Consumer Protection Act: Unregulated Entities now subject to MARP

William Fry Solicitors have published a useful guide on their web site to the new Consumer Protection Act; See link below:

https://sites-williamfry.vuturevx.c...?sid=fc2f62aa-c4e8-4fd8-a1c4-e62fdce452b5#one

What protections will the Act provide to consumers whose loans are sold to unregulated entities?

When the new legislation comes into operation:

• Upon the sale of a consumer loan portfolio to an unregulated entity, the relevant borrowers will continue to enjoy the benefits of CBI Codes designed to protect consumers (including the Code of Conduct on Mortgage Arrears).
  
  
• Upon the sale of a consumer loan portfolio to an unregulated entity, the relevant borrowers will have access to the Financial Services Ombudsman complaints procedure regarding treatment by credit servicing firms.
  
  
• As regulated entities, credit servicing firms will be subject to supervision and enforcement by the CBI.

Jim Stafford

To Jim,

Is this legislation retrospective in effect ?

My understanding is that no legislation can be made retrospective.

It appears from William Fry's interpretation that all existing providers will be caught by the new legislation going forward.

Jim Stafford

Isn't the issue of retrospection at the heart of the LAND AND CONVEYANCING LAW REFORM ACT 2013 which could be the subject of a Constitutional challenge?

To Jim Stafford,

How about the vulture funds that have already bought mortgages like lone star, dilosk, Cerberus etc. are they bound by this act ?

WizardDr said:

Isn't the issue of retrospection at the heart of the LAND AND CONVEYANCING LAW REFORM ACT 2013 which could be the subject of a Constitutional challenge?

Click to expand...

Tom Darcy, a founder member of Legal & Equitable, lodged a Constitutional Challenge to the ‘Land and Conveyancing Law Reform Act 2013′, drafted by Barrister David Langwallner, Dean of Griffith College and Director of the Innocence Project in Ireland.

The grounds of the claim are that critical sections of the Act are contrary to the Constitution of Ireland in that they are retroactive i.e. they alter the legal rights of citizens in retrospect. It is claimed that not only is it contrary to the Irish Constitution, it is contrary to the fundamental principles of the rule of law.

I understand that Tom Darcy is trying to raise €50,000 through "crowd funding" to finance the legal challenge.

Descart said:

How about the vulture funds that have already bought mortgages like lone star, dilosk, Cerberus etc. are they bound by this act ?

Click to expand...

Yes, all the funds who have purchased "consumer and SME debt" (as defined") are bound by the Act. In practice, many of the funds had more less complied with the MARP provisions in any event.

Jim Stafford

I think some purchasers have complied voluntarily. I suppose the key issue is that if they are regulated (are they?) then the CB can apply rules to cases going forward. What boggles the mind is that matters like this seemingly slip through the net when the Central Bank use a 500 page guide for Credit Unions ... and they never see this ball, drop others, forward passes and all the other cliches..

The funds will only be regulated if they carry out credit servicing themselves rather than outsource it. The credit servicing firms as regulated entities will be subject to the relevant consumer protection codes. If you have a complaint about how your mortgage is being serviced you can go to the FSO. However if you have a complaint about the interest rate being charged you won't have access to the FSO as it is not being set by a regulated entity.