Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36For more information, please visit or 5 4 In 2016, the consumer financial services industry continued to face regulatory uncertainty, significant government scrutiny, and ever-more creative litigation tactics from the plaintiffs’ bar. In order to stay competitive—and to avoid government and public scrutiny and costly consumer litigation—lenders must stay on top and ahead of changes in the law, new regulatory interpretations, and shifting legislative and enforcement priorities. Through our LenderLaw Watch and Consumer Finance Enforcement Watch blogs, Goodwin’s Financial Industry Group analyzed key industry and legal developments and provided real- time reporting on a full range of federal and state consumer finance enforcement activity, keeping our clients current and informed on key legal developments and how they could impact the industry. We also continued to develop our proprietary database of information on enforcement actions, allowing us to provide interactive data and quantitative enforcement trend analysis in real-time. In this year-end review, we synthesize our prior coverage of the most significant developments from 2016, and we offer some predictions on what the industry might expect in 2017 in the mortgage, credit card, student lending, credit reporting, auto lending, debt collection, TCPA, payday lending, and FinTech areas, with a focus on changes the new presidential administration may bring. overview 4 - Total Actions 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 S t a t e S t a t u t e o r R e g u l a t i o n C F P A F T C A F D C P A T I L A F C A E C O A F H A F C R A E F T A S C R A R E S P A F I R R E A 2015 2016 7 7 5 4 1 8 6 8 2 12 8 14 12 5 11 11 20 16 13 24 35 34 24 45 57 62 $224.0M Key Trends 2016 saw a significant amount of regulatory activity, especially from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which issued several proposals for sweeping regulatory change in a number of areas in the consumer financial industry. The CFPB unveiled or finalized sweeping new rules governing small dollar lending, prepaid card services, and, most notably, consumer arbitration. While the CFPB remained active in enforcement activities in 2016, the Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), and state attorneys general took on increasingly large roles in enforcing consumer financial protection laws, with particular focus on deceptive marketing and fair lending issues. Student lending also remained an enforcement priority in 2016, with several enforcement actions instituted against for-profit colleges and the shutdown by the Department of Education of a national for-profit college. 2016 also was a significant year for consumer financial litigation, and a handful of U.S. Supreme Court deci- sions from this year likely will shape consumer class action litigation for years to come. The year concluded on a wave of uncertainty following the election of Donald Trump as the next U.S. president, as industry attorneys, compliance departments, and lobbyists try to predict the new administration’s approach to the financial services industry. 2016 Highlights Regulatory, enforcement, and civil litigation activity remained robust in 2016. The CFPB’s regulatory branch was especially prolific, finalizing or proposing new reg- ulations in several consumer financial industries. Addi- tionally, the Supreme Court and D.C. federal appellate court decided several high-profile cases impacting plaintiffs’ constitutional standing to sue, the application of debt collection laws to bankruptcy proceedings, and the constitutionality of the CFPB. This year’s major developments included: A Long Awaited Next Step in the PHH Case. The D.C. Circuit ruled in PHH v. CFPB that the CFPB’s structure— with a single director removable only for cause—is unconstitutional and that instead the president must be empowered to remove the director at will. The ruling also held that the CFPB director’s $109 million penalty for an alleged RESPA violation that occurred outside the statute of limitations was not consistent with RESPA and was time barred. The CFPB is fighting the decision, and the ruling may reach the Supreme Court in 2017. Total Actions by Statute