Page 2 The Skanner MINORITY BUSINESS ENTERPRISE EDITION September 21, 2016 ® Challenging People to Shape a Better Future Now Bernie Foster Founder/Publisher Bobbie Dore Foster Executive Editor Jerry Foster Advertising Manager Christen McCurdy News Editor Patricia Irvin Graphic Designer Arashi Young Reporter Monica J. Foster Seattle Oice Coordinator Susan Fried Photographer 2016 MERIT AWARD WINNER The Skanner Newspaper, es- tablished in October 1975, is a weekly publication, published every Wednesday by IMM Publi- cations Inc. 415 N. Killingsworth St. P.O. Box 5455 Portland, OR 97228 Telephone (503) 285-5555 Fax: (503) 285-2900 info@theskanner.com www.TheSkanner.com The Skanner is a member of the National Newspaper Pub lishers Association and West Coast Black Pub lishers Association. All photos submitted become the property of The Skanner. We are not re spon sible for lost or damaged photos either solicited or unsolicited. ©2016 The Skanner. All rights re served. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission prohibited. Local News Paciic NW News World News Opinions Jobs, Bids Entertainment Community Calendar RSS feeds BE A PART OF THE CONVERSATION #SkNews Opinion Consumer Agency Wins Court Case against CashCall The ight for fair lending got a big boost on Aug. 31 when a federal court rejected a pay- day loan collector’s attempt to evade consumer laws. The de- cision against CashCall, a Cal- ifornia-based online payday and installment lender, up- held the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) authority to investigate and ine lenders for unfair, abu- sive or deceptive practices. The court ruling is a key step in a legal battle that be- gan nearly three years ago. In December 2013 and for the irst time, CFPB sued to secure consumer refunds of illegally collected money. Ac- cording to the iling, “defen- dants engaged in unfair, de- ceptive and abusive practices, including illegally debiting consumer checking accounts for loans that were void.” CFPB charged that Califor- nia-based CashCall, its sub- sidiary WS Funding LLC, ailiate Delbert Services Cor- poration, a Nevada collection agency were all the same own- ership. Loans ranging from $850- $10,000 were sold with upfront fees, lengthy repay- ment terms and interest rates as high as 343 percent. CFPB charged that these loan terms violated state laws in at least 16 states that had in place li- censing requirements, inter- est rate caps — or both. As early as 2009, CashCall also partnered with Western Sky Financial, another com- pany, to claim that tribal law Charlene Crowell NNPA Columnist rather than state law applied to their loans. Readers may recall a series of television ads promoting Western Sky’s quick and easy loans. The federal court disagreed and dismissed challenging arguments, inding CashCall to be the true lender. The re- “ trict of Columbia and 14 states where excessively-priced payday loans are not allowed. Collectively, these states save more than $2 billion a year that would otherwise be spent on payday loan fees. That’s a good thing for con- sumers. Consumer advocates are celebrating this important victory. It is one that upholds the importance of strong state laws and efective enforce- ment. “This important ruling val- idates the right of states to protect their citizens from The noticeable presence of payday lenders in Black and Latino com- munities indicate that our people are being targeted to become i- nancial victims lationship with Western Sky was tantamount to a “rent- a-bank” scheme. In part the ruling stated afected states “have expressed a fundamen- tal public policy in protecting its citizens.” CFPB’s late summer court victory is similar to another recent enforcement action by the Maryland Commissioner of Financial Regulation. In that state’s court, CashCall was found to be a lender that tried to evade state usury lim- its by using the rent-a-bank scheme. Today, there are 90 million people who live in the Dis- predatory loans, whether they are made online or at a storefront”, noted Diane Standaert, director of state policy and an executive vice president with the Center for Responsible Lending. “It rein- forces the common sense con- cept that people should not be harassed for debts they do not owe. Both states and the CFPB must continue to enact pro- tections against unfair lend- ing and collection practices.” The court ruling also comes when the deadline for public comment on payday lending approaches. CFPB will ac- cept comments from citizens and organizations that have concerns about payday and high-cost, small-dollar loans. An online portal can accept comments at: http://stoppay- daypredators.org/crl/. The deadline for public com- ment is October 7. If anyone doubts how these small-dollar loans cause so much inancial harm, consider these facts: • Over $3.4 billion in exces- sive fees are drained from payday borrowers each year. • Nearly 1 in 4 payday bor- rowers rely on either pub- lic assistance or retire- ment beneits as an income source. • Payday borrowers are more likely to experience bank penalty fees, delinquencies on other bills, and delayed medical care. All too oten across the country, payday storefronts ply their trade in Black and Latino neighborhoods. The noticeable presence of pay- day lenders in our communi- ties indicate that our people are being targeted to become inancial victims. I would challenge anyone to identify areas dominated by high-in- come consumers have a com- parable number of payday stores. Starting now, choose not to become a payday victim. If there was ever a time to speak up or speak out on predatory lending, don’t miss the Oct. 7 deadline for comments. Richard Cordray’s Testimony Before the Senate T his week, Consumer Fi- nancial Protection Bu- reau (CFPB) Director Richard Cordray deliv- ered before the Senate Com- mittee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Afairs in Wash- ington, DC. Below, please ind his writ- ten testimony:  Chairman Shelby, Ranking Member Brown, and mem- bers of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. In these brief remarks, I will discuss: (1) what our investigation found about the sales practic- es at Wells Fargo; (2) what we are seeking to achieve by our Order; and (3) some initial thoughts about what further steps need to be taken to im- prove the culture and practic- es of the banking industry. On Sept. 8, 2016, the Con- sumer Bureau, together with our partners at the Los Ange- les City Attorney’s oice and the Oice of the Comptrol- ler of the Currency, took an enforcement action against Wells Fargo Bank. Our in- vestigations found that, in order to meet sales goals and collect inancial bonuses for Richard Cordray Director, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau themselves, employees of the bank created unauthorized deposit and credit card ac- “ ed applications for 565,443 credit card accounts that may not have been authorized, by using consumers’ informa- tion without their knowledge or consent. These activities caused some consumers to incur fees. Even apart from that, they represent a stagger- ing breach of trust and con- duct that should never occur at any bank. Wells Fargo has demonstrated the epic scope They represent a staggering breach of trust and conduct that should never occur at any bank counts, enrolled consumers in online banking services, and ordered debit cards for consumers, all without their consent or even their knowl- edge. Some of these practices involved fake email accounts and phony PIN numbers. The fraudulent conduct oc- curred on a massive scale. As detailed in our Order, Wells Fargo opened 1,534,280 de- posit accounts that may not have been authorized, includ- ing transferring funds from some customer accounts with- out their knowledge or con- sent. Wells Fargo also initiat- of its failures by terminating at least 5,300 people thus far, including branch managers and managers of managers. The gravity and breadth of the fraud that occurred at Wells Fargo cannot be pushed aside as the stray misconduct of just a few bad apples. As one former federal prosecu- tor has aptly noted, the stun- ning nature and scale of these practices relects instead the consequences of a diseased orchard. As our Order de- scribes, Wells Fargo built and reined an incentive-compen- sation program and imple- mented sales goals to boost the cross-selling of products, but did so in a way that made it possible for its employees to pursue unfair and abusive sales practices. It appears that the bank did not monitor the program carefully, allowing thousands of employees to game the system and inlate their sales igures to meet their sales targets and claim higher bonuses. Rather than put its customers irst, Wells Fargo built and sustained a program where the bank and many of its employees served themselves instead, violating the basic ethics of a banking institution, including the key norm of trust. Our Order accomplishes several things. First, the kind of detail that we always make it a point to provide in our enforcement orders exposes Wells Fargo’s illegal miscon- duct, including its scale, for all to see for themselves. It has spawned vigorous pub- lic scrutiny over the past two weeks that no doubt will con- tinue. Read the rest of this commentary at TheSkanner.com