On September 30, a credit repair service provider and its owner were ordered to pay $31 million in consumer redress, and a $19 million civil money penalty, when a Massachusetts federal court granted summary judgment for the CFPB and the Massachusetts Attorney General.
The court found that the company and its owner had violated multiple federal and state consumer protection laws, including the Telemarketing Sales Rule (TSR), the CFPA’s prohibitions on unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts and practices (UDAAP), and Massachusetts’ Unfair and Deceptive Acts and Practices (UDAP) statute, as well the state’s Credit Service Organization Act. The violations stemmed from falsely guaranteeing credit score improvements and illegally charging upfront fees.
The CFPB’s initial lawsuit was filed in conjunction with the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office in 2020 and alleged the company made of false promises to consumers that the company could boost their credit scores. The lawsuit further accused the company of targeting low-income consumers with poor credit through keyword-linked online advertisements and telemarketing calls.
The court’s order sets forth that the company violated the advance fee provision of the TSR by offering credit repair services without specifying an end date and charging consumers before delivering the promised results. The court further noted that violations of the advance fee provision, which went on for ten years, also breached the Massachusetts Credit Services Organization Act, which mandates that credit service organizations provide specific disclosures to consumers before entering into service contracts.
Putting It Into Practice: Improper practices in the provision of consumer credit repair services and their vendors have recently become a point of emphasis for federal and state regulators (a trend previously discussed here, here, here, and here). In particular, regulators have focused on companies that request an advance or upfront fee from consumers before starting work. Companies offering credit repair services should evaluate their business models and practices in light of this recent enforcement trend.
