Bank regulation just got kicked up a notch.

It’s no secret that today’s world of banking is vastly different than it was just five years ago. With a heavy nod to the Great Recession, every element of the banking industry is now under a gigantic microscope – from both regulatory and consumer awareness standpoints ($5 debit fee backlash, anyone?). A big part of this microscope is the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. It’s a mighty piece of legislation that gives some major muscle to enforcing banking reform. And the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is a watchdog agency this Act created to effect real change to the American financial services industry.

Sounds like a lot of boring names and acronyms, right? But it’s really not that complicated. All it means is that there’s a powerful agency now looking out for us consumers and helping protect our financial well-being. We’re all for it and think it’s about time.

When the CFPB was created this summer, it set out to regulate activities by banks, but only those that fall in the traditional realm – large banks, thrifts and credit unions with assets over $10 billion. But in efforts to further protect consumers, the CFPB just expanded its reach to nonbanks, which it defines as any “company that offers or provides consumer financial products or services but does not have a bank, thrift, or credit union charter.” This includes thousands of businesses such as payday loan companies (you may have seen one in your local strip mall), mortgage companies (including foreclosure relief services) and private education lenders. And with 20 million consumers using payday loan services and 14% of all consumers having debt collectors on their tail, this expanded reach is profound.

So does this affect our day to day? Not really. But it does add some significant safeguards against people getting in over their heads financially or being bilked by unscrupulous businesses. Certain parts of the financial sector began resembling the Wild West (after all, a good part of the housing bubble was caused by subprime loans made through nonbank mortgage brokers), so having an agency that monitors the activities of a broader swath of finance-related businesses can only further help consumers make financially sound decisions.

What are your thoughts about this, Saver? Do you feel more confident knowing that there’s now more regulation over the financial sector, or do you think the government should step back and let consumers decide what’s best for themselves?

Sources:

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Time

Share Print
  • Drew Pettingill

    ING sucks … That twelve days of mobile contest sucks … No body that ever tries hard wins anything .. Instead this crummy bank give all the money to people named Grant and Woodridge . So either they make the wealthy wealthier or they make up names and give no money aware …

  • http://www.moneyreallymatters.com/ Vijaianand

    It’s “milked” not “bilked by unscrupulous businesses”. A decent amount of monitoring helps to filter out business but still there are intelligent people use their brain to find the loopholes to scam the people. It is tough to stop it and as a consumer you are your own safeguard/protection agency for anything you do financially. If it is too good to be true, it might be too good to be true. So beware.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tina-Huston/100003147233041 Tina Huston

    In 2009 my house burned and I broke both of my arms. I applied for a 2 month mortgage payment deferral. ING put me through hell getting them the paperwork and my right humerus healed crooked because I wasn’t supposed to move. They could have accepted the letter I sent from the doctor. They approved the deferral. The approval letter states, “This amount will be payable at the end of the term of your loan.” No where did I sign anything that said I had to pay back the deferred amount in order to get a rate renewal. Since then, I have made all of my payments and paid down my principle significantly and made a lump sum $10,000.00 principle pay down. I have gotten rate rewals since the deferral and since the $10,000.00 principle paydown. I recently applied for a rate renewal, and I received a terse email saying I wasn’t eligible because I have to payoff the 2 deferred payments first. They have never informed me that this was a condition. They have never informed me on how to make payments toward the 2 deferred payments. I pay principle and interest every month on my mortgage and I have never been informed on how to buy down the deferral or that it would prevent me from getting a rate renewal. When I applied for the deferral, I was never advised that this might prevent me from getting a rate renewal. When I paid the lump sum of $10,000.00, I was never advised that any of the funds needed to go toward the deferred amount. I have on ING letterhead that the deferral was due at the end of the term of the loan. The managers will not budge, nor will they say to whom they report. This is predatory and it cannot be legal. ING is doing what they want, as it works for them. Their objective is to get me to the end of my 5 year arm and jack up my rate 2% and not offer a rate renewal until I cough up $7112.00.

    I filed a complaint with Consumer Finance. More complaints to come.