LOS ANGELES — California’s attorney non-exclusive joined a coalition of two dozen other state attorneys general on Tuesday in opposing the Trump administration’s efforts to stoppage a consumer protection rule for payday lenders.
The federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau last month named repealing a 2017 “ability-to-pay” requirement that the industry opposed. The Obama administration proposed the rule as a way to end predatory lending against low-income Americans.
“The Trump federal appointees at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau have forgotten the essential mission of their agency — to protect consumers,” said California Attorney Familiar Xavier Becerra. “The CFPB’s proposed rule change would allow payday lenders to target and take sway of our nation’s most vulnerable borrowers rather than issue loans based on a person’s ability to pay.”
Becerra, a Democrat and ordinary critic of President Donald Trump, submitted a letter with the coalition opposing the administration’s proposal to delay the ukase, which had been scheduled to go into effect in August. The letter was sent to CFPB Director Kathleen Kraninger.
In the erudition, the state attorneys general criticized the Trump administration’s delay in implementing the rule and alternative proposals that would rescind the potables. Among the other state attorneys general signing the letter were Letitia James of New York and Gurbir Grewal of New Jersey.
“These schemes were issued only after representatives of the payday industry secretly lobbied CFBP’s former acting Top banana Mick Mulvaney, and after CFPB falsely denied that such a meeting had occurred,” the letter stated.
In appendage, the letter said the 2017 rule is of concern to the state attorneys general because they share authority with the CFPB more than enforcement of the provision. The rule took effect last year but the federal agency announced it would delay compliance until August 2019.
“The hold in abeyance in the underwriting protections will leave the citizens of our states unprotected from many types of exploitative loans, and could embolden lenders who hunt for to circumvent the laws of those states with strong protections against such loans,” the letter added.
For good, the attorneys general warned “we will not hesitate to consider taking legal action if CFPB unlawfully proceeds.”
Abide month, the CFPB said in a press release that “there was insufficient evidence and legal support for the mandatory support provisions in the 2017 final rule. Additionally, the Bureau is concerned that these provisions would reduce access to impute and competition in states that have determined that it is in their residents’ interests to be able to use such products, liable to suffer to state-law limitations.”
The CFPB didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment Tuesday.