Capital One, Walmart: A look at some of the consumer cases dropped by the CFPB under Trump
In some cases, companies that were supposed to refund their customers or pay a penalty for unfair or deceptive practices are no longer bound to make their customers whole. Other companies facing charges of fraud of deceptive practices saw their lawsuits dropped in the early days of the Trump administration.
Here are some of the Trump administration's rollbacks:
Navy Federal Credit Union
The CFPB accused Navy Federal Credit Union, the nation's largest credit union, of having unfair and deceptive overdraft fee practices. NFCU settled with the bureau and agreed to refund its members $80 million in overdraft fees. However, when the new administration took over, NFCU asked to have the order dismissed, which the CFPB agreed to do without giving a reason. Navy Federal has not said whether it would refund their members, which are mostly service men and women, families and veterans.
Reduced overdraft fees
The CFPB proposed new regulations that would have reduced overdraft fees to $5 from their industry average of $27. The regulations focused on a bureau analysis on what it actually cost banks to make short-term loans to customers to cover those purchases when a customer's account went negative. The banking industry stood to lose billions of dollars in overdraft revenue, although banks have been weening themselves off overdraft fee revenue for years. The regulations were overturned by the Republican-controlled Congress in April.
Capital One
In the last days of the Biden administration, the CFPB sued banking giant Capital One for allegedly cheating its customers out of $2 billion in interest payments on their savings accounts. The case involved a product that Capital One sold known as 360 Savings, which the bank advertised as having the best savings rate in the country. Capital One failed to tell some customers that it had another product with a higher savings rate. The case was dropped within days of the Trump administration taking over the bureau.
WalMart
The CFPB filed a lawsuit in December against WalMart and workforce company Branch Messenger, accusing the companies of deceptively steering delivery drivers to open accounts with Branch, in order for those employees to get instant access to their wages. However, the CFPB said these Branch accounts came with high fees and deceptive marketing, and said Wal-Mart and Branch should return $10 million to harmed drivers. Both Wal-Mart and Branch denied the accusations. The lawsuit was dropped by the CFPB in the first weeks of the Trump administration.
Zelle
The parent company of Zelle, the peer-to-peer payment system, as well as some of the nation's largest banks, were sued by the CFPB late last year over accusations they failed to protect hundreds of thousands of consumers from rampant fraud on Zelle, in violation of consumer financial laws. The CFPB's lawsuit claimed hundreds of thousands of customers lost approximately $870 million in funds to fraud over the seven years that Zelle had been in existence. That lawsuit was dropped by the CFPB in March.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
11 minutes ago
- Politico
House Judiciary Dems call for DOJ leaders to testify on Epstein fallout
Senate Majority Leader John Thune says he will bring the first procedural vote to the floor Tuesday on the White House's request to claw back $9.4 billion in spending. It's not clear he has even the 51 votes necessary to start debate on the package. Congress needs to approve the request before it expires Friday, or the administration will have to spend the money as lawmakers originally intended. That deadline is looming large as several GOP senators insist the administration clarify what spending it is actually seeking to rescind. They'll question President Donald Trump's budget director Russ Vought during senators' closed-door lunch Tuesday afternoon. 'We still are lacking the level of detail that is needed to make the right decisions,' Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins told reporters Monday evening. 'It's extremely unusual for any senator to not be able to get that kind of detailed information.' The Maine Republican is concerned not just over the administration's proposal to scale down the global AIDS-fighting program PEPFAR, but also about broader cutbacks in overseas public health. Sen. Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) told POLITICO he's particularly interested in protecting funding for global food aid programs like Food for Peace and the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program. It's increasingly evident the rescissions package will have to be changed in order to pass the Senate, and Thune told reporters as he left the Capitol on Monday that leadership is working with wary senators to 'see what a path forward on amendments looks like.' Senate leaders expect a vote-a-rama on amendments to start Wednesday, teeing up a final vote late Wednesday or early Thursday. If senators are able to advance a package with tweaks, House GOP leaders plan to put the package on the floor Thursday; they have already started to clear away procedural hurdles that would prevent them from passing the spending cut proposal ASAP. Throwing another wrinkle into it all, though, is that House GOP leaders don't want the Senate amending the package at all, knowing their members will be jammed with changes they don't like and be forced to choose between passing a watered-down product or missing the deadline to act. 'I think you got to respect the White House's request, and that's what we did, so I hope that's what we get back,' Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters Monday. 'There are two big categories of rescissions, and I'm not sure either of them should be subject to dispute.' It's also unclear whether an amended rescissions package would even have the support in the Republican House. Fiscal hawks are already drawing red lines, with Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) going as far as telling POLITICO he won't support a rescissions package that is 'a penny less' than the House-approved version. MEANWHILE, IN OTHER FUNDING FIGHTS — Senate appropriators remain at a standstill on moving a funding bill forward for the Commerce and Justice departments. They're trying to schedule a briefing with the FBI on the administration's rationale for abandoning the plan to move the bureau to suburban Maryland, according to Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), whose stand against Trump's desire for a site in the District of Columbia derailed a markup of the bill last week. But Van Hollen insists that even if the FBI assures senators that the Washington location is a secure site, he won't back off his attempt to block the administration from diverting about $1.4 billion that has been set aside for relocating the agency's campus to Maryland. Across the Capitol: House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole said that House leaders began whipping votes Monday night as the chamber prepares to take its vote on the $831.5 billion defense appropriations bill later this week. While defense appropriations bills have been bipartisan in the past, Republicans are expecting this measure to be a largely party-line affair. What else we're watching: — Epstein meltdown: We'll see if Republican leaders' headache from their members over the DOJ's failure to release files related to Jeffrey Epstein continues. Rep. Norman voted Monday in favor of a Democratic amendment in the House Rules Committee that would have forced a floor vote on the DOJ releasing more materials from the federal case. — Russia sanctions timeline: The bipartisan Russian sanctions bill might stall in the House and Senate after Trump announced secondary tariffs on countries trading with Russia. Thune said Monday he would hold off on advancing the bill for now. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise also said a vote could be delayed to post-August recess. — Dems' last stand against a controversial Trump pick: Senate Democrats are making a final bid to draw the spotlight to a whistleblower's allegations that Emil Bove, a top Justice Department official and 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals nominee, urged defiance of the same judicial branch he is seeking to join. Democrats want the whistleblower, Erez Reuveni, to testify before senators prior to their confirmation vote on Bove, which is set for Thursday morning. Jordain Carney, Katherine Tully-McManus, Jennifer Scholtes, Meredith Lee Hill and Cassandra Dumay contributed to this report.
Axios
13 minutes ago
- Axios
House Dems press GOP to hold hearing on Epstein files
A group of Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee are demanding their Republican counterparts hold a public hearing on the Trump administration's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein documents. Why it matters: Democrats have homed in on a strategy this week of squeezing Republicans on the issue as President Trump comes under fire from his own base. "We must submit to public scrutiny President Trump's and MAGA's longstanding claims about the 'Epstein files,'" the Democrats, led by Judiciary Committee ranking member Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), wrote to chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio).
Axios
13 minutes ago
- Axios
Hawley introduces bill to reverse Medicaid cuts he voted for
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) introduced legislation Tuesday to halt any future cuts to Medicaid hospital funding, two weeks after voting for the slashes as part of President Trump's " big, beautiful bill." The big picture: Hawley has emerged as a key player pushing back on a major Medicaid overhaul, which would include nearly $1 trillion in rollbacks over the next 10 years. Driving the news: The "Protect Medicaid and Rural Hospitals Act" introduced Tuesday, if passed, would repeal a provider tax moratorium and the future reduction of provider tax authority in the reconciliation bill. "This would restore a key aspect of Medicaid funding that states rely on to finance their programs," Hawley's office said in a press release. It also aims to repeal provisions in the reconciliation bill related to state directed payments that could reduce Medicaid reimbursements. What he's saying: "President Trump has always said we have to protect Medicaid for working people," Hawley said in a statement. "Now is the time to prevent any future cuts to Medicaid from going into effect."
