On April 10, 2018, the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (the “FFIEC”), an interagency body composed of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, National Credit Union Administration, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the State Liaison Committee, issued guidance to assist financial institutions in analyzing the use of cyber insurance in an effective risk management program (the “Guidance”).
Mr. Arciniegas works primarily as a derivatives lawyer and covers markets for over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives, structured finance products and listed futures. He advises on every stage throughout the life cycle of a derivatives transaction, providing assistance to a wide range of market participants engaged in the markets in various capacities. Regulatory matters range from assisting clients on financial reform legislation, registration and membership with the CFTC, NFA, and other financial market utilities, to providing guidance to commercial end-users and sell-side participants on exemptions, cross-border access issues, and matters involving the overlapping jurisdiction of securities and commodities regulation. Transactional matters include the negotiation and implementation of comprehensive documentation for agency-MBS, cleared and OTC derivatives, FX, futures, loan-level hedging arrangements, prime brokerage, repurchase transactions, securities lending, structured finance transactions, and related industry protocols implementing changes in those markets. Mr. Arciniegas has appeared before the CFTC, the Federal Reserve, the SEC, and is a frequent speaker and published author on futures and derivatives topics.
On July 10, 2017, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the “CFPB”) finalized its proposed arbitration rule that will prohibit providers of certain consumer financial products and services from requiring a consumer to utilize mandatory pre-dispute arbitration in lieu of a consumer filing or participating in a class action (“Arbitration Rule”). In other words, no longer may covered entities require a consumer to use arbitration in lieu of class action participation. This Arbitration Rule will likely have far ranging consequences for covered providers, including mandatory updates to consumer agreements, likely increases to legal and compliance costs and increased operational risks in new consumer products.
Congress directed the CFPB to study pre-dispute arbitration agreements in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“the Dodd-Frank Act”). The Dodd-Frank Act also authorized the CFPB, after completing the study, to issue regulations restricting or prohibiting the use of arbitration agreements if the CFPB found that such rules would be in the public interest and for the protection of consumers. In 2015, the CFPB published and delivered to Congress a study of arbitration. On May 24, 2016, the CFPB proposed the Arbitration Rule with a request for comment. Since May 2016 the CFPB has been silent, leading many in the financial services industry to believe that, with the change in administration, the CFPB had abandoned the Arbitration Rule. In finalizing the Arbitration Rule, the CFPB has answered the industry’s long outstanding question. Would the CFPB be more moderate in its approach in issuing regulation that drastically impacts financial services providers? The industry has its answer. The CFPB has answered in the negative.
Continue Reading Another Day, Another Regulation: A Summary and Description of the CFPB’s Arbitration Rule