Business

Representatives Waters and Green Request Documents from Consumer Bureau on Recent Settlements

NNPA NEWSWIRE — “The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“Consumer Bureau”) has recently announced several settlements against entities for engaging in unlawful practices without requiring the payment of redress to consumers harmed by the illegal conduct,” the lawmakers wrote. “This stands in stark contrast to the Consumer Bureau’s practice under the leadership of former Director Cordray. During Director Cordray’s tenure, the Consumer Bureau recovered nearly $12 billion in relief for harmed consumers over its first six years.[1] American consumers deserve a Consumer Bureau that will fight to recover their hard-earned money when they are cheated.”

Published

8 years ago

February 8, 2019

Oakland Post

WASHINGTON — Today, Congresswoman Maxine Waters (D-CA), Chairwoman of the House Committee on Financial Services, and Congressman Al Green (D-TX), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, wrote to Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Director Kathy Kraninger to request documents relating to recent settlements that do not require companies that have violated the law to provide redress to consumers who have been harmed.

“The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“Consumer Bureau”) has recently announced several settlements against entities for engaging in unlawful practices without requiring the payment of redress to consumers harmed by the illegal conduct,” the lawmakers wrote. “This stands in stark contrast to the Consumer Bureau’s practice under the leadership of former Director Cordray. During Director Cordray’s tenure, the Consumer Bureau recovered nearly $12 billion in relief for harmed consumers over its first six years.^[1] American consumers deserve a Consumer Bureau that will fight to recover their hard-earned money when they are cheated.”

In the letter, the lawmakers requested documents regarding recent Consumer Bureau settlements with Sterling Jewelers Inc., Enova International, Inc, and NDG Financial Corp. et al.

See below for the full letter.

The Honorable Kathy Kraninger
Director
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
1700 G Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20552

Dear Director Kraninger:

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“Consumer Bureau”) has recently announced several settlements against entities for engaging in unlawful practices without requiring the payment of redress to consumers harmed by the illegal conduct. This stands in stark contrast to the Consumer Bureau’s practice under the leadership of former Director Cordray. During Director Cordray’s tenure, the Consumer Bureau recovered nearly $12 billion in relief for harmed consumers over its first six years.^[1] American consumers deserve a Consumer Bureau that will fight to recover their hard-earned money when they are cheated.
On January 16, 2019, the Consumer Bureau announced it had reached a settlement with Sterling Jewelers Inc. (“Sterling”) for numerous claims, including that the company engaged in unfair practices by enrolling consumers who had a Sterling credit card in payment protection insurance without their consent.^[2] Under the terms of the settlement, Sterling is required to pay a penalty to the Consumer Bureau of $10 million, but does not have to refund consumers any of the money paid for payment protection insurance.^[3] According to the Consumer Bureau’s complaint against Sterling, payment protection insurance generated $60 million in revenue in 2016 alone.^[4] The Consumer Bureau has previously required payments to consumers in similar cases where it found that consumers were enrolled in payment protection products without their consent.^[5] The Committee is deeply troubled that the Consumer Bureau would allow a company to keep the profits they made from their illegal sales practices.
On January 25, 2019, the Consumer Bureau announced a settlement with Enova International, Inc. (“Enova”), an online lender, for engaging in unfair practices by debiting consumers’ bank accounts without authorization.^[6] The settlement requires Enova to pay a $3.2 million civil money penalty to the Consumer Bureau, but contains no provision for paying redress to consumers.^[7] The factual findings in the administrative consent order indicates that Enova debited payments on thousands of consumers’ outstanding loans where it did not have authorization and “extracted millions of dollars in unauthorized debits from consumers’ accounts.”^[8]
On February 1, 2019, the Consumer Bureau announced a settlement with NDG Financial Corporation and other Defendants (“NDG Financial”) that did not require them to pay either a penalty or restitution to consumers.^[9] The Consumer Bureau initiated its action against NDG Financial when the agency was still led by former Director Cordray. In its December 2015 amended complaint, the Consumer Bureau alleged that NDG Financial engaged in unfair, deceptive, and abusive practices by collecting on payday loans that were made in violation of state law.^[10]The amended complaint specifically sought “damages and other monetary relief as the Court finds necessary to redress injury to consumers resulting from [NDG Financial’s] violations of federal consumer protection laws including but not limited to restitution and the refund of monies paid.”^[11] Yet, the settlement agreement seeks no such relief for the wronged consumers.
Section 1055 of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (“CFPA”) explicitly authorizes the Consumer Bureau to obtain relief for consumers, including the refund of money, restitution, or the payment of damages or other monetary relief. 12 U.S.C. § 5565(a)(1)(2).
The Committee has serious concerns about how the Consumer Bureau is exercising its enforcement authority, especially how it is determining whether to require companies to pay redress to consumers that have been harmed. The fact that two of the three settlements involve online lending raises serious questions about the Consumer Bureau’s commitment to protecting America’s consumers from predatory online lending practices.
As part of the Committee’s oversight over the Consumer Bureau,^[12] please provide the following records by no later than March 5, 2019:

All documents and communications referring or related to the issue of restitution in the settlement in Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection and the People of the State of New York, by Letitia James, Attorney General for the State of New York, v. Sterling Jewelers Inc., Case 1:19-cv-00448, including but not limited to, all memoranda (whether draft or final), any and all drafts of the proposed consent order, and all meeting minutes.

All communications between the Bureau and Sterling or its representatives referring or related to the issue of restitution in the settlement in Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection and the People of the State of New York, by Letitia James, Attorney General for the State of New York, v. Sterling Jewelers Inc., Case 1:19-cv-00448, including but not limited to, any and all drafts of the proposed consent order.

All documents and communications referring or related to the issue of restitution in the settlement in In the Matter of Enova International, Inc., 2019-CFPB-0003, including but not limited to, all memoranda (whether draft or final), any and all drafts of the proposed consent order, and all meeting minutes.

All communications between the Bureau and Enova or its representatives referring or related to the issue of restitution in the settlement in In the Matter of Enova International, Inc., 2019-CFPB-0003, including but not limited to, any and all drafts of the proposed consent order.

All documents and communications referring or related to the issue of restitution in the settlement inConsumer Financial Protection Bureau v. NDG Financial Corp. et al., Case 1:15-cv-05211, including but not limited to, all memoranda (whether draft or final), any and all drafts of the proposed consent order, and all meeting minutes.

All communications between the Bureau and NDG (or any of the other Defendants named in the settlement) or their representatives referring or related to the issue of restitution in the settlement in Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. NDG Financial Corp. et al., Case 1:15-cv-05211, including but not limited to, any and all drafts of the proposed consent order.

Please address any questions regarding this request to Committee staff at (202) 225-4247.
Sincerely,
MAXINE WATERS
CHAIRWOMAN
AL GREEN
CHAIRMAN
Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations

cc: The Honorable Patrick McHenry, Ranking Member

^[1] https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/blog/six-years-serving-you/

^[2] Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection and the People of the State of New York, by Letitia James, Attorney General for the State of New York, v. Sterling Jewelers Inc., Case 1:19-cv-00448 (Jan. 16, 2019), available at https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-settles-claims-against-sterling-jewelers-inc/.

^[3] Id.

^[4]Complaint at ¶41, available at https://s3.amazonaws.com/files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/bcfp_sterling-jewelers_complaint.pdf

^[5] See e.g. . Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Consent Order In the Matter of Bank of America, N.A. and FIA Card Services, N .A. 2014-CFPB-0004 (April 9, 2014) (providing approximately $269 million in restitution to consumers for deceptively enrolling consumers in payment protection products) available at https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/cfpb-orders-bank-of-america-to-pay-727-million-in-consumer-relief-for-illegal-credit-card-practices/ ; Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Consent Order In the Matter of Fifth Third Bank, 2015-CFPB-0025 (Sept 28, 2015)(requiring approximately $3 million in restitution to consumers for deceptively enrolling consumers in payment protection products) available at https://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/201509_cfpb_consent-order-fifth-third-bank-add-on.pdf;

^[6] Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Consent Order In the Matter of Enova International, Inc., 2019-CFPB-0003, (Jan25. 8, 2019), available at https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-reaches-settlement-enova-international-inc/ .

^[7] Id.

^[8] Consent Order at ¶¶ 14, 18, available at https://s3.amazonaws.com/files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_enova-international_consent-order_2019-01.pdf .

^[9] Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. NDG Financial Corp. et al., Case 1:15-cv-05211-CM (February 1, 2019) available at https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/newsroom/consumer-financial-protection-bureau-settles-ndg-financial-corp/

^[10] Amended Complaint at ¶¶ 275-95 available at https://s3.amazonaws.com/files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/cfpb_northway_amended-complaint_122015.pdf

^[11] Id. at ¶337(b).

^[12] Rule X, Rules of the House of Representatives, 116^th Congress

Posts by

Up Next

COMMENTARY: Black history can be uncomfortable for some

Don't Miss

Black Business Spotlight: Nokomis Dental Center

Oakland Post

Click to comment

Black History

Five Hospitals Said No! Who Will Help Annette Henry Recover?

Annette Henry, a 67-year-old Oakland woman, is struggling to access essential medical care after a devastating stroke left her with a rare neuropathic pain syndrome. Despite medical documentation confirming her need for inpatient rehabilitation, five different Bay Area hospitals have denied her admission, often citing her inability to meet rigid therapy thresholds. Her family’s efforts to seek intervention from state and federal lawmakers have yielded no results, leaving Henry at home without a clear path to recovery. To see how these systemic failures are impacting her health, read more.

Published

10 hours ago

November 3, 2026

Post News Group

By Tanya Dennis

A tangle of red tape and contradictions between health providers and Medicare rules have impeded an Oakland woman’s ability to recover from a stroke she had last year.

Her family – who are her caretakers – have reached out to various professionals and state and federal lawmakers for help to no avail.

At 67, Annette Henry needs inpatient stroke rehabilitation after a devastating stroke in May 2025. Since then, multiple Bay Area hospitals have denied it. She was accepted into a rehabilitation facility in June 2025 but discharged prematurely in July, in essentially the same condition.

Three hospitals where she was a patient pushed skilled nursing over inpatient rehabilitation. Two more declined referrals.

Now at home, Henry is caught in a system that measures her need for treatment against the limitations treatment should address.

Medical professionals have documented her need for a higher level of care.

In August 2025, a Medicare Quality Improvement Organization (QIO) overturned Henry’s discharge from an inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF).

The QIO’s independent physician reviewer found she had not received the “intensive therapy program outlined on admission,” according to the Aug. 30, 2025, determination letter. Yet the decision did not secure her readmission or guarantee continued rehabilitation.

Henry has central post-stroke pain, a rare neuropathic pain syndrome that can make movement and touch intensely painful. Her pain specialist recommended inpatient rehabilitation alongside pain management.

Nevertheless, facilities have cited her inability to tolerate three hours of daily therapy as a reason to deny inpatient rehabilitation.

That practice raises questions about Medicare coverage policy. In Hooper v. Sullivan, No. H-80-99 (D. Conn. 1989), the court recorded the parties’ agreement that denials based on numerical utilization screens, diagnostic screens, treatment norms, the “three-hour rule,” or other “rules of thumb” were not appropriate.

CMS subsequently cited Hooper in its Aug. 7, 2009, final rule (74 Fed. Reg. 39762, 39794). The policy is also addressed in the Medicare Benefit Policy Manual, Chapter 1, Section 110, and CMS’s June 1 Review Choice Demonstration for IRF Services: Operational Guide.

These authorities underscore the need for individualized assessments rather than rigid numerical thresholds.

The central contradiction is stark: the pain and disability that make rehabilitation necessary have been cited as reasons to deny it. UCSF Stanyan’s April 7 discharge summary for Henry states that acute rehabilitation unit (ARU) placement was declined for “inability to tolerate three hours of therapy daily.” Without appropriate treatment, Henry risks further decline.

Her records document complications associated with prolonged immobility.

Orthopedics documented flexion contractures of the small and ring fingers on March 19.

Chest imaging on April 1 showed bibasilar dependent atelectasis, a condition involving reduced inflation of the lower portions of both lungs. These concerns can be examined through her medical records and photographs.

“What does a ‘not reasonable’ discharge look like?” her family asks. For them, it looks like an appeal decision recognizing a problem without ensuring a remedy: repeated referrals, denials and a patient still without the rehabilitation her treating professionals have recommended.

The family has sought help from the California Department of Public Health and the federal Office for Civil Rights to no avail. They contacted U.S. Rep. Lateefah Simon in June 2025, while Henry was in rehabilitation; Senator Alex Padilla in May 2026; and Senator Adam Schiff in September 2026.

DeCuir says the family received no meaningful assistance and was redirected to the QIO or advised working with a social worker after Henry had already been discharged.

The consequences extend beyond rehabilitation. The family reports that Henry has struggled to attend in-person specialist or any appointments and needs in-person evaluation and treatment for complications, recommended evaluations, health screenings and preventive care.

Her mobility limitations have become barriers to broader medical care. Every office tells her their office is not set up to accommodate her. This has happened with specialty care, out-patient services, screenings and physical therapy.

Henry is a Black woman on Medicare, and her family believes her experience raises concerns about unequal access to intensive rehabilitation. Research has documented disparities in discharge to inpatient rehabilitation rather than skilled nursing, underscoring the importance of individualized review.

CMS, state regulators and healthcare providers should examine Henry’s records, assess her needs on their clinical merits and explain how the applicable coverage standards were applied, and whether they are being enforced.

Rehabilitation is not a reward for patients who can already tolerate treatment. It is care intended to help people recover function. Henry’s case asks whether a system designed to support recovery can leave a patient without a path to it.

Post News Group

Posts by Post News Group

Black History

From Backyard Grilling to Jack London Square: Jamale Carlyle’s Chicken Wing Success Story

Jamale Carlyle turned a backyard hobby into a flourishing business after using grilling to cope with the loss of his mother and sister. The former corporate executive and CPA transitioned from a twenty-year career in the power industry to selling chicken wings at farmers’ markets in Tracy and Oakland. Following immediate success and viral social media attention, Carlyle opened two permanent storefronts and established a charitable partnership to support local youth. His journey highlights a unique path from internal auditing to community entrepreneurship. Read more.

Published

10 hours ago

November 3, 2026

Post News Group

Jamale Carlyle had a long career working for power companies before embarking making his grilling hobby into a business. Courtesy photo.

By Tanya Dennis

For Jamale Carlyle, what began as a way to cope with personal loss has grown into a thriving chicken wing business with locations in Tracy and Oakland’s Jack London Square.

Raised in Los Angeles, Carlyle remains a southern kid at heart, guided by the values and principles instilled in him growing up. In 2020, he lost his sister, and two months later, his mother passed away. The losses left him grieving half of his immediate family and searching for a way forward.

He turned to God, and to two favorite pastimes: grilling chicken wings and deep sea fishing. Friends who gathered in his backyard encouraged him to turn his chicken wings into a business.

Carlyle had built a successful corporate career before becoming an entrepreneur. An economics graduate of the University of California, Irvine, he earned a master’s degree in accounting from the University of Southern California and became a certified public accountant (CPA).

He spent more than 20 years in the power industry, including working for Edison International in Los Angeles and Boston. He later joined JP Energy Partners in Dallas, helping its team take the company public.

After moving to San Francisco in 2016, Carlyle spent 10 years with Pattern Energy, a wind energy company, where he served as vice president of Internal Audit and took on numerous corporate responsibilities.

But in 2025, grilling became more than a hobby. Carlyle began selling his wings at farmers’ markets, initially dedicating four hours every Saturday. Nervous about his first outing in Tracy, he wondered whether his friends had simply been encouraging. Instead, he sold out on opening day.

He later brought his business to Jack London Square’s Farmers Market, where he again sold out on his first day. As demand grew, he expanded into catering before opening his Tracy storefront in May 2026 and his Jack London Square location in July.

Social media helped fuel the momentum. In Tracy, enthusiastic reviews on the community’s Rants and Raves Facebook page brought customers through the door. His Jack London Square debut also gained traction online, generating approximately 100,000 views on social media on his on opening day.

Still processing the rapid growth, Carlyle describes the business as something that began in his backyard as a stress reliever and became an unexpected calling, and a way of giving back.

“Giving back” has led to a partnership with Mike Jenkins, owner of Oakland Strong, a nonprofit gym known for Olympic style weight lifting and developing national and international champions. After Jenkins visited Carlyle’s store with members of his team, Carlyle returned the visit, and the two began discussing ways to partner to support the community.

“I’m really big on charity. I believe in giving back to the community,” Carlyle said. “I knew before I opened my store, I’d be doing something like this, this is what God wants me to do.”

Their collaboration will introduce the “Oakland Strong Bowl,” featuring 10 dry-rub Cajun wings and a vegetable-rice bowl for $17.99, with $2 from each purchase donated to the Oakland Strong Foundation. The initiative is expected to launch in early November.

“This builds community in Oakland and Jack London Square,” Carlyle said.

Looking ahead, Carlyle plans to expand the menu with chicken thighs, chicken tacos and additional sides. He is also pursuing a liquor license to create a destination where customers can enjoy wings while watching sports.

For now, he is focused on growing his two locations. But with customers embracing his food and his commitment to giving back, Carlyle sees the possibility of bringing his chicken wings to more communities throughout the Bay Area.

Post News Group

Posts by Post News Group

Business

SEIU Local 1000 and State of California Will Continue to Negotiate New Labor Contract

Thousands of California state employees represented by SEIU Local 1000 recently staged a one-day walkout to protest stalled contract negotiations with Governor Gavin Newsom’s administration. The union, which represents approximately 100,000 public workers, is demanding a 20% wage increase over three years and an end to mandatory four-day in-person work requirements. While the initial strike has concluded, union leadership warns that further demonstrations are likely if the state continues to reject their demands for better pay and telework flexibility. Negotiations are expected to continue as both sides seek a resolution. Read more.

Published

11 hours ago

November 3, 2026

Post News Group

California state workers staged a one-day strike Oct. 21 to protest alleged unfair labor practices and stalled contract negotiations over wages, remote work requirements and health care costs. The workers' previous contract expired June 30. CBM photo by Antonio Ray Harvey.

By Antonio Ray Harvey, California Black Media

After the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 1000 labor contract expired June 30 and talks with Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration stalled, the union stepped up its efforts to secure a new agreement, saying its demands had gone unheeded.

On Oct. 21, thousands of state employees represented by SEIU Local 1000 staged a one-day walkout to protest alleged unfair labor practices during negotiations with Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration.

Although the strike has ended, SEIU Local 1000 President Anica Walls said further demonstrations or an expanded strike are highly likely if contract negotiations remain stalled. The union represents approximately 100,000 public employees statewide.

“We are out here because our jobs matter,” Wells said. “If they continue to refuse to bargain with us in good faith, we are prepared to escalate.”

Sen. Lola Smallwood-Cuevas (D-Los Angeles) expressed support for SEIU Local 1000’s labor action in an Instagram post, emphasizing the importance of fair treatment for workers.

“I stand in complete solidarity with SEIU Local 1000,” Smallwood-Cuevas stated. “More than 100,000 state workers they represent are on strike today fighting for good-faith bargaining, fair treatment, and a contract that reflects the value of the essential public services they provide every day—all things that should be a given for the workers our state relies on the most.”

Smallwood-Cuevas, a member of the California Legislative Black Caucus (CLBC) added, “When California’s workers hold the line, the whole nation pays attention.”

According to union representatives, SEIU Local 1000 is seeking a contract that addresses rising living costs and provides greater workplace flexibility. The union is demanding a 20% wage increase over three years and an end to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s requirement that state employees work in person four days a week.

The union is also seeking increased state contributions toward employee health care benefits to reduce workers’ out-of-pocket costs.

On Sept. 18, Newsom vetoed Assembly Bill 1729, authored by Assemblymember Alex Lee (D-San Jose), which sought to expand telework opportunities for state employees.

The bill would have required state agencies to offer telework options or provide written justifications for requiring employees to work in person. Supporters argued that telework could save taxpayers approximately $225 million annually by reducing office space and parking costs while lowering vehicle emissions and improving employee retention.

Newsom said the legislation would limit state departments’ flexibility to manage their workforces and evaluate telework exemptions individually. He has also emphasized the benefits of in-person collaboration.

“I want people to come back to work, reengage, rediscover, collaborate, coordinate, develop relationships, friendships, and fall in love,” Newsom said in July. “You get three-day weekends. Four years ago, that would’ve been a triumph. Now it’s a burden.”

Union organizers described the Oct. 21 walkout as a one-day unfair labor practice strike, rather than an indefinite work stoppage. The action was intended to demonstrate solidarity and increase pressure on the state during negotiations.

SEIU Local 1000 has been without a contract since its previous three-year agreement expired June 30. Negotiations are expected to resume.

Responding to the statewide walkout, the California Department of Human Resources (CalHR) said it “remains focused on achieving a fair and responsible agreement with SEIU Local 1000 and continues to be available at the bargaining table.”