Category Archives: Uncategorized

SPOTLIGHT: Richard Martinez of Rise Programs

Richard Martinez Rise Programs

 

 

www.riseprograms.com

Richard Martinez is a recognized leader in the world of coaching, entrepreneur in the business of physical and emotional health, and now one of the leading specialists of one of the most talked about shows on the internet: Despegando Show. He is well known for advising the Latino community, reaching thousands of people who want to experience a radical change for a more fulfilling life.

“Discipline leads to excellence”, and he has perfected that with the use of the best technical practices, to heal and empower people. He listens and advises through innovative methods of effective training. These have had the best results with his “risers “, who have experienced positive changes.

The study and training of a great leader like Richard Martinez has led him to work beside the best health and wellness experts in the world such as, Dr. Andrew Weil; Director of the Center for Integrative Medicine Arizona, the great recognized and acclaimed Dr. Deepak Chopra; leader in the field of “mind-body” medicine, Dr. David Katz; director of the Prevention Research Center at Yale University, and Dr. Water Willet; President Nutrition at Harvard University. These are only some among other great personalities, and researchers internationally, that Richard Martinez has had the opportunity to work with.

www.itsrichardmartinez.com

 

A leader is distinguished as a visionary, and Richard Martinez is no exception. He has taken the risk of crossing the language barrier, and has been dedicated to transforming nations through education. He has been equipping and strengthening leaders in different areas, who are committed to their people. As part of this vision, he has participated in different organizations such as “Healing Hearts and Nations” (HHN), which is currently in more than 22 countries in Africa, and more than 15 major cities in India. One of his programs that seeks to create positive energy in young people, takes place within the walls of the Hip Hop School of Arts, where he has been director for two years.

The commitment of Richard and his team has crossed many borders. One of them being Africa where they established “Training Centers”. They have also created an orphanage called “Lynsi Love Orphanage”, which houses a school with education levels ranging from grade 1 to 3.

Richard Martinez teaches that mental and physical health is an important part of learning. It is proven that by keeping these two areas in balance, it is easier to get a clear mind that leads to a successful life. With the realization of such a life affecting need, he became the owner and manager of his own business “You-nification”. Here he helps his customers to unify their body, soul, and spirit, which leads them to achieve their full potential. They are then allowed to find their true purpose, and passion to experience life.

PRESS RELEASE: CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU MONTHLY SNAPSHOT SPOTLIGHTS STUDENT LOAN COMPLAINTS

consumer financial protection bureau

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
April 25, 2017

CONTACT:
Office of Communications
Tel: (202) 435-7170

CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU MONTHLY SNAPSHOT SPOTLIGHTS STUDENT LOAN COMPLAINTS
Report Also Looks at Consumer Complaints from Nevada

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) released a monthly complaint snapshot highlighting consumer complaints about student loans. The snapshot shows that both private and federal student loan borrowers nationwide report persistent servicing breakdowns that may sideline their path to repayment. This month’s report also highlights trends seen in complaints coming from Nevada. As of April 1, 2017, the Bureau had handled approximately 1,163,200 consumer complaints across all products.

“Student loan servicers play an important role in helping millions of people manage the loans they take out to pursue an education,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray. “Unfortunately, borrowers continue to report difficulties and setbacks as they try to work with their servicers to manage their loan debt.”

The Monthly Complaint Report can be found at: http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/201704_cfpb_Monthly-Complaint-Report.pdf

Category Spotlight: Student Loans
At $1.4 trillion, student loan debt represents the U.S.’s second largest debt market behind mortgages. More than 44 million student loan borrowers rely on the companies servicing their loans to manage all aspects of repayment, including providing borrowers with available repayment options when they are struggling to repay their loans. In September 2015, the Bureau released a report outlining widespread servicing failures and sloppy, patchwork practices reported by both federal and private student loan borrowers. As of April 1, 2017, the Bureau had handled approximately 44,400 student loan complaints from consumers. Some of the findings in the snapshot include:

  • Consumers complain about poor information from and sloppy practices by servicers: Of all the complaints the Bureau receives about student loans, over half—64 percent—are about problems consumers experience when dealing with their student loan servicer. Consumers who reach out to their servicer complain they are not informed about options that would allow them to continue repaying their loan, such as income-driven repayment plans. Rather, consumers complain that their servicer directs them into plans that suspend repayment and cause the interest on their loans to pile up. Consumers also complain that their monthly student loan payments are misapplied by the servicer, which the Bureau believes can cause a range of problems including negative credit reporting and loss of certain loan benefits, such as cosigner release for private student loans.
  • Consumers complain about difficulty enrolling and staying in an income-driven repayment plan: Consumers complain about processing delays and inaccurate denials when submitting an income-driven repayment plan application to their servicer. These complaints include documents being lost by the servicer, application processing times spanning several months, missed payment towards loan forgiveness, and unclear guidance when enrolling into a new income-driven repayment plan. Additionally, consumers complain of receiving insufficient information from their servicers to meet recertification deadlines for their income-driven repayment plan.
  • Consumers report confusion about their progress toward Public Service Loan Forgiveness programs: Consumers express concerns about their standing in Public Service Loan Forgiveness and other loan forgiveness programs. These borrowers complain that after years of making payments, they learn that their loans are not enrolled in a qualifying repayment plan, despite borrowers telling their servicers that they were pursuing Public Service Loan Forgiveness. Other borrowers complain that their servicer did not explain that consolidating their loans would wipe out all previous progress made towards loan forgiveness.
  • Companies with the most student loan-related complaints: The three companies that the Bureau has received the most average monthly student loan complaints about are Navient Solutions, LLC, Fedloan Servicing/AES, and Nelnet.

The Bureau has also reported on consumer complaints to highlight the unique challenges that certain populations of consumers with student loan debt face, including older Americans, servicemembers, veterans with disabilities, and previously defaulted borrowers.

National Complaint Overview
As of April 1, 2017, the CFPB had handled approximately 1,163,200 complaints nationally. Some of the findings from the statistics being published in this month’s snapshot report include:

  • Complaint volume: For March 2017, debt collection was the most-complained-about financial product or service. Of the approximately 28,000 complaints handled in March, there were 8,711 complaints about debt collection. The second most-complained-about consumer product was credit reporting, which accounted for 5,498 complaints. Mortgages were third most-complained-about financial product or service, accounting for 3,965 complaints. 
  • Product trends: In a year-to-year comparison examining the three-month time period of January to March, student loan complaints showed the greatest increase—325 percent—of any product or service. The Bureau received 773 student loan complaints between January and March 2016, while it received 3,284 complaints during the same time period in 2017. Part of this year-to-year increase can be attributed to the CFPB updating its student loan complaint form to accept complaints about federal student loan servicing, starting in late February 2016. The Bureau also initiated an enforcement action against a large student loan servicer during the time period covered by this report. 
  • State information: Montana, Georgia, and Wyoming experienced the greatest year-to-year complaint volume increases from January to March 2017, versus the same time period 12 months before; with Montana up 54 percent, Georgia up 46 percent, and Wyoming up 45 percent. 
  • Most-complained-about companies: The top three companies that received the most complaints from November 2016 through January 2017 were Navient Solutions, LLC, Equifax, and Experian.

Geographic Spotlight: Nevada
This month, the CFPB highlighted complaints from Nevada and the Las Vegas metro area.  As of April 1, 2017, consumers in Nevada have submitted 14,600 of the 1,163,200 complaints the CFPB has handled. Of those complaints, 10,800 came from consumers in the Las Vegas metro area. Findings from the Nevada complaints include:

  • Rate of debt collection complaints similar to the national average: Complaints related to debt collection accounted for 29 percent of all complaints submitted by consumers from Nevada. This is slightly higher than the rate of 27 percent at which consumers nationally submit debt collection complaints to the Bureau.
  • Rate of mortgage complaints mirrors the national average: Complaints related to mortgages accounted for 23 percent of all complaints submitted by consumers from Nevada, which is identical to the national rate of mortgage complaints submitted.
  • Most-complained-about companies: Wells Fargo, Experian, and Equifax were the most-complained-about companies from consumers in Nevada.

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, which created the CFPB, established consumer complaint handling as an integral part of the CFPB’s work. The CFPB began accepting complaints as soon as it opened its doors in July 2011. It currently accepts complaints on many consumer financial products, including credit cards, mortgages, bank accounts and services, student loans, vehicle and other consumer loans, credit reporting, money transfers, debt collection, and payday loans.

In June 2012, the CFPB launched its Consumer Complaint Database, which is the nation’s largest public collection of consumer financial complaints. When consumers submit a complaint they have the option to share publicly their explanation of what happened. For more individual-level complaint data and to read consumers’ experiences, visit the Consumer Complaint Database at: www.consumerfinance.gov/complaintdatabase/.

Company-level complaint data in the report uses a three-month rolling average of complaints sent by the Bureau to companies for response. This data lags other complaint data in this report by two months to reflect the 60 days companies have to respond to complaints, confirming a commercial relationship with the consumer. Company-level information should be considered in the context of company size.

To submit a complaint, consumers can:

  • Go online at www.consumerfinance.gov/complaint/
  • Call the toll-free phone number at 1-855-411-CFPB (2372) or TTY/TDD phone number at 1-855-729-CFPB (2372)
  • Fax the CFPB at 1-855-237-2392
  • Mail a letter to: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, P.O. Box 4503, Iowa City, Iowa 52244
  • Additionally, through “Ask CFPB,” consumers can get clear, unbiased answers to their questions at consumerfinance.gov/askcfpb or by calling 1-855-411-CFPB (2372).

###

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is a 21st century agency that helps consumer finance markets work by making rules more effective, by consistently and fairly enforcing those rules, and by empowering consumers to take more control over their economic lives. For more information, visit consumerfinance.gov.

SPOTLIGHT: Adriana Gallardo of Rise Programs

riseprograms.com

 

www.riseprograms.com

Adriana Gallardo is one of Southern California’s most successful business women. As the mastermind behind Adriana’s Insurance, an empire consisting of over 60 offices, Adriana is a symbol of leadership in the insurance industry, which she has dominated for the past 20 years.

www.adrianasinsurance.com

adraianas insurance

Beyond being a powerhouse mogul, Adriana has become an inspirational figure to the community, starting with the people in her offices, where there is a sense of respect and admiration. She constantly encourages and motivates her personnel to put their heart and dedication into everything they do. She personally trains her employees and shares her experience and knowledge with all the energy that is part of her character.

www.adrianagallardo.com

Adriana Gallardo of Adriana's Insurance

Having already established her insurance business, Adriana opened her own marketing firm, Resulta2 Media Group, she is also the producer of her own reality Despegando Show, and she owns an upscale beauty salon.

www.resulta2media.com

resulta2media.com

www.vivebeautysalon.com

vive beauty salon

Adriana has shown her ability to build profitable businesses and is now ready to share her experience. After years of hard work and educating herself, she is convinced that transformational education is the key in bringing businesses to the next level of success.

CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU SUES FOUR ONLINE LENDERS FOR COLLECTING ON DEBTS CONSUMERS DID NOT LEGALLY OWE

consumer financial protection bureau

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
April 27, 2017

CONTACT:
Office of Communications
Tel: (202) 435-7170

CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU SUES FOUR ONLINE LENDERS FOR COLLECTING ON DEBTS CONSUMERS DID NOT LEGALLY OWE
Bureau Alleges Companies Deceived Consumers About Debt That Was Not Legally Owed

Washington, D.C. – The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) today took action against four online lenders – Golden Valley Lending, Inc., Silver Cloud Financial, Inc., Mountain Summit Financial, Inc., and Majestic Lake Financial, Inc. – for deceiving consumers by collecting debt they were not legally owed. In a suit filed in federal court, the CFPB alleges that the four lenders could not legally collect on these debts because the loans were void under state laws governing interest rate caps or the licensing of lenders. The CFPB alleges that the lenders made deceptive demands and illegally took money from consumer bank accounts for debts that consumers did not legally owe. The CFPB seeks to stop the unlawful practices, recoup relief for harmed consumers, and impose a penalty.

“We are suing four online lenders for collecting on debts that consumers did not legally owe,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray. “We allege that these companies made deceptive demands and illegally took money from people’s bank accounts. We are seeking to stop these violations and get relief for consumers.”

Golden Valley Lending, Inc., Silver Cloud Financial, Inc., Mountain Summit Financial, Inc., and Majestic Lake Financial, Inc. are online installment loan companies in Upper Lake, California. Since at least 2012, Golden Valley Lending and Silver Cloud Financial have offered online loans of between $300 and $1,200 with annual interest rates ranging from 440 percent up to 950 percent. Mountain Summit Financial and Majestic Lake Financial began offering similar loans more recently.

The Bureau’s investigation showed that the high-cost loans violated licensing requirements or interest-rate caps – or both – that made the loans void in whole or in part in at least 17 states: Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, and South Dakota. The Bureau alleges that the four lenders are collecting money that consumers do not legally owe. The CFPB’s suit alleges that Golden Valley Lending, Silver Cloud Financial, Mountain Summit Financial, and Majestic Lake Financial violated the Truth in Lending Act and the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The specific allegations include:

  • Deceiving consumers about loan payments that were not owed: The lenders pursued consumers for payments even though the loans in question were void in whole or in part under state law and payments could not be collected. The interest rates the lenders charged were high enough to violate usury laws in some states where they did business, and violation of these usury laws renders particular loans void. In addition, the lenders did not obtain licenses to lend or collect in certain states, and the failure to obtain those licenses renders particular loans void. The four lenders created the false impression that they had a legal right to collect payments and that consumers had a legal obligation to pay off the loans.
  • Collecting loan payments which consumers did not owe: The four lenders made electronic withdrawals from consumers’ bank accounts or called or sent letters to consumers demanding payment for debts that consumers were under no legal obligation to pay.
  • Failing to disclose the real cost of credit: The lenders’ websites did not disclose the annual percentage rates that apply to the loans. When contacted by prospective borrowers, the lenders’ representatives also did not tell consumers the annual percentage rate that would apply to the loans.

Under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the CFPB is authorized to take action against institutions engaged in unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices, or that otherwise violate federal consumer financial laws like the Truth in Lending Act. The CFPB is seeking monetary relief for consumers, civil money penalties, and injunctive relief, including a prohibition on collecting on void loans, against Golden Valley and the other lenders. The Bureau’s complaint is not a finding or ruling that the defendant have actually violated the law.

A copy of the complaint filed in federal district court is available at: http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/201704_cfpb_Golden-Valley_Silver-Cloud_Majestic-Lake_complaint.pdf

###

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is a 21st century agency that helps consumer finance markets work by making rules more effective, by consistently and fairly enforcing those rules, and by empowering consumers to take more control over their economic lives. For more information, visit consumerfinance.gov.

PRESS RELEASE: CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU ISSUES $1.25 MILLION FINE TO SERVICEMEMBER AUTO LENDER FOR VIOLATING CONSENT ORDER

consumer financial protection bureau

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
April 26, 2017

CONTACT:
Office of Communications
Tel: (202) 435-7170

CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU ISSUES $1.25 MILLION FINE TO SERVICEMEMBER AUTO LENDER FOR VIOLATING CONSENT ORDER
Auto Loan Company Failed to Provide Redress for Illegal Collection Tactics

Washington, D.C. — The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) today took action against Security National Automotive Acceptance Company (SNAAC), an auto lender specializing in loans to servicemembers, for violating a Bureau consent order. In 2015, the CFPB ordered SNAAC to pay both redress and a civil penalty for illegal debt collection tactics, including making threats to contact servicemembers’ commanding officers about debts and exaggerating the consequences of not paying. SNAAC violated the 2015 order by failing to provide more than $1 million in refunds and credits, affecting more than 1,000 consumers. Today’s consent order requires SNAAC to make good on the redress it owes to those consumers and pay an additional $1.25 million penalty.

“This company violated a Bureau order when it failed to get money back to servicemembers it had hounded with illegal debt collection tactics,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray. “We are making sure this company finally rights its wrongs.”

SNAAC, based in Mason, Ohio, is an auto-finance company that operates in more than two dozen states and specializes in loans to servicemembers, primarily to buy used vehicles. In June 2015, the CFPB sued SNAAC for aggressive collection tactics against consumers who fell behind on their loans. If servicemembers lagged behind on payments, SNAAC’s collectors would threaten to contact—and in many cases did contact—their chain of command about their debts. Also, the company exaggerated the consequences of not paying. For instance, they told some consumers that failure to pay could result in action under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, demotion, discharge, or loss of security clearance. But these consequences were extremely unlikely. The CFPB alleged that SNAAC’s aggressive tactics, which took advantage of servicemembers’ special obligations to remain current on debts, victimized thousands of borrowers.

In October 2015, a CFPB consent order found that SNAAC had indeed engaged in unfair, deceptive, and abusive acts and practices while collecting on these auto loans. The order required SNAAC to pay $2.275 million in consumer redress through credits and refunds, and a $1 million civil penalty. Consumers with an account balance were to receive credits to their accounts, and consumers with a zero balance were to receive cash refunds. While SNAAC submitted two plans that claimed to provide the full amount of redress ordered, both were designed to underpay such redress. Acting on a tip from a servicemember’s father, the CFPB discovered that SNAAC had issued worthless “credits” to hundreds of consumers and failed to provide proper redress to many more.

The CFPB is issuing today’s consent order against SNAAC for violating the terms of the 2015 consent order by failing to properly give refunds or credits to affected borrowers. In today’s order, the CFPB found that the company had failed to meet its obligation to pay redress to consumers by:

  • Issuing worthless “credits” to settled-in-full accounts: In purporting to provide redress, SNAAC treated accounts that were settled-in-full as having a positive account balance. Instead of providing refunds to consumers with settled-in-full accounts, SNAAC issued worthless account “credits.” Those consumers received no benefit from such a “credit” because they no longer owed SNAAC money and could not use such a credit toward any new or existing loan.
  • Issuing worthless “credits” to discharged accounts: SNAAC also issued worthless account “credits” to consumers whose debts had been discharged in bankruptcy, and who no longer owed SNAAC money on their auto loan. SNAAC had no legal claim to any unpaid balance, and these consumers received no benefit from the “credits.” SNAAC had, in fact, already stopped collections on these accounts.
  • Failing to properly give redress to consumers making payments under settlement agreements:  Some SNAAC consumers were making payments under settlement agreements. But SNAAC based redress on the original, higher account balance in place before it agreed on a settlement with the borrower. As a result, in many instances, SNAAC issued credits that exceeded consumers’ settlement balances, rather than refund any amount above what the consumers actually owed. And because their settlement balances were improperly credited, some consumers unwittingly overpaid SNAAC to settle their accounts. 

Enforcement Action
Under the Dodd-Frank Act, the CFPB is authorized to take action against institutions engaged in unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices, or that otherwise violate federal consumer financial laws. Under today’s consent order: 

  • SNAAC must pay redress as promised to affected consumers: SNAAC must pay the Bureau roughly $720,000, which the Bureau will send as refunds to about 925 consumers. SNAAC must issue about $370,000 in new credits to over 1,000 consumers with remaining account balances as well as properly credit roughly 1,000 consumers making payments under settlement agreements. SNAAC must also pay $75,000 to the Bureau to cover the costs of distributing these payments.
  • SNAAC must pay a $1.25 million penalty: SNAAC must pay a penalty of $1.25 million to the CFPB Civil Penalty Fund, in addition to the $1 million penalty it paid under the 2015 consent order.

The text of the consent order is found here: http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/201704_SNAAC-consent-order.pdf

###

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is a 21st century agency that helps consumer finance markets work by making rules more effective, by consistently and fairly enforcing those rules, and by empowering consumers to take more control over their economic lives. For more information, visit consumerfinance.gov.

PRESS RELEASE: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Finds Some Student Loan and Mortgage Servicers Illegally Fail to Provide Protection to Borrowers

consumer financial protection bureau

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
April 26, 2017

CONTACT:
Office of Communications
Tel: (202) 435-7170

CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU SUPERVISION FINDS SOME STUDENT LOAN AND MORTGAGE SERVICERS ILLEGALLY FAIL TO PROVIDE PROTECTIONS TO BORROWERS
Bureau Recovered $6.1 Million for 16,000 Consumers Harmed By Auto Loan Originators

Washington, D.C. – The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) today announced that its recent supervisory work has found that some student loan and mortgage servicers are violating the law by failing to provide struggling borrowers with legal protections. CFPB examiners found that some student loan servicers failed to refund charges imposed on borrowers who had been wrongly denied the right to defer payments while enrolled in school. The report also found that some mortgage servicers did not deliver the required foreclosure protections to borrowers seeking to save their homes, mishandled escrow accounts, and sent incomplete bills. The report also announced that non-public supervisory activities have led to the recovery of about $6.1 million for 16,000 consumers harmed by auto loan originators.

“We found that some mortgage and student loan servicers are violating the law by failing to provide protections to borrowers,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray. “Their slipshod practices are putting borrowers at risk of financial failure and we will hold them accountable.”

Under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the CFPB has authority to supervise banks and credit unions with more than $10 billion in assets and certain nonbanks. These include mortgage companies, private student lenders, payday lenders, and others defined as “larger participants.” Today’s report, the 15th edition of Supervisory Highlights, covers supervisory activities generally from September-December 2016, and shares observations in the areas of student loan servicing, mortgage servicing, mortgage origination, and fair lending.

Student Loan Servicing
Student loan servicers are the primary point of contact about loans for the more than 44 million Americans with student debt. It is a Bureau priority to end illegal practices in student loan servicing. Previously, the Bureau reported that borrowers encounter servicing problems driven by incomplete, inaccurate, or untimely reporting of student data. This can cost some borrowers hundreds of dollars or more. In February, the CFPB warned student loan borrowers to take steps to protect themselves from costly student enrollment status data errors. The Department of Education has also warned that these errors can lead to higher loan costs for borrowers and may contribute to student loan delinquency and defaults. In today’s report, Bureau examiners found that student loan servicers: 

  • Routinely acted on flawed information: Most student loan borrowers have a right to postpone payments, called a deferment, while they are enrolled in school. But CFPB examiners found that one or more student loan servicers routinely acted on incorrect information about whether the borrower was enrolled in school. This faulty information was in student data reports used to manage millions of borrowers’ accounts, and was provided by National Student Clearinghouse, an enrollment data reporting company.
  • Failed to reverse charges wrongly imposed on borrowers in school: Because of data errors, one or more student loan servicers routinely failed to reverse certain charges even after it knew it had wrongly ended a deferment. These charges included improper late fees and capitalization of unpaid interest, which occurs when interest that accumulates on a student loan is added to the principal balance. 

Mortgage Servicing
Mortgage servicers collect payments from the mortgage borrower and forward those payments to the owner of the loan. They typically handle customer service, collections, loan modifications, and foreclosures. Supervision continues to see serious issues for consumers seeking alternatives to foreclosure, or loss mitigation, at certain servicers. Issues identified during recent CFPB examinations include problems with foreclosure protections, premature foreclosure filings,  mishandling of escrow accounts, and incomplete periodic statements. Bureau examiners found one or more servicers:

  • Kept borrowers in the dark on foreclosure alternatives: One or more servicers failed to identify the additional documents and information borrowers needed to submit to complete a loss mitigation application to avoid foreclosure. They then denied the applications for not including those documents. Supervision directed these servicers to enhance policies, procedures, and monitoring to address the issue.
  • Prematurely launched the foreclosure process: Servicers cannot take certain steps toward foreclosure once they receive a complete loss mitigation application from a borrower more than 37 days before a foreclosure sale. For instance, servicers cannot make first notice of a foreclosure if a borrower has submitted a complete application for a loan modification or other foreclosure alternative that is still pending review. Bureau examiners found that one or more servicers failed to properly classify applications as complete after receiving the information, and failed to give required foreclosure protections to those consumers.
  • Mishandled escrow accounts: One or more servicers used funds from escrow accounts to pay insurance premiums on unrelated loans. This created shortages in the escrow account and forced higher monthly payments onto consumers. Supervision directed the servicer to give redress to affected consumers, and adopt policies and procedures to ensure that insurance payments are made properly from escrow accounts.
  • Issued incomplete periodic statements: Servicers must provide regular statements that include the amount and due date of the next payment; a breakdown of payments by principal, interest, fees, and escrow; and recent transactions. Examiners found one or more servicers used vague language like “Misc. Expenses” and “Charge for Service” when describing certain costs. These insufficient descriptions failed to comply with the rule. Supervision directed the servicer to modify its descriptions to help consumers understand their fees and charges.

Other Highlights
In the lead-up to the financial crisis, many consumers ended up in risky mortgages because lenders did not check to see if they could afford to pay back the loan. Under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, lenders must make a reasonable effort to figure out if a consumer can repay the mortgage before making the loan. Today’s report looks at how CFPB examiners assess compliance with the Ability-to-Repay rule, including requirements on how a lender verifies a consumer’s ability to repay a mortgage loan. This includes whether a creditor’s decision relies on verified assets and not income, and whether it can be based on the size of the down payment for a consumer who otherwise lacks verified income or assets.

Today’s report also notes that CFPB examiners alerted one or more companies to spikes in complaint volume, prompting the companies to develop remedies. It also discusses the CFPB’s continued development and implementation of a program to directly examine key service providers to help reduce risks to consumers when a company outsources certain activities to those providers. In today’s report, the CFPB also reminds companies that creating incentives for employees and service providers to meet sales and other business goals can lead to consumer harm if those incentives are not properly managed. In addition, the report includes details about updated and expanded publicly available surname data from the U.S. Census Bureau for use in models that may be combined with geography data in CFPB analysis of fair lending practices.

The report highlights that non-public supervisory activities have led to the recovery of about $6.1 million for 16,000 consumers harmed by illegal practices by auto loan originators. The CFPB’s recent supervisory activities led to or supported five recent public enforcement actions, resulting in over $39 million in consumer remediation and another $19 million in civil money penalties. Today’s report shares information industry can use to comply with federal consumer financial law. In cases where CFPB examiners find problems, they alert the company and outline necessary remedial measures. This may include paying refunds or restitution, or taking actions to stop illegal practices, such as new policies or improved training or monitoring. When appropriate, the CFPB opens investigations for potential enforcement actions.

Today’s edition of Supervisory Highlights is available at:http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/201704_cfpb_Supervisory-Highlights_Issue-15.pdf

###

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is a 21st century agency that helps consumer finance markets work by making rules more effective, by consistently and fairly enforcing those rules, and by empowering consumers to take more control over their economic lives. For more information, visit consumerfinance.gov.

PRESS RELEASE: Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Releases Report Outlining Strategies for Promoting Diversity and Inclusion in the Mortgage Industry

consumer financial protection bureau

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
April 27, 2017

CONTACT:
Office of Communications
Tel: (202) 435-7170

CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU RELEASES REPORT OUTLINING STRATEGIES FOR PROMOTING DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION IN THE MORTGAGE INDUSTRY
Report Discusses Current Approaches and Business Case for Diversity and Inclusion

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) today released a report summarizing strategies for promoting diversity and inclusion used by mortgage industry participants. It highlights the business case for diversity along with current approaches and practices used in the mortgage industry, such as establishing buy-in from top leadership, integrating principles of inclusion in recruiting and hiring, and the importance of data in assessing the impact of diversity on keeping organizations competitive. The report is the result of the CFPB’s collaboration with the financial services industry to raise awareness of the importance of strengthening diversity and inclusion within organizations.

“The Consumer Bureau’s mission is to protect all consumers across the diverse American marketplace, just as financial institutions seek to serve them with helpful products and services,” said CFPB Director Richard Cordray.  “The insights in this report from our roundtable with mortgage lenders help to show the advantages of integrating diversity and inclusion programs in workplaces throughout the financial services industry.”

The CFPB’s Office of Minority and Women Inclusion (OMWI) convened an industry roundtable meeting in collaboration with the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA), which has shown notable leadership on these issues, and today’s report is a readout of that meeting. The roundtable convened representatives from the mortgage industry, including from larger and smaller banks, as well as some nonbank financial companies. Some participants were the primary executive leaders of their companies and others led units such as mortgage banking, neighborhood lending, or human resources. The roundtable also included OMWI staff from other federal agencies, including the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), Federal Reserve, and Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA).

Through the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, Congress required the creation of an Office of Minority and Women Inclusion at the following agencies: Treasury, FDIC, FHFA, OCC, National Credit Union Administration, Securities and Exchange Commission, CFPB, Federal Reserve Board, and each Federal Reserve Bank. Each of the OMWI directors is charged with developing standards for the diversity of the agency workforce, increasing diversity in agency programs and contracts, and assessing diversity policies and practices of entities regulated by the agency.

The report highlights issues raised by the roundtable participants, including current approaches, and underscores the need to develop a strong business case for diversity and inclusion. The speakers stressed how their businesses were being affected by the changing demographics of their customer base. They noted that a diverse and inclusive workforce was especially important to help them attract and retain the talent and perspective they need to solve new and complex problems, create innovative solutions, and improve business outcomes in face of this growing challenge. The report discusses strategies and practices on topics including:

  • The business case for diversity and inclusion: The roundtable participants shared that embracing diversity and inclusion made business sense for their organizations. Participants that analyzed how diversity and inclusion can strengthen organizations found that it improved overall performance and leads to a more positive and productive workplace.
  • The importance of leadership buy-in and accountability: A strong theme was the importance of the “tone from the top” of the organization, without which many speakers said it is virtually impossible to sustain a successful diversity program. Strong leadership on diversity and inclusion issues aligned organizations to build in diversity and inclusion as fundamental principles. 
  • Recruiting, hiring, inclusion, retention, advancement, and engagement: Participants shared that principles of inclusion are vital in developing and sustaining a diverse workforce over time. Organizations noted that they sought to boost retention levels and advancement prospects of people with different backgrounds and viewpoints. Another goal reported by participants is to make sure that discussions and decisions within the organization reflect the more robust analysis and broader understanding that can result from multiple viewpoints.
  • Broadening the customer base with new business products: Participants explained that a more diverse workforce fosters greater understanding of the particular needs and situations of a more diverse customer base, including tailoring products to the needs of different consumers. Participants saw this as a key approach to attracting and satisfying a broader base of customers. 
  • The importance of data:  Data collection and analysis play an integral role in supporting many of the participating organizations’ business cases for diversity. Some participants noted that understanding the demographics of an organization’s workforce is key to ensuring that it reflects the available talent pools and remains competitive and effective.

The CFPB’s OMWI Report on Promoting Diversity and Inclusion in the Mortgages Industry is available at: http://files.consumerfinance.gov/f/documents/201704_cfpb_OMWI-Regulated-Entities-External-Report.PDF

###

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is a 21st century agency that helps consumer finance markets work by making rules more effective, by consistently and fairly enforcing those rules, and by empowering consumers to take more control over their economic lives. For more information, visit consumerfinance.gov.

 

cigar rights

PRESS RELEASE: Cigar Smokers Rights Guide

 

SOURCE: Famous Smoke Shop
Famous Smoke Shop
March 30, 2017 05:00 ET
Top Premium Cigar Retailer Launches Cigar Smokers’ Rights Guide;
Famous Smoke Shop Details Effects of Newly-Enacted FDA Cigar Regulations

 

http://fda.famous-smoke.com/
EASTON, PA–(Marketwired – March 30, 2017) – Famous Smoke Shop, the leading online distributor of discounted premium cigars, has debuted their new interactive Cigar Smokers’ Rights Hub. Crafted in response to the US Food & Drug Administration’s 2016 Final Deeming Rule regarding premium cigars and other tobacco products, the Famous Smoke guide presents cigar enthusiasts with a history of legal actions affecting the tobacco industry. The Smokers’ Rights Hub also offers cigar smokers a detailed understanding of how FDA’s new regulations will negatively impact the premium cigar industry, and the legal challenges that have been mounted against the agency’s sweeping new rules.
“The rights of adult cigar enthusiasts to purchase and enjoy a completely legal product are quickly going up in flames.” Arthur Zaretsky is the president and owner of Famous Smoke Shop, who has launched a Cigar Smokers’ Rights Hub — a website devoted to educating consumers about the Food & Drug Administration’s Final Deeming Rule concerning premium cigars. FDA released 499 pages of new and strict cigar regulations in August of 2016, filled with measures, rulings, definitions and fees that “completely overstepped the authority FDA was given by Congress to regulate tobacco,” says Zaretsky. His company’s goal is to inform customers — and cigar enthusiasts at large — about how these rules are shortchanging consumers, unfair to business and in violation of US law. “The agency is going at this regulation, and the costs associated with compliance, blindly. FDA has failed to perform an adequate, legitimate cost-benefit analysis of the Final Rule’s economic impact on small businesses, as is required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act,” says Zaretsky, who adds, “the FDA is defying the law.”
The Smokers’ Rights Hub notes significant factors that distinguish cigars from cigarettes. Their contents, and how their made, are vastly different, says Cigar Advisor Managing Editor John Pullo: “premium cigars are made entirely by hand, with whole tobacco leaf. Cigarettes are vastly different — they’re made on high speed machines, in bulk, using chopped tobaccos and additives. Cigars and cigarettes are very different, and shouldn’t be treated the same way.” In spite of those differences, FDA is now regulating premium cigars in the same way as cigarettes — and has put into place significant restrictions on the blending of new cigars, levying of fees on cigar makers to have their products chemically tested and kept on the market for sale, as well as reclassifying retailers as “manufacturers” for selling cigar samplers and house pipe blends. These vast new changes have prompted the premium cigar industry to sue the FDA on Constitutional grounds.
The history of modern governmental regulation over tobacco stretches 50 years, according to the Cigar Smokers’ Rights timeline. “All the while, the federal government has slowly — and quite frankly, unfairly — been chipping away at cigar smokers’ rights,” says Zaretsky. Because these new regulations are such a broad overreach of the regulatory authority granted to FDA by Congress in 2009, three industry groups have filed suit against the agency to have the Deeming Rule rescinded. Mark Pursell, CEO of the International Premium Cigar and Pipe Retailers Association, noted in a statement: “After a thorough and detailed legal review, we are challenging this unlawful regulatory action in federal court to protect the statutory and constitutional rights of our industry and its members.” Cigar Association of America President Craig Williamson added, “We hoped the FDA would craft a flexible regulatory structure that accounted for the uniqueness of our industry. Instead, we got a broad, one-size-fits-all rule that fails to account for how cigars and premium cigars are manufactured, distributed, sold and consumed in the United States. The FDA exceeded its statutory authority and violated the federal rulemaking process when crafting this set of broad and sweeping regulations.”
The details of this suit, along with regular updates on additional filings and motions, are currently posted at the Famous Smoke Shop Cigar Rights site, so that consumers can follow the industry’s fighting against FDA’s massive regulatory changes.
The new Famous Smoke Shop Cigar Smokers’ Rights Hub details many of the changes the FDA has made regarding their tobacco enforcement measures, including how premium cigars will become more expensive, due to the added costs of FDA approval fees being passed to retailers and consumers. The Hub also lays out how the selection of cigars currently available for sale will likely become smaller, as the new FDA rules will force some existing brands off the market — while limiting the influx of new cigars on store shelves: “that rich tradition of Innovation by cigar makers will be stifled,” says Cigar Advisor’s John Pullo. This, he says, is why cigar lovers can educate themselves with the helpful service that Famous provides. “We as cigar enthusiasts need to empower ourselves with information about the regulation of our hobby, and about the steps being taken by the FDA to unfairly limit our choices at the cigar shop and online. A resource like the Rights Hub is critical to becoming a well-informed consumer.”

 

About Famous Smoke Shop
Famous Smoke Shop is the #1 American-owned discount cigar retailer, home to the lowest prices on the largest selection of premium cigars, humidors and cigar accessories in the country. With over one thousand cigar brands in stock, including Acid, Davidoff, Macanudo, Romeo y Julieta, Ashton, Padron, Oliva and Perdomo cigars, cigar smokers shop at Famous Smoke Shop with confidence: every purchase is backed by the Famous Freshness Guarantee and award-winning customer service. Famous remains committed to educating each and every adult customer on their right to enjoy tobacco products responsibly.
CONTACT INFORMATION:
Famous Smoke Shop
90 Mort Drive
Easton, PA 18040
800-564-2486

 

Press Release: Sevilla Local Media in Association with Mad House – Atlantic Recording Artist, Cham (“Baby Cham”)

March 20, 2017

 

Sevilla Local Media, LLC

(951) 289-1710

sevillalocalmedia@gmail.com

www.sevillalocalmedia.com

 

For Immediate Release:

Sevilla Local Media, a Riverside, California, based Digital Marketing & SEO Company that also manages and promotes a select stable of recording artists, announces an official association with CHAM (Damian Beckett), more famously known as BABY CHAM, specific to marketing, promotion and booking.

Sevilla Local Media is now part of Team Cham and will begin by increasing the visibility of Cham’s career and the his new single, “Money Wine”

Cham will be appearing live in select California venues in May 2017.

For booking and all other inquiries regarding CHAM, please contact TOMMY SEVILLA at the contact information noted above.

 

 

From Wikipedia:

Cham (born Damian Beckett, 24 February 1979) is a Jamaica born rapper, singer-songwriter and actor, most well known for his 2006 single “Ghetto Story” from his major label debut album of the same name, a song which led to multiple “story” songs by other artists in a similar vein.[1] He is currently signed to Atlantic Records, and was known as Baby Cham until 2005. He is still called Baby Cham by his Jamaican fans and fans from around the world.

Originally from Sherlock Crescent in Saint Andrew Parish, Cham’s career began in the early 1990s.[2] The Miami New Times referred to his debut album Wow… The Story, released in 2000, as “the most anticipated album in years from any reggae artist”, and a Washington Post review of a live Cham concert in 2006 described him as “the man who may be the next Sean Paul — a dancehall artist who crosses over to the U.S. hip-hop market.”[3][4]

Throughout his career, Cham has collaborated with many hip hop and R&B artists such as Foxy Brown, Alicia Keys, Carl Thomas, Shawn Mims, Mis-Teeq, Rihanna, Che’Nelle, Jentina, Akon, and T-Pain, Keke Palmer and many others.

Cham has for a long time worked with producer Dave Kelly.[2] In 2012, he recorded with his wife, O, on the singles “Wine” and “Tun Up”.[2] In 2013 he released the Kelly-produced single “Fighter”, featuring Damian “Junior Gong” Marley.[5]

Cham’s third album, the Kelly-produced Lawless is due to be released in June 2015.[6] Featuring the single “I Am Hot”, the album was recorded in Florida apart from a collaboration with Mykal Rose and Bounty Killer, which was recorded in Jamaica.[6]

 

sevilla local media

Cigar & Spirits Magazine’s 7th Annual West Coast Cigar & Spirits Tasting

cigar and spirits magazine

 

 

 

 

 

www.CigarandSpiritsMagazine.com

It’s that time of the year again!
Come and sample some of the world’s greatest spirits and cigars at the 7th Annual Cigar & Spirits West Coast Tasting event! You’ll take home hundreds of dollars worth of premium samples.
Past Vendors have included:
Arturo Fuente Cigars
Rocky Patel
Drew Estate
Ventura Cigar Company
La Palina
Falto
Garo Habano
Montecristo
Romeo y Julieta
Gurkha
JC Newman – Diamond Crown
Aging Room
Villiger
Trill Cigars
Royal Gold Cigars
Dignity
Southern Draw Cigars
Zander-Greg
Altadis USA
Alec Bradley Cigars
Boutique Blends
Esteban Carreras Cigars
Miami Cigar Company
La Aurora Cigars
Hiram & Solomon Cigars
USA Sales
Zander Greg
Alpha Cigar

Ketel One Vodka
Beam Global
Zacapa Rum
Makers 46
El Tesoro Anejo
2 Gingers Irish Whiskey
Dos Armadillos
Comisario
Sensi Wines
Tatratea
Sazerac
Buffalo Trace Small Batch Bourbon
Buffalo Trace White Dog
Fireball Whisky
Eagle Rare 10YR Bourbon
Diageo
Johnnie Walker
Oban Whisky
Talisker Whisky
Lagavulin Whisky
Deep Eddy Vodka
NOLET’S Silver Gin
Zing Vodka
A. Hardy Brands
Hardy VSOP Cognac
Hardy XO Cognac
Dingle Irish Gin
Michael Goddard Vodka & Gin
Mexican Moonshine
T1 Tequila
Titos Handmade Vodka
Macallan

Buzz Bars
Hangar 24 Brewing Co
Backyard Marys
Balls of Steel
Left Shoe Company
Never Hungover

 

Buy Tickets Now!