There is no room to unfairly criticize the determination of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to properly fulfill its regulatory roll in mortgage servicing, writes the founder of the Maine Attorney Saving Homes program.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau seems to have been turned loose by Chopra in a redux of the bad old days under former director Richard Cordray, when the agency inflicted punishment on the mortgage industry often without any basis in fact, writes Whalen.

In a letter to the agency’s new director, top Senate Democrats recommended policy steps intended to limit mistakes in consumers’ credit files that they said “can ruin lives.”

A report by the agency found that consumers in majority Black neighborhoods were more than twice as likely as those in white neighborhoods to lodge complaints with the credit bureaus over information in their files. Meanwhile, disputes were less common among older borrowers.

As the expiration of a national eviction moratorium puts economic pressure on low-income households, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is said to be considering investigating credit bureaus, debt collectors and large landlords accused of harming renters. But some argue the agency would be overreaching.

The agency developed measures taking effect Aug. 31 that, among other things, will allow lenders to prioritize foreclosures of the most impaired loans and then focus on modifying salvageable ones.

As people more heavily use exchanges and other providers of digital-asset-related services, they're registering more beefs with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, too. Experts say it's only a matter of time before the agency invokes its broad authority to police the sector.

The last-minute creation of the new federal holiday raised questions for lenders who must adhere to certain timelines regulated by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

The bureau said two rules related to communications with debtors will go into effect as originally planned on Nov. 30. The agency had previously proposed an extension to consider consumer advocates' concerns about the regulations.

A three-judge panel determined that a lower-court ruling against two law firms specializing in mortgage repair had used the wrong measure to calculate restitution.