FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: JUNE 20, 2019

National Consumer Law Center contact:  Jan Kruse, jkruse@nclc.org or (617) 542-8010

Washington, D.C. – Today, the Stopping Bad Robocalls Act was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives by Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ) and Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR), chair and ranking member, respectively, of the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce. The bill is also sponsored by Rep. Mike Doyle (D-PA) and Rep. Bob Latta (R-OH). “This bipartisan bill is an important step forward in the fight to stop unwanted and illegal robocalls,” said National Consumer Law Center Senior Counsel Margot Saunders.

The bill would provide new protections from robocallers by requiring the Federal Communications Commission to 1)  issue comprehensive regulations to stop unwanted and illegal automated calls and texts, 2) implement meaningful call authentication technology (so Caller ID is once again reliable),  and 3) ensure that call blocking programs are not charged to consumers. The bill also requires the FCC to create a database that callers can check to avoid making robocalls to a telephone number that has been reassigned to someone else.  It incorporates all the protections of the TRACED Act recently passed by the U.S. Senate, and goes farther by making the TRACED Act’s call authentication and call blocking requirements applicable not just to the largest phone companies, but also those serving rural areas..   

“There’s still more to be done and there is a lot of responsibility placed on the FCC to protect consumers,” added Saunders. “Robocalls plague voters of all political stripes so we are  especially pleased to see a bipartisan effort on this bill. We hope this is the first of several positive steps that Congress will take.”

Robocalls surged after a 2018 decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals in D.C. that set aside a 2015 FCC order on the question of how to interpret the Telephone Consumer Protection Act’s (TCPA’s) ban on autodialed calls to cell phones without the called party’s consent. This decision raised the specter that the prohibition might be interpreted not to cover the autodialing systems that are currently used to deluge cell phones with unwanted calls. Last year, Americans received more than 47 billion robocalls, with 60 billion estimated for this year. In May 2019, 9 of the top 10 robocallers were collectors attempting to collect on debts owed to well-known businesses, including Capital One, Wells Fargo, Santander, and Comcast, according to YouMail.

More information on NCLC’s extensive work on illegal robocalls is available at: https://www.nclc.org/issues/robocalls-and-telemarketing.html

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 11, 2019

National Consumer Law Center contact: Jan Kruse, jkruse@nclc.org or (617) 542-8010

Washington, D.C.- The parties listed below make the following joint statement regarding the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) issued by the Federal Communications Commission proposing to place a cap on the federal Universal Service Fund (USF):

“When Congress codified the concept of universal service by enacting the Telecommunications Act of 1996, it called for the creation of different programs tailored to promote affordable communications services for those most in need, from students, library patrons and rural hospitals to low-income and rural communities. Grouped under a single umbrella of the Universal Service Fund, these programs are intended to work in concert to address the “digital divide” and ensure that all consumers have access to high-quality and affordable communications. Indeed, our nation’s economic well-being and the well-being of people and businesses in rural and low-income communities require universal access to affordable, quality, high-speed broadband.

“The parties listed below believe that placing an overall cap on the USF puts at risk the comprehensive mission of universal service as Congress intended and articulated it. An overall USF cap, even if sized to meet current overall demand or the sum of authorized levels plus inflation, could still end up pitting these essential programs against each other in the future and undermine efforts to solve the “digital divide.” By contrast, the 1996 Act specifically directs the FCC to ensure that the Universal Service Fund has “sufficient” funding, and the FCC must therefore evaluate and size each program to suit its unique and essential universal service mission. An overarching cap would thus undermine efforts to ensure that funding for each program is and will remain “sufficient” to satisfy Congress’ mandates for universal service for all.

“For these reasons, the organizations and associations listed here respectfully oppose the imposition of an overall cap on the Universal Service Fund.”

AASA, The School Superintendents Association

Access Humboldt

Advanced Data Services, Inc. (ADS)

Advocates for Basic Legal Equality (ABLE)

Alliance for Excellent Education

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)

American Library Association (ALA)

Appalshop

Asian Americans Advancing Justice │AAJC

Association of Educational Service Agencies

Benton Foundation

Center for Rural Strategies

Chief Officers of State Library Agencies (COSLA)

Citizens Coalition

Common Cause

Common Sense Media

Communications Workers of America

Conterra Networks

Consortium for School Networking (COSN)

Consumer Federation of America (CFA)

Free Library of Philadelphia

Georgia K-12 CTO Council

Greenlining

Illinois Educational Technology Leaders (IETL)

Infinity Communications & Consulting, Inc.

Institute for Local Self-Reliance

The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights

Louisiana CTO Council

MediaJustice

Midland Council of Governments

Missouri Educational Technology Leaders (METL)

Mobile Beacon

NAACP

National Association of State Boards of Education

National Collaborative for Digital Equity (NCDE)

National Consumer Law Center, on behalf of its low-income clients (NCLC)

National Digital Inclusion Alliance (NDIA)

National Hispanic Media Coalition (NHMC)

National Rural Education Association

National Rural Education Advocacy Consortium

National Tribal Telecommunications Association

Native Public Media

Next Century Cities

North Central Ohio Computer Cooperative (NCOCC)

Northern Buckeye Education Council

NTCA – The Rural Broadband Association

New America’s Open Technology Institute (OTI)

New York State Association for Computers and Technologies in Education (NYSCATE)

OCA – Asian Pacific American Advocates

Pennsylvania Association for Education Communications and Technology (PAECT)

Rural Wireless Association, Inc.

Schools, Health & Libraries Broadband (SHLB) Coalition

SouthWest Ohio Computer Association (SWOCA)

State Educational Technology Directors Association (SETDA)

Texas K-12 CTO Council

Tri-County Computer Services Association

Tribal Digital Village Network (TDVNet)

United Church of Christ, OC Inc. (UCC OC Inc.)

Urban Libraries Council (ULC)

Velocity Fiber

Virginia Society for Technology in Education (VSTE)

Voqal

WTA-Advocates for Rural Broadband

Yavapai County Education Service Agency

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 11, 2019

National Consumer Law Center contact: Jan Kruse, jkruse@nclc.org or (617) 542-8010

Letters come after news that regulators pursuing joint small-dollar policy; Growing concern that several Administration appointees may be giving green light for predatory loans

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, the National Consumer Law Center (NCLC) joined a coalition of national civil rights and consumer groups in writing to top banking regulators on the importance of preventing banks from once again issuing payday loans that trap people in a cycle of debt. The groups pointed to a recent letter from more than 400 organizations to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which “prominently stressed the dangers of bank-issued payday loans in addition to those of non-bank payday lenders.”

These new letters were sent to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), and the Federal Reserve (Fed) by Americans for Financial Reform, the Center for Responsible Lending, Consumer Federation of America, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, the NAACP, and the National Consumer Law Center (on behalf of its low-income clients).

The letters urged the regulators to “listen to the voices of Americans across the country who have spoken out so strongly in opposition to high-cost, balloon payment loans.”

The letters also pointed out: “When bank payday loans were on the market, two-thirds of fees came from people who on average borrowed 15 or more times a year, many of whom took out loans 10 or more months a year.”

A link to letter to the FDIC is here.

A link to letter to the OCC is here.

A link to letter to the Fed is here.

The letters echo recent concerns over the National Credit Union Administration’s proposal to loosen standards in the Payday Alternative Loan (PAL) program.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: JUNE 10, 2019

National Consumer Law Center contact: Jan Kruse, jkruse@nclc.org or (617) 542-8010

Joanna K. Darcus’s full testimony will be available by 10am ET on June 11 at: http://bit.ly/nclc-test-loan-serv

Washington, D.C.- National Consumer Law Center attorney Joanna K. Darcus will testify on Tuesday, June 11 at 10am E.T. before the U.S. House Financial Services Committee’s Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee at a hearing entitled “An Examination of State Efforts to Oversee the $1.5 Trillion Student Loan Servicing Market.”

In her testimony, Darcus will note that the U.S. Department of Education data shows that nearly a quarter of the more than 43 million federal student loan borrowers are in distress on their loans. These borrowers need high-quality, timely assistance. Unfortunately, as extensively documented, the student loan servicing industry has long been rife with misconduct.

The consequences of servicers’ misconduct are significant and, at times, catastrophic for borrowers’ financial lives. According to an April 2017 CFPB report based upon student loan borrower complaints, sloppy practices by servicers created obstacles to repayment, raised the costs of debt, caused distress, and ultimately contributed to driving struggling borrowers to default.

In particular, many eligible borrowers are not enrolled in income-driven repayment (IDR) plans despite clear benefits to the financial health of borrowers and their families. Instead, servicers steer many borrowers into forbearances and deferments, which are profitable for the servicer and costly to the borrower.

Servicer misconduct leading to default exposes borrowers to aggressive federal debt collection practices. The amount the government seizes using wage garnishment and offsets of Social Security and tax refund (including the Earned Income Tax Credit) often is far greater than the payments borrowers would have been required to make under an IDR plan. The consequences of default include damage to borrowers’ credit histories, increasing the cost of access to further credit and potentially erecting barriers to accessing employment and housing.

Darcus will also discuss how quality servicing is especially critical for addressing racial disparities in student loan outcomes, citing a Brookings Institution 2016 analysis by Judith Scott-Clayton & Jing Li that found, on average, that Black students graduated with about $7,400 more student loan debt than their White peers. Additionally Black and Latino students are also targeted for enrollment and overrepresented in high-cost, low-quality predatory schools.

Borrowers harmed by servicer misconduct need real relief. Reining in servicing misconduct and errors requires robust public oversight at the state and federal levels. Although some states have stepped up to protect their residents, borrowers nationwide also need and deserve for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to provide stronger oversight and for federal loan servicers to provide better assistance.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 6, 2019

CONTACTS: National Consumer Law Center: Jan Kruse (jkruse@nclc.org) or (617) 542-8010; Margot Saunders (msaunders@nclc.org)

National Consumer Law Center Senior Attorney Margot Saunders issues statement on FCC proposal calling it “a meaningful first step, but not a magic bullet.”

WASHINGTON, D.C.–Today, the FCC unanimously approved a proposal to grant phone service providers the authority to proactively block robocalls that its analysis determines are automated and likely illegal or unwanted. The proposal comes on the heels of the U.S. Senate’s overwhelming approval of the bipartisan “TRACED Act” which would mandate the FCC to require that providers  employ similar call-blocking authority as well as force implementation of call authentication technology known as STIR/SHAKEN.

National Consumer Law Center Senior Attorney Margot Saunders, a national expert on robocalls and the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), issued the following statement on the approval of the proposal:

“We recognize the FCC’s actions today as a meaningful step toward ridding consumers of unwanted and harassing robocalls, but it’s not a magic bullet. Consumers must insist that Congress and the FCC go further towards restoring the use of their cellphones and restoring their faith in the modern communications infrastructure.

“Today’s order only grants phone companies permission to block robocalls; it does not require them to do so–and proponents and opponents of the proposal have raised understandable concerns about the accuracy of phone companies’ analysis regarding which calls will be blocked. It is unclear how the phone companies will identify and determine whether to permit or block robocalls primarily falling into four categories–scams, wanted calls (such as Rx reminders and school closing notices), unwanted but legal calls (such as debt collection calls with prior consent to call), and illegal debt collection and telemarketing calls made without prior consent or after consent has been revoked.

“Call blocking is a valuable tool and call authentication measures are essential going forward, but the measures are by no means a complete fix. A critical piece to remedy the nation’s runaway robocall epidemic is a strong interpretation of the federal TCPA, which shields consumers from autodialed and prerecorded calls to their cell phones without consent, and strong FCC enforcement of the rules to rein in robo-harassment.

“Debt collectors and other prolific robocallers should follow the rules on who can be called and who is telling them to stop calling and then they must actually stop calling. Service providers must also be aware of who owns the numbers they have provided so that call authentication can provide a viable source of relief for consumers inundated with scam, spoofed, unwanted, and illegal robocalls.”

For more information, state-by-state robocall data, and recommendations, visit NCLC’s Robocalls and Telemarketing page.

June 19th 2-3PM (ET)