Under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd Frank Act), all covered entities are legally required to refrain from committing unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices (collectively, UDAAPs) in violation of the Act.
Certain acts or practices related to the collection of consumer debt that could, depending on the facts and circumstances, constitute UDAAPs prohibited by the Dodd-Frank Act. Whether conduct like that described in this bulletin constitutes a UDAAP may depend on additional facts and analysis.
The examples described in this bulletin are not exhaustive of all potential UDAAPs. The Bureau may closely review any covered person or service provider’s consumer debt collection efforts for potential violations of Federal consumer financial laws.
UDAAPs can cause significant financial injury to consumers, erode consumer
confidence, and undermine fair competition in the financial marketplace. Original
creditors and other covered persons and service providers under the Dodd-Frank Act
involved in collecting debt related to any consumer financial product or service are
subject to the prohibition against UDAAPs in the Dodd-Frank Act.
In addition to the prohibition of UDAAPs under the Dodd-Frank Act, the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) also makes it illegal for a person defined as a “debt
collector” from engaging in conduct “the natural consequence of which is to harass,
oppress, or abuse any person in connection with the collection of a debt,” to “use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt,” or to “use any unfair or unconscionable means to collect or
attempt to collect any debt.”
The FDCPA generally applies to third-party debt collectors, such as collection agencies, debt purchasers, and attorneys who are regularly engaged in debt collection.
All parties covered by the FDCPA must comply with any obligations they have under the FDCPA, in addition to any obligations to refrain from UDAAPs in violation of the Dodd-Frank Act.
Although the FDCPA’s definition of “debt collector” does not include some persons who collect consumer debt, all covered persons and service providers must refrain from committing UDAAPs in violation of the Dodd-Frank Act.
B. Summary of Applicable Standards for UDAAPs
1. Unfair Acts or Practices
The Dodd-Frank Act prohibits conduct that constitutes an unfair act or practice. An
act or practice is unfair when:
(1) It causes or is likely to cause substantial injury to consumers;
(2) The injury is not reasonably avoidable by consumers; and
(3) The injury is not outweighed by countervailing benefits to consumers or to
A “substantial injury” typically takes the form of monetary harm, such as fees or
costs paid by consumers because of the unfair act or practice. However, the injury
does not have to be monetary.
Although emotional impact and other subjective
types of harm will not ordinarily amount to substantial injury, in certain
circumstances emotional impacts may amount to or contribute to substantial injury.
In addition, actual injury is not required; a significant risk of concrete harm is
sufficient. An injury is not reasonably avoidable by consumers when an act or practice
interferes with or hinders a consumer’s ability to make informed decisions or take
action to avoid that injury.
Injury caused by transactions that occur without a consumer’s knowledge or consent is not reasonably avoidable. Injuries that can only be avoided by spending large amounts of money or other significant resources also may not be reasonably avoidable.
Finally, an act or practice is not unfair if the injury it causes or is likely to cause is outweighed by its consumer or competitive benefits.
Established public policy may be considered with all other evidence to determine
whether an act or practice is unfair, but may not serve as the primary basis for such
2. Deceptive Acts or Practices
The Dodd-Frank Act also prohibits conduct that constitutes a deceptive act or
practice. An act or practice is deceptive when:
(1) The act or practice misleads or is likely to mislead the consumer;
(2) The consumer’s interpretation is reasonable under the circumstances;
(3) The misleading act or practice is material.
To determine whether an act or practice has actually misled or is likely to mislead a
consumer, the totality of the circumstances is considered.
Deceptive acts or practices can take the form of a representation or omission.
The Bureau also looks at implied representations, including any implications that statements about the consumer’s debt can be supported. Ensuring that claims are supported before they are made will minimize the risk of omitting material information and/or making false statements that could mislead consumers.
To determine if the consumer’s interpretation of the information was reasonable
under the circumstances when representations target a specific audience, such as
older Americans or financially distressed consumers, the communication may be
considered from the perspective of a reasonable member of the target audience.
statement or information can be misleading even if not all consumers, or not all
consumers in the targeted group, would be misled, so long as a significant minority would be misled.
Likewise, if a representation conveys more than one meaning to
reasonable consumers, one of which is false, the speaker may still be liable for the
Material information is information that is likely to
affect a consumer’s choice of, or conduct regarding, the product or service.
Information that is likely important to consumers is material.
Sometimes, a person may make a disclosure or other qualifying statement that might
prevent consumers from being misled by a representation or omission that, on its
own, would be deceptive. The Bureau looks to the following factors in assessing
whether the disclosure or other qualifying statement is adequate to prevent the
deception: whether the disclosure is prominent enough for a consumer to notice;
whether the information is presented in a clear and easy to understand format; the
placement of the information; and the proximity of the information to the other
claims it qualifies.
3. Abusive Acts or Practices
The Dodd-Frank Act also prohibits conduct that constitutes an abusive act or
practice. An act or practice is abusive when it:
(1) Materially interferes with the ability of a consumer to understand a
term or condition of a consumer financial product or service; or
(2) Takes unreasonable advantage of –
(A) a consumer’s lack of understanding of the material risks, costs,
or conditions of the product or service;
(B) a consumer’s inability to protect his or her interests in selecting
or using a consumer financial product or service; or
(C) a consumer’s reasonable reliance on a covered person to act in
his or her interests.
It is important to note that, although abusive acts or practices may also be unfair or
deceptive, each of these prohibitions are separate and distinct, and are governed by
separate legal standards.
C. Examples of Unfair, Deceptive and/or Abusive Acts or Practices
Depending on the facts and circumstances, the following non-exhaustive list of
examples of conduct related to the collection of consumer debt could constitute
UDAAPs. Accordingly, the Bureau will be watching these practices closely.
• Collecting or assessing a debt and/or any additional amounts in
connection with a debt (including interest, fees, and charges) not
expressly authorized by the agreement creating the debt or permitted
• Failing to post payments timely or properly or to credit a consumer’s account with payments that the consumer submitted on time and then charging late fees to that consumer.
• Taking possession of property without the legal right to do so.
• Revealing the consumer’s debt, without the consumer’s consent, to the consumer’s employer and/or co-workers.
• Falsely representing the character, amount, or legal status of the debt.
• Misrepresenting that a debt collection communication is from an
• Misrepresenting that a communication is from a government source
or that the source of the communication is affiliated with the
• Misrepresenting whether information about a payment or nonpayment
would be furnished to a credit reporting agency.
• Misrepresenting to consumers that their debts would be waived or
forgiven if they accepted a settlement offer, when the company does
not, in fact, forgive or waive the debt.
• Threatening any action that is not intended or the covered person or
service provider does not have the authorization to pursue, including
false threats of lawsuits, arrest, prosecution, or imprisonment for
non-payment of a debt.
Again, the obligation to avoid UDAAPs under the Dodd-Frank Act is in addition to
any obligations that may arise under the FDCPA. Original creditors and other
covered persons and service providers involved in collecting debt related to any
consumer financial product or service are subject to the prohibition against UDAAPs
in the Dodd-Frank Act. The CFPB will continue to review closely the practices of
those engaged in the collection of consumer debts for potential UDAAPs, including
the practices described above. The Bureau will use all appropriate tools to assess
whether supervisory, enforcement, or other actions may be necessary.
For a copy of this document click here: 201307_cfpb_bulletin_unfair-deceptive-abusive-practices.