18 AUTO LENDING In 2017, Goodwin tracked 12 auto lending enforcement actions. This is a 25% decrease from the 16 auto loan actions tracked in 2016. Unlike last year, state attorneys general brought the majority of new actions, whereas federal enforcement in the area was virtually non-existent. The Massachusetts Attorney General was the most active regulator, bringing three auto lending actions in 2017. Single federal actions were also brought by the FTC, CFPB, and DOJ respectively. 2017 also saw the CFPB propose and finalize a new rule providing increased protections on short- term auto loans. However, the impact of the rule may be diminished by the GAO’s determination that the CFPB’s Bulletin relating to indirect auto lending and compliance with the ECOA was in fact a “rule,” thereby making it subject to Congressional review and potential repeal. And as the CFPB announced in December 2016, the Bureau no longer intends to bring fair lending enforcement actions against auto lenders, and instead will focus on supervisory compliance, unless the CFPB changes course, we do not expect to see a recurrence of fair lending actions in auto lending. 2017 TRENDS There was a substantial decrease in auto lending enforcement actions in 2017, as the CFPB became largely inactive in the area, bringing only one action— down from eight in 2016 and seven in 2015. The FTC and DOJ also contributed to the overall decrease in auto loan enforcement, as they generally remained inactive in the area. The overall decrease in auto lending enforcement likely corresponds with the CFPB’s finding, in a recent quarterly report, that auto lending activity has cooled over the last year. Despite the overall decrease in enforcement activity, 2017 did see continued activity by state attorneys general and agencies. State actions accounted for 90% of civil penalties, 80% of consumer relief, and 77% of restitution assessed in auto lending enforcement actions in 2017. State attorneys general pursued auto lenders for various violations of state consumer protection statutes, including misleading advertisements, lease offers, and disclosures; usurious interest rates; and unlicensed state activity. In addition, although federal regulators brought far fewer actions in 2017, the CFPB demonstrated its willingness to enforce prior consent orders where auto lenders failed to properly adhere to the terms. For example, the CFPB determined that an auto lender provided worthless credits rather than refunds to consumers affected by its illegal debt collection practices, and ordered the lender to provide proper credits in the amount of nearly $1.1 million. 2017 HIGHLIGHTS CFPB Passes Final Auto Title Loan Rule. Last year, the CFPB proposed a new rule addressing auto title loans. The rule was finalized in October, and puts into place new ability-to-repay protections on certain short-term