Archives for May 2023

TAMPA, Fla. — OneTouch Direct, a global business process outsourcing company, has announced the appointment of Yvonne Torrijos as Chief Client Officer (CCO) of OTD Americas, its newest company subsidiary. Yvonne is a recognized industry leader with significant experience building long term client partnerships, developing innovative marketing and sales strategies, and driving strong revenue growth.

In the newly created Chief Client Officer role, Yvonne is responsible for global client management, ensuring clients a consistently exceptional experience integrated across the company. She will oversee all communications, marketing, and client business development for OTD Americas, with a focus on building long term client partnerships in new business verticals and services. 

“Yvonne’s strategic vision and extensive experience make her an excellent addition to OTD Americas’ leadership team,” said Chris Reed, OneTouch Direct’s Executive Vice President. “Her expertise cultivating high profile client relationships will be invaluable to OTD Americas’ growth and expansion.”      

With more than 30 years’ experience, Yvonne is known as the Client Champion, applying a cohesive approach across marketing, sales, client support, project launch and operations to deliver an integrated end-to-end customer experience across the organization and supporting the client goal for success. She will leverage her industry expertise to build long-term, strategic client partnerships, accelerating company growth and expansion.

“It is a privilege to take on this role at an exciting time in OTD Americas growth,” said Yvonne. “I joined OTD Americas because I could see the great potential in the Company to deliver true, sustaining value for our client partners and look forward to working with Toby and the senior management team to help lead the company to its next level of strategic growth.” 

To learn more about OTD Americas, you can reach Yvonne at yvonne.torrijos@otdamericas.com.

About OTD Americas

OTD Americas, the nearshore subsidiary arm for OneTouch Direct, provides full service contact solutions from state of the art centers in Colombia, Mexico, Asia, and Eastern Europe with the ability to build to suit upon client demand. As a contact center outsourcing company, OTD Americas offers integrated omni-channel customer engagement for customer service, collections, back office support, and custom technology solutions designed to drive exceptional customer interactions and enhance our clients’ brands. Partnering with leading global brands representing clients in Banking and Financial Services, Consumer Auto, FinTech, Healthcare, Insurance, Media, Retail and e-commerce, Technology, Telecom, and Utilities industries, OTD Americas is focused on facilitating our clients’ strategic growth with Class A workplace, leveraging exceptional employee attrition rates, and ensuring brand protection in a competitive unique cost benefit structure. Our global delivery model offers flexible onshore, nearshore, offshore, and WAHA service options spanning the US, Mexico, Colombia, Asia, and Eastern Europe. 

About OneTouch Direct

OneTouch Direct, parent company for OTD Americas, is a US based business process outsourcing company delivering best-in-class customer experiences (CX) for some of the world’s largest and most loved brands. Rooted in our passion and deep expertise, OneTouch Direct creates unified brand experiences that break the rules and foster meaningful relationships. For over 20 years, our people-centric, data driven outsourcing solutions have powered better revenues and profitability across the full customer life cycle. For more information visit https://www.onetouchdirect.com/.

WASHINGTON, DC — McGlinchey Stafford is pleased to announce that litigator Jonathan “Jon” Cornfield has joined McGlinchey as an associate in the firm’s Washington, D.C. office. Jon represents financial services institutions in litigation, commercial disputes, complex torts, and class actions at the state, federal, and appellate levels.

“I am pleased to welcome Jon to our D.C. office,” said Megan Ben’Ary, Managing Member of the firm’s Washington, D.C. office. “His strong background with all stages of litigation will enhance our robust financial services litigation team in D.C..” Jon is the second hire McGlinchey has made in D.C. in recent months. Member and veteran financial services compliance attorney Jim Milano joined the office in March.

Before joining McGlinchey, Jon represented a federal regulatory agency as outside counsel on claims involving broker-dealer and investment advisor requests for expungement of information from their registration records. 

“Jon’s commercial litigation and complex tort capabilities will be an asset to our team as we continue to provide clients nationwide with best-in-class financial services litigation services.” said Shaun RameyShaun Ramey co-chair of the firm’s Financial Services Litigation group.

[article_ad]

Jon received his J.D. with Honors from The George Washington University Law School in 2018. After graduation, Jon clerked for the Hon. William M. Jackson in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, and previously interned with the U.S. Trade Representative’s Office of General Counsel, the U.S. Department of State’s American Foreign Service Association, and the U.S. Marshal Service’s Office of General Counsel. 

McGlinchey’s Financial Services Litigation group represents all manner of financial institutions including national and state-chartered banks, finance companies, mortgage lenders and servicers, credit card issuers, automobile lenders, student lenders, community banks, thrifts, credit unions, and insurance providers.  With over 65 attorneys licensed in 25 states and Washington D.C., Financial Services Litigation is the firm’s largest practice group. Since the beginning of 2022, the group has made 16 new attorney hires in 11 offices. 

About McGlinchey

McGlinchey Stafford is a premier midsized business law firm offering services in 30 practice areas through a highly integrated national platform. McGlinchey attorneys leverage bold innovation, diverse talent, and leading-edge technology across our powerful network to serve clients at the local, regional, and national level. With nearly 150 attorneys licensed in 32 states, McGlinchey operates from 17 offices nationwide. The firm currently has 18 attorneys and 12 practice areas recognized in Chambers U.S.A. 2022 and Chambers FinTech 2023, and 53 attorneys recognized by Best Lawyers, 40 attorneys recognized in various Super Lawyers rankings, 49 practice areas recognized by Best Law Firms, and was named a “Top Performer” by the Leadership Council for Legal Diversity (LCLD) since 2018. To learn more, visit www.mcglinchey.com.

Turning its sights to collections judgments, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) recently published a blog post (Blog Post) to highlight its new Working Paper and report (Paper) analyzing collection judgments. The Paper addresses the racial distribution of collection judgments and the effect judgments have on consumers. Citing a suggestion by the National Consumer Law Center (NCLC), the Paper considers how increasing state and federal garnishment protections would affect consumers. It does not, however, discuss the impact a widespread change to garnishment exemptions would have on the overall financial ecosystem. 

The Blog Post

The April 26, 2023, Blog Post, drafted by CFPB economists, begins by including an anecdote about a consumer whose wages were garnished to satisfy a judgment.  While not including anything specific about this consumer’s case, the authors indicate that if the garnishment did not satisfy the judgment, the consumer might be garnished again.

The authors acknowledge there is limited data about civil judgments; however, they assert they have filled the data gap by studying credit bureau data and its relationship to wage garnishment laws. 

The Blog Post claims the Paper establishes the following new facts:  

[article_ad]

1. Civil Judgments are about twice as common as bankruptcies.
2. Civil Judgments are 20 times more common in some states than others. 
3. And Civil Judgments are more concentrated in areas with a higher percentage of Black Residents, even after adjusting for the rate of unpaid debts.

Though the Blog Post mentions, in passing, that there was a decline in suit rates in 2016 and that the 2020 pandemic caused a further decline, they use 2012 data to support the above findings. Referencing a chart that shows the 2012 judgment rate per 1000 people, the authors state they were surprised by the level of variance and opined, “[w]e find that states with more wage garnishment protections have fewer civil judgments. Further, we find that states with lower filing costs have far more civil judgments.”

Regarding racial distribution, citing the 2012 data, the authors indicate that “as an area’s share of Black residents increases, the incidence of civil judgments also goes up.” The authors claim their analysis and comparison of 90-day delinquency rates supports this finding. It does not appear the CFPB economists considered any other factors. 

The Blog Post concludes the way it started, referencing a single consumer’s experience with garnishment stating, “civil judgments can have a profound impact on people’s lives.”

The Paper

The 45-page paper, which serves as the basis for the Blog Post, includes the following notable statements, findings, and claims:

• Defendants in debt collection suits “frequently do not show up in court at all, possibly because they were never informed about the suit or thought it was a mistake” (Page 3)

• “Most people’s experience with the civil court system is courts enforcing a judgment against them, not helping them start anew” (Page 3)

• The “simple model of a profit maximizing creditor” shows why judgments are higher in some states than others (Page 4)

• “Around three-quarters of civil judgments were never ‘satisfied,’ suggesting that collection is a problem even with the force of the state.

• “Despite its importance as the primary legal recourse to collect consumer debts, relatively little is known about civil judgments. Yet judgments impose costs on defendants, courts, as well as employers and financial institutions who are ordered to help creditors garnish wages or seize assets.” (Page 7)

• References to suit filing rates are based on 2004 data that was analyzed in 2008. (Page 7)

• “Defendants rarely have representation and are often unaware of the civil litigation at all until their wages start being garnished.” (Page 7)

• An analysis of debt lawsuits in New York City Civil Court from 2006 – 2008 shows debt collection suits cluster in black neighborhoods. (Page 8)

• Based on a study with data gathered from 1994-2000, “greater wage garnishment is associated with a lower likelihood of credit card delinquency, but does not affect bankruptcy.” (Page 9)

• For its analysis, the authors pulled data from 2012, which contains archives for a sample of records going back to 2001. (Page 10)

• The NCLC’s Model Family Financial Protection Act proposes to quadruple current federal exemptions and is larger than any current state protections (except in states which do not allow garnishment). (Page 40)

• “Decreases in the amount garnishable also appear to decrease access to credit, suggesting an important public policy trade-off,” (Page 40)

The Paper does not address:

• Civil litigation and civil procedure outside of the collections context
• State laws, regulations, and procedure that impact collections
• The effect of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 
• Suit service rates

Finally, the list of resources included in the Paper includes several studies commissioned by consumer groups. No creditor, banking, credit bureau, debt buyer, or debt collection industry resources were cited. 

Questions submitted to the CFPB

On May 8, 2023 (6 days before publishing this article), I sent the CFPB a list of questions regarding the Paper and Blog Post, which included the following: 

• Who is the target audience for the working paper upon which the blog post is based? 

• Whether they consulted with debt collectors, creditors, or other accounts receivable management people or organizations for input, reports, studies, data, or sources? 

• Did the authors consider any factors which lead to lawsuits, such as why accounts are not settled somewhere between charge off and lawsuit?

• Regarding the age of the data: how are 2012 suit rates and 2017 credit reporting data relevant to 2023? What is the trajectory, and how do the authors know?

• Was there an attempt to obtain more recent data? 

• What is the factual basis for the sentences regarding consumers’ knowledge of the lawsuits against them and their experience with the civil court system?

• Were the effects of the 2020 pandemic studied, such as significant pauses to litigation? If so, why are these effects not mentioned in the report?

• How can the authors be sure their study is complete when a significant number of state courts are not online, and those that are online do not have a uniform reporting system?

• When discussing race, did the authors consider any other factors besides population? For example, litigation challenges like high court costs in certain jurisdictions?

• How does the NYC 2006-2008 study apply to the current trends? What was the racial makeup of NYC at that time? 

• Why does the statement which lists the adverse financial effects of garnishment omit the cost to the creditors?

• Did the authors consider that judgments are a basic part of legal civil procedure?

• What is the intended goal of publishing this Paper?

The CFPB did not provide a comment or response to these questions by the time this article was published. 

insideARM Perspective

Creditors and everyone in the ARM industry should be concerned by the Paper and Blog Post. Though the Paper’s goal was not explicitly stated, there is a clue. On Page 40, it references NCLC’s “Model Family Financial Protection Act” and points out that NCLC’s proposal more than quadruples current exemptions and is more than most states’ current garnishment protection. The authors explain the positive effect adopting this policy would have on consumers earning certain amounts. 

Though decreasing the stress on consumers is a worthy endeavor, the Paper and Blog Post are deeply flawed.

The collections world moves fast. The old (perhaps ancient?) data speaks for itself. The authors did not attempt to reconcile 2017, 2012, 2008, and in some cases 2003 data, to 2023. All of these dates precede Reg F and the pandemic which each had, and continue to have, a significant impact on the collection industry as a whole, including lawsuits and judgments. Though the authors did say in passing that their data set is limited, they did not discuss the effects of Reg F or the pandemic, or explain why either is irrelevant to their data and resulting conclusions.  

Further, several base facts concerning consumers and their involvement in legal proceedings are incorrect and cited in the Paper as “fact” without a data source. For example, the Paper states that consumers “frequently do not show up in court at all, possibly because they were never informed about the suit” and that  “Most people’s experience with the civil court system is courts enforcing a judgment against them.”

This simply isn’t true. This data is available and easily accessible with minimum effort.

To highlight the inaccuracy of these statements and the ease of gathering this information, I contacted a leading national process-serving company for some statistics about personal service (where a litigant is served directly with the lawsuit). Within two business days of my request, the process serving company confirmed that out of approximately half a million serves, 60% were personally served to the defendant (consumer).  The remainder were served via acceptable substitute service methods. 

Thus, contrary to the authors’ assertions, and without even delving into methods of substitute service, nearly two-thirds of consumers served with lawsuits filed against them are served by someone directly placing the lawsuit in their hands. In other words, consumers know about the lawsuits filed against them. What they choose to do with it after service is a different question. Had the CFPB chosen to connect with creditors and the debt collection industry before publishing the Paper, the authors could have verified their claims and removed these factually inaccurate statements.

Finally, although the authors considered access to credit, stating “decreases in the amount garnishable also appear to decrease access to credit, suggesting an important public policy trade-off,” (see page 40), they did not consider other unintended potential economic consequences that would result from a wide-spread change to garnishment laws. 

Collection agencies are a critical part of the financial ecosystem. They fill the gap between charge-offs and lawsuits. Though no one likes discussing past due debts, compliant collection agencies work with consumers to find ways to pay less than they owe, split their payments over time, or come up with other repayment options which original creditors don’t offer. 

If the CFPB is genuinely interested in stopping judgments, they should meet with creditors and the debt collection industry to learn why it’s so challenging to connect with consumers to discuss the resolution of their debt at the collection agency phase. They should look at the consequences and realities of collecting within the confines of a law as outdated as the FDCPA and the myriad other factors (like carriers blocking valid text messages) that are strangling lawful and compliant collection agencies and preventing them from resolving debt before lawsuits are filed. 

Everyone with a stake in the ARM industry should consider contacting their Federal Representatives (particularly if those congresspeople sit on the House Financial Services Committee) to express their concern with the CFPB’s deeply flawed “new” facts. Debt collection is an integral part of the financial ecosystem. Wide-spread changes based on incomplete and one-sided data will have dire unintended consequences. 

A Florida appellate court recently published a massively important opinion regarding text messages and standing.  

In Pet Supermarket v. Eldridge, No. 3D21-1174, (May 10. 2023), Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal confirmed that 

1. Florida state courts have the same Article III “concrete harm” limitations that federal courts have; 
   
2. Receipt of a text message in violation of a bare procedural right established by the TCPA does not create “concrete harm”; and 
3. Plaintiff failed to show any significant harm arose from receipt of a single text that it is “so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency,” and therefore failed to show concrete harm from the text at issue.

You can read the ruling here: Eldridge

This is an incredibly important ruling on a couple of fronts.

First, and most basically, having a state appellate court confirm that concrete harm limits exists in state court is really important. Many states treat their courthouses as tribunals of “general” jurisdiction meaning they will hear any dispute regardless of whether any real harm resulted. Not in Florida. Only a violation of the law that has actually caused some meaningful harm is going to be heard–otherwise the case will be dismissed!

[article_ad]

Second, the finding that a violation of the TCPA does not trigger standing because the mere violation of a procedural protection cannot create “concrete harm” is a sneaky important ruling. I have said since the day after Spokeo was decided way back in 2016 that TCPA class actions were dead since a mere violation of the statute–without more–would never cause sufficient harm to afford standing. And while some unwanted texts might cause harm–such as where they cause someone to fall off a ladder– the regular old text message would not and certifying a class of ladder injuries would be impossible in these cases. Well the Edlridge court concurs–which is fabulous because so many district courts have gotten this issue deass wrong.

Third, the Eldridge court sets an incredibly high standard for substantive harm here. Nuisance or annoyance is not enough. Rather the Plaintiff needs to show some truly obnoxious conduct to have standing to sue. This last piece is a bit odd because standing is not the same as showing elements of a common law claim. So the idea that TCPA cases are not enforceable unless some common law claim could also be stated seems a bit… off. Still that appears to be the heart and soul of the Eldridge court’s holding:

We find that Eldridge’s receipt of one text message while at home, during the weekend, simply does not rise to the level of outrageousness required for an invasion of privacy, i.e., that it is “so outrageous in character, and so extreme in degree, as to go beyond all possible bounds of decency,” and therefore, Eldridge’s alleged statutory injury is not akin to Florida’s common law harm of intrusion upon seclusion.

Hmmm.

Again, not sure that’s the correct analysis– but it is super cool and very helpful for TCPA defendants in the state.

Bottom line: in Florida state court a mere violation of the TCPA is not enough to cause harm– and this may mean that the jurisdictional requirements in state court are actually now much HIGHER than in federal court. Wow!

The take away here is that good news just keeps pouring in for callers and texters in Florida. Not only has the FTSA been massively amended, the courthouse doors were just shut to most types of call and text cases. Remarkable change in just a few days!

We’ll keep an eye on all of this.

WEST SENECA, N.Y. — Landmark Strategy Group, a nationally licensed and bonded receivables management firm, showcases its dedication to community involvement with a generous donation to FeedMore WNY, a nonprofit organization focused on ending hunger in the Western New York region. 

Landmark Strategy Group community outreach is led by Western New York native, Mark Lesinski, Co-Founder and Director of Business Development at Landmark, who believes that no act of kindness is ever too small. This donation to FeedMore WNY reflects the company’s commitment to supporting local charitable organizations that address critical needs such as food and shelter for residents in need. 

“I firmly believe our success as a company is not only measured by our business achievements but also by the positive impact we create in our community,” said Mark Lesinski. “It is our responsibility and privilege to support organizations like FeedMore WNY and help provide for the essential needs of our neighbors. Our donation is a reflection of our commitment to helping those in need in Western New York.” 

FeedMore WNY is the result of a healthy merger between two well-respected organizations in the area – the Food Bank of WNY and Meals on Wheels for Western New York. Through their combined efforts, FeedMore WNY now serves as a one-stop resource for nutritious food, friendship, and skills training for residents in need throughout Cattaraugus, Chautauqua, Erie, and Niagara counties. 

With a culture of giving ingrained in its DNA, Landmark Strategy Group actively seeks opportunities to make a positive impact in the community. The company recognizes that helping those in need is not only the right thing to do but also essential for empowering vulnerable and at-risk populations to create a more stable and connected community environment. 

In 2020, FeedMore’s WNY’s Meals on Wheels program provided approximately 1.4 million meals to homebound neighbors and congregate dining sites. Meanwhile, its food bank program distributed more than 17 million pounds of fresh and shelf-stable foods to nearly 300 pantries, soup kitchens, emergency shelters, and other hunger-relief agencies. Landmark Strategy Group’s donation will support these essential services and further FeedMore WNY’s impact on the community. 

About FeedMore WNY

FeedMore WNY is an independent, nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization and a member of the national organizations Feeding America, Meals on Wheels America, and the National Association of Nutrition and Aging Services Providers. The organization has earned the maximum 4-star rating from Charity Navigator, America’s largest charity evaluator. 

Learn More

For more information about Landmark Strategy Group, visit their website at thelandmarkcorp.com. To learn more about FeedMore WNY and how you can support its mission, please visit feedmorewny.org. 

About Landmark Strategy Group

Landmark Strategy Group, LLC., is a nationally licensed and bonded receivables management firm located in West Seneca, NY, specializing in credit union collections, passively purchasing non-performing credit cards, auto deficiency, mortgage loans, revolving or installment loans, and Chapter 13 bankruptcy receivables portfolios. The company is committed to providing quick valuation, streamlined purchases, and exceptional customer service after the sale. 

On April 11, 2023, Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion announced that they removed unpaid medical collections under $500 from consumer credit reports. The three companies, in July 2022, previously removed paid medical collections from credit reports, and extended the delay in medical collection reporting from sixth months after the first delinquency to one year after the first delinquency. In its Data Point released on April 26, 2023, the CFPB reviewed the impact of the removal of medical collection tradelines based on a sampling of credit reports from 2012-2020 and found that removing medical collection tradelines can significantly improve credit scores and credit availability.

In its report, the CFPB focuses on the consumer impact of medical collections because unlike other forms of credit, medical debt is often not incurred voluntarily or with a full understanding of repayment terms. Key findings from the Data Point include:

[article_ad]

1. Consumers appeared to review reports and seek removal of medical collection tradelines to obtain mortgages, based on data showing increases in first-lien mortgage inquiries in the last quarter in which a medical collection tradeline is reported and increases in the first quarter after a medical collection tradeline is removed.

2. An estimated 22.8 million consumer will have at least one medical collection tradeline removed from their credit reports (73% of the population who had medical collections on their credit report in December 2022).

3. Consumers could experience a 21 to 32 point increase in their credit scores in the first quarter after their last medical collection tradeline is removed from their credit report, enabling access to credit at lower interest rates and a benefit in any rental screenings and employment background checks.

4. Data showed that consumers’ total amount of available revolving credit increased on average by $1,028 and their total amount of available installment credit increased on average by $4,123 six quarters after the last medical collection tradeline was removed from their credit report.

The CFPB has been focused on medical debt reporting under Director Rohit Chopra. In 2022, the CFPB issued three reports on medical debt along with CFPB comments strongly suggesting that the agency was headed in the direction of taking steps to block or limit the reporting of medical debt. In February 2023, the CFPB published its report titled “Market Snapshot: An Update on Third-Party Debt Collections Tradelines Reporting,” analyzing trends in credit reporting of debt in collections and its blog post named “Debt collectors re-evaluate medical debt furnishing in light of data integrity issues,” highlighting factors that create challenges for medical collections reporting. The February report foreshadowed the change to remove small dollar and paid medical collection tradelines.

We will monitor for further developments to see whether the removal of paid medical collections and unpaid medical collections under $500 from consumer credit reports satisfies the CFPB’s desire to mitigate consumer harm from medical debt information or whether it will impose additional requirements on furnishers and consumer reporting agencies.

TAMPA, Fla. — OneTouch Direct, a global business process outsourcing company, today announced the appointment of Toby Parrish as the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of OTD Americas, its newest company subsidiary. In this role, Toby is responsible for leading all aspects of the company’s operations management, client support, and development to deliver best-in-class performance for high-value brands.

Based on more than 25 years of industry experience, Toby is a seasoned BPO executive with a successful history building and preparing customer engagement contact center companies for high growth in new verticals. He brings a wealth of knowledge and excellent strategic and leadership skills to this role with a proven track record developing diverse, high performance teams across operations, technology, finance, human resources, data analytics and client service supporting some of the most recognized brands in the world. Toby’s years of experience include specialization in operations and strategic growth initiatives with established expertise leveraging operational scale across a global footprint, from North America, Central America, South America, Philippines, China, and the US. 

Chris Reed, OneTouch Direct’s Executive Vice President, said, “Toby is highly qualified to lead OTD Americas. We are confident his industry expertise and business acumen will be key to driving our growth and expansion.” 

“I am honored and humbled to have been selected to lead OTD Americas,” said Toby Parrish. “I have been impressed by the Company’s operational excellence, outstanding culture, and the quality of our people. I’m excited by the tremendous opportunity to leverage the size and scale of OTD Americas to capture growth opportunities and deliver value to our client partners.”

About OTD Americas

OTD Americas, the nearshore subsidiary arm for OneTouch Direct, provides full service contact solutions from state of the art centers in Colombia, Mexico, Asia, and Eastern Europe with the ability to build to suit upon client demand. As a contact center outsourcing company, OTD Americas offers integrated omni-channel customer engagement for customer service, collections, back office support, and custom technology solutions designed to drive exceptional customer interactions and enhance our clients’ brands. Partnering with leading global brands representing clients in Banking and Financial Services, Consumer Auto, FinTech, Healthcare, Insurance, Media, Retail and e-commerce, Technology, Telecom, and Utilities industries, OTD Americas is focused on facilitating our clients’ strategic growth with Class A workplace, leveraging exceptional employee attrition rates, and ensuring brand protection in a competitive unique cost benefit structure. Our global delivery model offers flexible onshore, nearshore, offshore, and WAHA service options spanning the US, Mexico, Colombia, Asia, and Eastern Europe. 

About OneTouch Direct

OneTouch Direct, parent company for OTD Americas, is a US based business process outsourcing company delivering best-in-class customer experiences (CX) for some of the world’s largest and most loved brands. Rooted in our passion and deep expertise, OneTouch Direct creates unified brand experiences that break the rules and foster meaningful relationships. For over 20 years, our people-centric, data driven outsourcing solutions have powered better revenues and profitability across the full customer life cycle. For more information visit https://www.onetouchdirect.com/.

On April 27, the Washington State governor signed HB 1155 to enact the My Health My Data Act—a comprehensive health privacy law that provides broad restrictions on the use of consumer health data. The Act is intended to cover health data not covered by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.

The Act defines a regulated entity as any legal entity that conducts business in the state of Washington or engages with Washington residents that (alone or jointly with others) “determines the purpose and means of collecting, processing, sharing, or selling of consumer health data.” Government agencies, tribal nations, and contracted service providers that process such data on behalf of a government agency are exempt. 

The Act increases privacy protections and outlines several requirements, such as 

1. Entities must maintain a consumer health data privacy policy that clearly and conspicuously discloses the categories of health data collected and specifies how the data will be used, collected, and shared (including with third parties and affiliates); 

2. Entities must obtain consent from consumers prior to collecting, sharing, and selling their health data;

3. entities are restricted from geofencing particular locations to collect and sell data; and 

4. entities are required to develop specific privacy disclosures. Consumers are also empowered with the right to have their health data deleted. The Act outlines numerous compliance elements relating to access restrictions, replying to consumers, and processor requirements. The Act also specifies the types of information and documents for which the Act is not applicable. In addition, the Act provides a private right of action to consumers and grants the state attorney general enforcement authority as well.

The Act is effective July 23. Regulated entities must comply by March 31, 2024, except for certain provisions applicable to small businesses that have until June 30, 2024 to comply.

LOCKPORT, N.Y. — When veterans and brothers Joseph Torriere and Jacob Torriere retired from the U.S. Armed Forces and entered the receivables management industry full-time, they knew they wanted to continue serving by helping other veterans in their families and communities. After researching multiple private nonprofit veteran organizations to get involved in, they were pleased to find several quality choices. Thus began monthly donations from Spire Recovery Solutions to a rotating assortment of organizations dedicated to supporting military and veteran families in many of the common challenges these families face during and after active military duty. 

Semper Fi & America’s Fund

The first monthly donation of the year went to the Semper Fi & America’s Fund. “The fund cares for our nation’s critically wounded, ill, and injured service members, veterans, and military families. Supporting all branches of the U.S. Armed Forces, the Fund provides one-on-one case management, connection, and lifetime support.” 

Donations are applied to programs that ensure service members and military families have the resources they need during their recovery and throughout their transition back to their communities. Some of what they do include a Service Member & Family Support Program, a Transition Program, and an Integrative Wellness Program. Visit thefund.org to learn more about the program and read real stories about the heroes they serve. 

Farmers Assisting Returning Military (FARM)

The second monthly donation went to a unique organization, F.A.R.M., which aims to “reestablish meaning in the lives of veterans through agricultural therapeutic rehabilitation and training. The program allows veterans reintegrating into society to once again become teachers, providers, nurturers and leaders while empowering them to lead the change in America’s distressed food system.” The program offers what they consider three core aspects veterans often miss about military life— purpose, regimen and camaraderie— to returning veterans as they integrate back into civilian life. 

Founders James Jeffers and Steve Smith served in the Army together during various deployments to Iraq and beyond from 1999-2009 but struggled with health issues upon returning home. Their health began to improve as they grew fresh organic food for themselves and their families, discovering “dirt therapy” and the act of farming to be therapeutic and grounding. Learn more at farmingveterans.org. 

Rescue 22 Foundation

In March, Spire contributed to the Veteran Service Dog Trust campaign at the Rescue 22 Foundation. “It is estimated that over 30% of returning GWOT veterans have Post Traumatic Stress and/or Traumatic Brain Injuries. Nearly 1,600 veterans have returned as amputees and there are still more additional medical complexities such as seizure disorders, heart euthymia, and early onset of Parkinson’s.” The VA does not provide funding for service dogs for PTS, TBI  or other non-mobility diagnoses at this time. 

“The Veteran Service Dog Trust [VSDT] fulfills the foundation’s primary mission to provide the highest quality task-trained dogs on behalf of our nation’s veterans. The foundation provides psychiatric, mobility and medical service dogs to veterans at no charge and without geographic restrictions. Service dogs that meet the needs of veterans diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress remain the organization’s most requested type of dog.” Learn more at rescue22foundation.org. 

Find Out More

Through donations and spreading the word about these organizations and their missions, the Spire team is proud to be able to continue honoring and serving U.S. military veterans throughout the nation. For those interested in joining their efforts, this article as well as others on the Spire news blog provide information about a variety of options with different specialties that the team has selected to support over the years. 

About Spire Recovery Solutions 

Spire Recovery Solutions, LLC was founded by U.S. Veterans Joseph Torriere and Jacob Torriere. Spire is a professional, nationally licensed full-service debt collection agency that assists creditors in the recovery of outstanding balances while providing consumers with exceptional customer service. Spire Recovery Solutions uses customized processes and state-of-the-art technology to provide transparency and compliance that clients and consumers trust and rely on while working together toward account resolution.

Citing research that found about half of U.S. adults find it difficult to afford the cost of their healthcare, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) published a report focusing on medical credit cards and loans used to cover basic medical treatment and emergency health care. According to the CFPB, the use of medical credit cards and installment loans can increase the financial burden on patients who may pay more than they otherwise would pay.

The CFPB acknowledged in its report that both insured and uninsured Americans face significant challenges paying for necessary medical procedures. One reason is that many medical services and devices, such as fertility treatments, auditory devices, and dental services, may not be covered by insurance. Another reason is that average deductibles have grown 336% in the last two decades. For these reasons, many people will use financial alternatives, including medical credit cards and installment loans, to cover healthcare costs.

Specifically, the CFPB found that:

* Medical credit cards and installment loans were once used primarily for elective care but now cover everything from emergency visits and specialty care to regular checkups.

• When a patient signs up for a medical credit card, their card can be used again for medical services until they reach their credit limit.

• Medical installment loans, on the other hand, are generally offered before a treatment and are only authorized to cover that treatment.

* Medical financing companies rely on healthcare providers to market their products.

• According to the CFPB, healthcare providers may be disincentivized to explain mandated financial assistance programs or zero-interest repayment options to patients before offering these products.

• The Bureau also stated that healthcare providers may be unable to adequately explain complex terms, such as deferred interest plans, to patients.

* Certain medical payment products offer deferred interest promotions. These products offer zero or low interest for a set period of time. Once the promotional period expires, the rates can increase significantly.

• Notably, the report acknowledged that for the majority of patients who pay off their full balance in the designated time period, deferred interest financing can be advantageous.

[article_ad]

The CFPB concludes its report by stating, “[w]e will continue to look at how medical credit cards and loans are marketed to providers, the reach of these products, and how the use of these products, particularly for patients with limited access to credit, impacts patients’ finances and health outcomes.”

This is an area where we have not seen much activity from the CFPB in quite some time. The fact that the issue of medical procedure financing is coming up again may indicate that the Bureau’s interest in this area has returned. Troutman Pepper will continue to monitor the CFPB’s activity in this area and report if the Bureau’s findings prompt more enforcement actions.