On March 29, the United Kingdom’s Financial Services Authority (FSA) published the findings of its thematic review into anti-bribery and corruption systems and controls in U.K.-based investment banks. The FSA review also looked at related topics including (i) gift-giving practices and controls, (ii) staff recruitment and vetting, (iii) training, and (iv) incident reporting. The FSA report concludes that the U.K. investment banking sector has been too slow and reactive in managing bribery and corruption risk, and that substantial work remains. In response, the FSA published proposed revisions to its regulatory guide, “Financial crime: a guide for firms.” The FSA proposes to update Chapters 2 and 6 of Part 1 of the guide, with new guidance and examples of good and poor practice drawn from the report findings. The FSA also proposes to include a new Chapter 13 in Part 2 of the guide, which will consolidate all examples of good and poor practice highlighted in the thematic review. Stakeholders can submit comments on the proposed revisions through April 29, 2012.
Join Us! 2012 Fair Lending Today Conference on Compliance, Regulatory and Litigation Issues and the CFPB in Today’s Changing Enforcement Environment, hosted by BuckleySandler LLP.
2012 Panel Topics Include:
- Overview: A New Agency Emerges
- The Justice Department and Fair Lending: Disparate Impact Escapes Potential Elimination in Magner
- Mortgage Servicing Developments: The AG/DOJ Settlement, the CFPB, and Ongoing Enforcement
- Anatomy of a CFPB Enforcement Action
- The CFPB’s Fair Lending Agenda for Auto, Private Student Lenders, and Non-Secured Lending
- New CFPB Enforcement Priorities for Credit Cards
- Fair and Responsible Banking Risk Management Update
When: Monday, April 30, 2012
Where: The Fairmont Hotel inWashington, DC
Registration required. This conference is open to all financial services companies and others subject to CFPB oversight. Please no outside law firms, government agency personnel, consultant firms or media. For more information visit http://www.fairlendingtoday.com/ or contact firstname.lastname@example.org.
On March 28, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-3 that the Privacy Act of 1974, which regulates how federal agencies handle personal information, does not unequivocally authorize damages for mental or emotional distress. Cooper v. FAA, No. 10-1024, 2012 WL 1019969 (U.S. Mar. 28, 2012). In this case, an airline pilot sued the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and other federal agencies for impermissibly exchanging information about his HIV status in connection with a criminal investigation. The pilot claimed to suffer emotional and mental distress due to the disclosure. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that the term “actual damages” in the Privacy Act is not ambiguous and includes damages for mental and emotional distress. The Supreme Court reversed, holding, as the district court originally held, that the term is ambiguous and therefore does not waive the government’s sovereign immunity from liability for nonpecuniary damages. The narrow ruling only directly impacts actions under the Privacy Act, and the court notes that “actual damages” can mean different things in different contexts. As such, the holding does not invalidate prior lower court rulings that “actual damages” under other statutes, including the Fair Credit Reporting Act and the Fair Housing Act, can include damages for emotional or mental distress.
On March 16, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels signed House Bill 1238, which includes provisions allowing a mortgage creditor to file a petition to have a state court determine whether a property is abandoned. The bill also sets forth criteria and procedures for use by the court in making its determination. A finding from the court that a property is abandoned allows for an expedited foreclosure process.
Recently, Indiana enacted Senate Bill 298. The new law provides that if a mortgage or vendor’s lien does not show the due date of the last installment, the mortgage or lien expires 10 years after the date of execution of the mortgage or lien instead of 20 years under the current law. The bill makes exceptions to the expiration period if a foreclosure action is brought prior to the expiration. It also provides for civil actions concerning an omitted party’s interest in a property and sets forth factors that the court must consider in determining any rights of redemption. Lastly, the bill provides that: (i) the senior lien on which the foreclosure action was based is not extinguished by merger with the title to the property conveyed to a purchaser at the judicial sale until the interest of any omitted party has been terminated; and (ii) until an omitted party’s interest is terminated, the purchaser at the judicial sale is the equitable owner of the senior lien.
On March 15, West Virginia enacted House Bill 3177, which will permit the owner of a residential rental property purchased at foreclosure to terminate an existing tenancy after giving the tenant 90 days notice, or not less than 30 days notice before the expiration of the lease, whichever is shorter. Tenants with month-to-month leases need only be provided with 30 days notice. The law details the content and method of delivery for the notices. The new provisions take effect January 1, 2013.