that the prohibition against sex discrimination under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (“ECOA”) and Regulation B includes sexual orientation and gender identity discrimination.
The job of regulators “is to help our system fulfill its important role in society by ensuring it operates in a safe and sound manner and treats customers fairly,” Otting said in a press release. ” “I have been impressed with Mick’s leadership and emphasis on operational efficiency and excellence,” Otting added.
This past Monday, the Democratic Attorneys General of 16 states and the District of Columbia filed a motion with the D.C. Circuit seeking to intervene in the PHH appeal. Today, two more motions to intervene were filed.
2017 was highlighted by a series of Executive Orders calling for comprehensive reviews of existing regulations, a series of reports issued by the U.S. Department of the Treasury accompanied by recommendations for significant regulatory reforms, and major changes in leadership (and vision) at many of the federal banking agencies.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 23,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content