Is the CFPB Meting Out Justice or Inflicting Abuse?

Demand Propels Home Prices Upward 2 days ago The Best Markets For Residential Property Investors 2 days ago Tagged with: CFPB Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Fines and Penalties Data Provider Black Knight to Acquire Top of Mind 2 days ago March 24, 2016 1,154 Views Governmental Measures Target Expanded Access to Affordable Housing 2 days ago The Best Markets For Residential Property Investors 2 days ago Share Save Subscribe Home / Daily Dose / Is the CFPB Meting Out Justice or Inflicting Abuse? Is the CFPB Meting Out Justice or Inflicting Abuse?  Print This Post Related Articles Richard CordrayThe controversial Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which was launched in July 2011 from the equally controversial Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, is nearing its fifth birthday.In slightly less than five years, the Bureau has handed out more than $5 billion in fines to companies who they deemed have violated federal consumer financial protection laws. A large chunk of that has been handed out to financial firms for violations in the mortgage servicing space; in December 2013, the Bureau ordered Ocwen Financial, the nation’s largest non-bank servicer, to pay $2 billion in consumer relief to underwater borrowers for alleged servicing errors that pushed borrowers into foreclosure.Whether you think the CFPB is meting out justice and protecting consumers from abusive financial practices or if the Bureau is the one that is actually inflicting the abuse generally depends on what side of the fence you’re on.If you’re on the Democratic side, you are probably among those who see the Bureau as a triumph for all that is good in the world of protecting consumers. In March 2015, House Financial Services Committee Ranking Member Maxine Waters (D-California) told the committee, “Mr. Chairman (Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas), your party pretends to care about the huge challenges of income inequality and minority access to credit, vilifying this agency as ‘hurting the very people we are trying to help.”In November, presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton tweeted, “The CFPB protects borrowers from unfair and deceptive Wall Street practices. Attacks against it are unfounded and outrageous.” Also in November, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts), the Bureau’s chief architect, tweeted, “So here’s my message to Wall Street and their GOP buddies: We’re ready to fight back to protect the CFPB.”If you’re on the Republican side, chances are you see the CFPB as an overreaching government bureaucracy with a lack of transparency and accountability. Both of the aforementioned Clinton and Warren tweets were sent in response to a TV commercial that ran during the nationally-televised GOP debate. The ad was sponsored by the American Action Network, a right-leaning Washington, D.C.-based advocacy group, and it painted the CFPB as a communist organization that even included a backdrop of gigantic red-shaded banners of CFPB Director Richard Cordray and Warren.Since the Bureau opened its doors, Republicans have asserted that the Bureau’s overreach has caused increased compliance costs to businesses, which has in turn resulted in costlier financial products for consumers. Critics of the Bureau say this process harms the very consumers it aims to protect.Last week in a House Financial Services Committee hearing in which Cordray testified, Hensarling told the committee that “Congress has made Mr. Cordray a dictator.”“Apologists for the Bureau, along with Mr. Cordray, frequently cite the tens of millions of dollars of fines they have imposed as proof they are protecting consumers,” Hensarling said. “But the Bureau operates as legislature cop on the beat, prosecutor, judge and jury all rolled into one. Fines imposed in such an abusive structure tell us nothing about justice or consumer welfare. Nothing.”Republicans have introduced several bills in an attempt to reform the CFPB, notably by Rep. Sean Duffy (R-Wisconsin) and Randy Neugebauer (R-Texas), but none have made any headway.Should a Republican be elected president, what will be the future of the CFPB? Will it continue as is, or will the president make wholesale changes? Brian Honea’s writing and editing career spans nearly two decades across many forms of media. He served as sports editor for two suburban newspaper chains in the DFW area and has freelanced for such publications as the Yahoo! Contributor Network, Dallas Home Improvement magazine, and the Dallas Morning News. He has written four non-fiction sports books, the latest of which, The Life of Coach Chuck Curtis, was published by the TCU Press in December 2014. A lifelong Texan, Brian received his master’s degree from Amberton University in Garland. Servicers Navigate the Post-Pandemic World 2 days ago in Daily Dose, Featured, News Governmental Measures Target Expanded Access to Affordable Housing 2 days ago Servicers Navigate the Post-Pandemic World 2 days ago CFPB Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Fines and Penalties 2016-03-24 Brian Honea About Author: Brian Honea The Week Ahead: Nearing the Forbearance Exit 2 days ago Previous: Housing Advocates’ Applause of Trust Fund Contribution Comes With Caution Next: DS News Webcast: Friday 3/25/2016 Data Provider Black Knight to Acquire Top of Mind 2 days ago Sign up for DS News Daily Demand Propels Home Prices Upward 2 days ago read more

SC To Consider On August 10 Plea Against Offence Of ‘Scandalizing The Court’ Under Contempt Of Courts Act

first_imgTop StoriesSC To Consider On August 10 Plea Against Offence Of ‘Scandalizing The Court’ Under Contempt Of Courts Act LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK6 Aug 2020 9:59 PMShare This – xA Supreme Court bench comprising Justices D Y Chandrachud and K M Joseph will consider for admission on August 10 the writ petition challenging the constitutionality of the offence of ‘scandalizing the court’ under Section 2(c)(i) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.The petition filed by N Ram (former Editor and Managing Director of ‘The Hindu), Advocate Prashant Bhushan and…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginA Supreme Court bench comprising Justices D Y Chandrachud and K M Joseph will consider for admission on August 10 the writ petition challenging the constitutionality of the offence of ‘scandalizing the court’ under Section 2(c)(i) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.The petition filed by N Ram (former Editor and Managing Director of ‘The Hindu), Advocate Prashant Bhushan and Arun Shourie (former Union Minister) challenges the provision as vague, arbitrary, subjective and leading to violation of fundamental right to free speech.Notably, the petition was filed following the contempt proceedings taken against Bhushan over two of his tweets about the Chief Justice of India and the Supreme Court. On August 5, the SC reserved orders on the contempt case.SC bench of Justices D Y Chandrachud & K M Joseph to consider on August 10 the plea challenging constitutionality of the offence of “scandalizing the court” under Section 2(c)(i) of Contempt of Courts Act.The petition has been filed by N Ram @nramind , @pbhushan1 & Arun Shourie pic.twitter.com/9FjpSjP8IU— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) August 6, 2020The petitioners argue that the provision : fails the test of over-breadth. abridges the right to free speech and expression in the absence of “real and tangible” harm. creates a “chilling effect” on the free speech and expression.”The impugned sub-section is unconstitutional as it is incompatible with preambular values and basic feature of the Constitution. It violates Article 19(1)(a), is unconstitutional and incurably vague, and is manifestly arbitrary”, reads the petition filed through Advocate Kamini Jaiswal.The petitioners state that the offence is “rooted in Colonial assumptions”, which have no place in a democracy. The provision is highly subjective, inviting greatly different readings and application. Thus, the vagueness of the offence violates Article 14 which demands equal treatment and non-arbitrariness. “For instance, in P N Dua vs P. Shiv Shankar , the respondent was not held guilty of scandalising the court despite referring to Supreme Court judges at a public function as “antisocial elements i.e. FERA violators, bride burners and a whole horde of reactionaries” on account of the fact that he was Law Minister. However, in D.C. Saxena vs Chief Justice of India, the respondent was held guilty of criminal contempt for alleging that a Chief Justice was corrupt and that an F.l.R. under the l.P.C. should be registered against him”, the plea states. The provision is also challenged as violative of Article 14 on the ground of “manifest arbitrariness”, on the basis of principles laid down by the SC in Shayara Bano (Triple Talaq case) and Navtej Johar (decriminalization of homosexuality).In 2013, the United Kingdom, had abolished the offence of scandalizing the judiciary as form of contempt of court based on UK Law Commission’s recommendation that the law was vague and not compatible with freedom of speech.Next Storylast_img read more

Ocean City Schools Closed Tuesday as Nor’easter Hits

first_imgStreets near 30th Street and Haven Avenue were flooded Monday morning, but a new flood warning indicates much worse flooding during high tides Monday night at about 9:30 p.m. and Tuesday morning at about 9:41 a.m.All Ocean City schools will be closed Tuesday, Dec. 9, due to the heavy rains, high winds and tidal flooding, the school district announced early Tuesday.The National Weather Service has issued a coastal flood warning for Ocean City on Tuesday morning as a coastal storm bears down on the island and promises to bring as much as 2 inches of rain.The warning was in effect for a Monday night high tide, but with the rain yet to arrive, only the most flood-prone streets saw flooding.The Tuesday morning tide arrives at 9:41 a.m. — at the same time the rain and wind from the passing nor’easter will be heaviest.Residents of low-lying streets should consider moving their vehicles.Northeast winds are expected to gust as strong as 45 mph on Tuesday morning.The seas offshore will be 8 to 11 feet, according to the marine forecast.The forecast calls for coastal regions to see only rain. Areas north and west of the Interstate 95 could see a mix of rain and snow.In the surf, a stormy northeast swell is expected to build through Tuesday with offshore winds possibly creating good conditions on Wednesday as the storm passes. The ocean water temperature is 47 degrees.A Monday afternoon alert from the Ocean City Office of Emergency Management is as follows:Widespread minor to moderate tidal flooding can be expected around the time of high tide Monday, Dec. 8 at approximately 9:30 p.m. along the bayfront.Widespread moderate tidal flooding is again expected during Tuesday morning’s high tide at approximately 9:41 a.m.  It is expected that the flooding Tuesday morning will significantly exceed what was experienced Monday morning.Flooding may occur well prior to the times of high tide and last for several hours.Residents and visitors in areas of Ocean City that have experienced tidal flooding in the past are advised to move their vehicles to higher ground well prior to the times of high tide.Motorists are reminded to not enter flooded roadways or drive around barricades.  The water may be much deeper than it appears.Periods of heavy rain and high gusty winds are also expected during this period.  Please secure loose objects on or around your property.Weather conditions and forecasts should be closely monitored for the next 24 hours.Further information and updates can be seen locally on the City’s Government Access Channel (Channel 97 on the Comcast Cable System in Ocean City) or on line at: www.ocnj.us.Flood “warnings” indicate conditions already exist or are imminent. “Watches” indicate only strong possibilities. The complete National Weather Service briefing on the storm is below.Download (PDF, 918KB)last_img read more