valgaze
10 hours ago
Years ago Experian hit me with a sneaky fee for some credit-monitoring service I’d apparently been auto-enrolled in after checking my score. It was a substantial amount of money at the time. When I complained & asked for a refund for this auto-enroll service, Experian immediately offered me a discounted rate.
I filed a complaint with the CFPB. I have no idea what happened behind the scenes, but Experian backed down and refunded every penny.
I’m not an expert in financial regulation but that was the first time in a while where I felt like a federal agency was actually protecting ordinary people rather than hassling them.
Over past couple years the CFPB’s leadership seems packed with hyperpartisan apparatchiks intent on dismantling the very agency they’re in theory going to run.
This debanking matter may well fall within the CFPB’s purview. But the agency today seeing today bears little resemblance to the muscular consumer watchdog it was created to be.
Acting Director Mark Paoletta strikes me as precisely the kind of Washington operator lawyer you’d want nowhere near an agency whose entire purpose is to protect consumers from powerful financial institutions.
iugtmkbdfil834
10 hours ago
CFPB is interesting. Banks largely hate it and this administration had a major input in defanging it, which makes this action more interesting. FWIW, while rank and file employees effectively enforcing BSA laws are broadly tend to be somewhat neutral ( and you do want disinterested parties ), I agree with your hesitation on the current state of federal agencies.
adjejmxbdjdn
6 hours ago
The banks will start subscribing to the Truth social early news functionality and all these problems will disappear.
The current issues they’re worried about being hit by the law once the administration changes so they’ve stayed far away from the Truth Social stuff. This is likely just a little push to get them over the hump.
iamnothere
10 hours ago
CFPB has been decent, and I’m glad they are still doing some work. My understanding is that their scope has been reduced, and it looks like the new focus is on things that are still legitimate problems but which are somehow more “right-coded” (like debanking). What I wouldn’t give for a truly nonpartisan agency that tackles issues across the board.
Geeek
10 hours ago
I mean, that's what old CFPB was.
iamnothere
10 hours ago
They ignored the debanking issue for a long time, likely because it was somehow framed as a partisan issue, despite it affecting people across the political landscape. The issue falls squarely within their mandate, so it’s ridiculous that it took so long to address it.
jordanb
3 hours ago
They did not "ignore debanking." CFPB was responsible for investigating violations of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, which it did vigorously until its rules were rewritten in 2026 to essentially gut the law by agency rulemaking edict.
The whining about "debanking" was in reference to crypto companies that were being tied to illegal transactions, and Jan 6 insurrectionists.
As is typical for this administration, the hard day-in-day-out work of the CFPB has been gutted so regular Americans no longer have protection against predatory financial firms, and instead the agency is being used for a witch hunt against people who were following the actual laws of this country in ways that hurt this president or his friends
travoc
10 hours ago
CFPB is inherently political, like all government agencies. Of course it ignored the debanking issue. CFPB was just serving its current masters.
halJordan
8 hours ago
Alright, then you're replying to the wrong comment.
sieabahlpark
9 hours ago
[dead]