Consumer Financial Services

Subscribe to Consumer Financial Services via RSS

In this special crossover episode of Regulatory Oversight and The Consumer Finance Podcast, Chris Willis is joined by colleagues Lori Sommerfield and Matthew Berns to discuss New Jersey’s sweeping new disparate impact regulations under the Law Against Discrimination. They break down one of the most comprehensive state-level disparate impact rules in the U.S., the contrasts with traditional federal standards, and implications for enforcement in financial services. The discussion dives into credit scores, underwriting models, AI and automated decision-making tools, and the difference between New Jersey’s approach and the Trump administration’s effort to scale back disparate impact at the federal level, offering practical takeaways for lenders and other covered entities navigating this shifting landscape.

In this episode of Moving the Metal, hosts Brooke Conkle and Chris Capurso are joined by Troutman colleagues Chris Carlson and Nam Kang from the firm’s RISE Practice Group to unpack what “Trump 2.0” really means for dealers and auto finance companies. With the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and other federal regulators pulling back, the group explains how state attorneys general (AGs) and state financial regulators are rapidly filling the void — often led by former CFPB staff now embedded in state offices — and why that creates a complex patchwork of unfair or deceptive acts or practices standards and enforcement approaches across 50 states. They discuss hot-button themes like affordability, junk fees, mini-CFPBs, and the growing role of state working groups, as well as how state AGs are leveraging prior CFPB theories, the California CARS rule, and copy‑and‑paste complaints.

This article was originally published on Law360 and is republished here with permission as it originally appeared on January 22, 2026.

Since the change in administration last year, much has changed in the payments law landscape. Federal regulators have been busy rescinding agency guidance, advisory opinions, interpretive rules and policy statements.

State attorneys general (AGs) are among the most active and influential regulators in the U.S., using broad statutory authority, political visibility, and growing technical knowledge to shape policy and enforcement across sectors. In 2025, they asserted their authority to shape the legal and regulatory environment across the U.S. through aggressive and coordinated action. Despite changing…

On December 23, 2025, the New York Attorney General (AG) announced a settlement with Monterey Finance (Monterey) of approximately $2.4 million in debt relief for 835 New York consumers and $175,000 in penalties. The AG alleged that Monterey disguised high-cost lease agreements as traditional consumer financing, causing consumers to pay more than the sticker price for goods and services they believed they were purchasing.

Last month, Ohio and nine other state attorneys general (collectively, the AGs) entered into an assurance of voluntary compliance (AV) with Menard Inc. d/b/a Menards, a Wisconsin-based home improvement retailer. The settlement resolved the AGs’ allegations concerning deceptive rebate advertising and price gouging during the COVID-19 pandemic. Menards will pay $4.25 million to the multistate group, in addition to making several changes primarily related to the company’s rebate and advertising business practices.

On December 19, 2025, New York Governor Kathy Hochul signed into law the Fostering Affordability and Integrity through Reasonable (FAIR) Business Practices Act. The FAIR Act, which was proposed by Attorney General (AG) Tish James, represents the first major update to the state’s primary consumer protection law in 45 years and significantly broadens the statute’s reach.

On November 21, Delaware Attorney General Kathy Jennings’s Investor Protection Unit (IPU) announced a $995,180 penalty against Kovack Advisors, Inc. (Kovack) for a series of violations of the Delaware Securities Act. The enforcement action — resolved through a consent order — highlights the IPU’s growing focus on registration accuracy, supervisory systems, and books-and-records compliance for investment advisers operating in the state.