United States: Will The Real Marketplace Lender Please Stand Up?

Understanding The Hidden Consumer Regulatory Risk For Hedge Funds
Last Updated: February 1 2016
Article by Michael D. Mann and Margot Laporte

The recent growth of marketplace lending platforms has resulted in non-bank entities, such as hedge funds, engaging in activities that could conceivably be construed as consumer lending transactions. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the "CFPB") was established by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (the "Dodd-Frank Act") as an independent agency within the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the "Federal Reserve") to regulate the offering and provision of consumer financial products and services and to enforce federal consumer financial laws against banks and other covered entities.1 Currently, the CFPB does not have authority over nonbank entities engaging in activities such as marketplace lending that do not constitute the offering or provision of financial products or services directly to consumers. However, as marketplace lending becomes more sophisticated, the line will continue to blur between the regulated consumer lending activities of banks and other covered entities, which include the origination, brokerage and servicing of mortgage, student and payday loans, and the unregulated marketplace lending activities of non-bank entities, which include the provision of liquidity to online lending platforms that originate loans to consumers.

In this memorandum, we outline the potential risks and theories of regulation for non-bank entities engaged in marketplace lending and suggest several areas where proactive policies and procedures implementing best practices in advance of specific regulatory guidance would benefit non-banks engaged, directly or indirectly, in the fast evolving marketplace lending industry.

As marketplace lending migrates towards activities that more closely resemble consumer lending, non-bank entities should anticipate that their activities will draw the scrutiny of the CFPB and other regulators in connection with consumer protection laws, even if those activities do not directly touch consumers. These marketplace lending activities could include financing loans to consumers, purchasing and servicing loans to consumers originated by banks or online lending platforms, taking a controlling position in a chain of payday lenders, or engaging in other structured financial transactions that indirectly touch consumers. While non-bank entities may view their marketplace lending activities as removed from consumers, Congress, as well as federal and state regulators, have signaled a heightened focus on consumer protection, particularly in transactions involving sophisticated financial institutions.

On September 30, 2015, for instance, Lael Brainard, a member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, advised an audience assembled at the Third Annual Community Banking Research and Policy Conference that banks should consider regulatory compliance when purchasing consumer loans originated by online lenders, including whether the online lenders' origination, underwriting, credit and other practices raise any consumer protection risks. Governor Brainard noted that "some have suggested a need for regulators to take a more active role in defining and enforcing standards that apply more broadly to [the online lending] sector."2 While the Federal Reserve, the CFPB and other regulators supervise the banks to which Governor Brainard directed her remarks, non-bank entities engaged in marketplace lending should proactively monitor the increased regulatory focus on the duty of banks that purchase loans originated by online lenders to comply with consumer protection regulations.3

Because the CFPB has not, as of yet, regulated non-bank entities engaged in marketplace lending, there is an absence of market-wide consumer protection-related best practices in this industry. This void leaves the industry open to significant regulatory and reputational risk, both because it increases the likelihood that the CFPB and other regulators will turn their focus to these marketplace lending practices, and because it may leave non-bank entities unprepared to address the regulators' expectations in the event that their practices are subject to scrutiny. Accordingly, we recommend that non-bank entities should, first, implement internal risk-based best practices with respect to consumer protection laws and regulations in connection with their marketplace lending programs; and second, be cognizant of the risk that regulators might regard their involvement in the marketplace lending space—whether as a loan purchaser or as a financing party to, or investor in, marketplace lending platforms—as having crossed the line from disinterested investing to consumer lending.


Recent developments suggest several lenses through which the CFPB and other regulators might one day view non-bank entities engaged in marketplace lending as subject to enforcement jurisdiction. The CFPB and other regulators could, for instance, seek to hold nonbank entities that engage in activities that directly or indirectly affect loans to consumers responsible for violations of consumer protection laws under a theory akin to aiding and abetting. Regulators also could seek to enforce consumer protection laws against non-bank entities that finance or purchase and service consumer loans under the theory that the non-bank entity, and not the originating bank, was the "true lender" in the lending transaction. These theories are discussed in greater detail below, but they are not the only ways in which the CFPB and other regulators may seek to broadly enforce consumer protection laws in the future.

Under an "aiding and abetting" theory of liability, the CFPB may seek to assert enforcement jurisdiction over hedge funds and other non-bank entities that engage in marketplace lending activities by alleging that the nonbank entity aided and abetted a covered entity, such as a loan originator, in violations of consumer protection laws. The CFPB's broad enforcement authority to prevent covered entities and "service providers"4 from committing or engaging in unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or practices ("UDAAPs") under federal law in connection with any transaction offering or providing a consumer financial product or service means that nonbank entities could be held responsible for aiding and abetting a wide range of prohibited conduct under the broad UDAAP standard.5

In particular, the CFPB's February 24, 2014 Consent Order in the Matter of 1st Alliance Lending, LLC6 raises questions about the types of activities that could subject non-bank entities engaged in marketplace lending to scrutiny by the CFPB. In this case, following a self-report by a mortgage lender, the CFPB imposed a civil monetary penalty on the lender for having paid unearned settlement fees to a hedge fund that at one time had financed its mortgage loans, in violation of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act. While the CFPB did not charge the hedge fund in this case, it is possible that the CFPB could, in the future, seek to hold hedge funds and other non-bank entities that finance problematic consumer transactions responsible for aiding and abetting violations of consumer protection laws.

With respect to the "true lender" theory, recent developments in litigation regarding whether non-bank entities or third-party service providers were the "true lenders" in the context of state usury and other consumer protection laws could provide another lens through which the CFPB and other regulators might consider whether entities that engage in marketplace lending could be subject to consumer protection laws. In CashCall, Inc. v. Morrisey7, for instance, the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia affirmed a circuit court decision finding that CashCall, Inc., a California-based consumer finance company that purchased, marketed and serviced high-interest loans from First Bank and Trust ("FB&T"), was the "true lender" for purposes of state usury and consumer protection laws. FB&T, a South Dakota-chartered bank supervised and insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, made small, unsecured loans at high interest rates to consumers in various states. Pursuant to marketing agreements with FB&T, CashCall purchased FB&T's loans within three days of the loans' origination dates. FB&T retained the origination fees and all interest accrued prior to CashCall's purchase of the loans.

Focusing on an examination of which entity had the "predominant economic interest" in the transactions, the appeals court affirmed the circuit court's conclusion that CashCall, and not FB&T, was the "true lender" in this case. The appeals court cited the circuit court's findings that: (1) CashCall's agreements with FB&T placed the entire monetary burden and risk of the loan program on CashCall; (2) CashCall paid FB&T more for each loan than the amount financed by FB&T; (3) CashCall's sole owner and stockholder personally guaranteed all of CashCall's financial obligations to FB&T, including the amounts of the loans prior to CashCall's purchase; (4) CashCall agreed to indemnify FB&T against all losses arising out of their agreement, including any claims asserted by borrowers; (5) CashCall was under a contractual obligation to purchase the loans originated and funded by FB&T only if the loans were approved pursuant to CashCall's underwriting guidelines; and (6) CashCall treated the loans as if it had funded them for purposes of financial reporting.

Extrapolating from this analysis, the CFPB and other regulators could seek to hold non-bank entities engaged in marketplace lending responsible for problematic consumer lending transactions under the theory that the non-bank entity was the "true lender" in the transaction. Although not every court that has undertaken a "true lender" analysis in the context of state usury and other consumer protection laws has found the non-bank entity to be the true lender, these cases suggest that, in determining whether a third party that funds or purchases and services a loan was the "true lender," courts have examined the contractual and economic arrangements between the parties, focusing on factors such as: (1) the degree to which the non-bank entity assumes, or shares with the bank, the monetary burden and risk of loss arising from the loan transaction; (2) whether the non-bank entity agrees to indemnify the bank against any loss arising from the loan transaction; (3) the non-bank entity's right to impose underwriting and other credit risk guidelines with respect to the types of loans it will fund or purchase; and (4) the amount of time that elapses before the non-bank entity purchases the loan.8

Consequently, non-bank entities that participate in marketplace lending should consider these factors when negotiating and structuring arrangements with banks and other lending platforms in order to limit the risk that they might be considered the "true lender" should the lending relationship be subject to regulatory scrutiny in the future.


While we cannot predict regulatory trends with certainty, we can predict that, as the marketplace lending activities of non-bank entities migrate closer to consumer lending, these activities increasingly will be subject to scrutiny by the CFPB and other regulators in connection with consumer protection laws. We have identified two potential theories under which the CFPB may seek to enforce consumer protection laws against non-bank entities over which it does not currently have jurisdiction, but these theories are not exhaustive.

As a result, we recommend that hedge funds and other non-bank entities engaged in marketplace lending take several steps today to mitigate the risk from this regulatory uncertainty. First, non-bank entities should develop consumer protection-related best practices akin to those that have been established for banks and other regulated entities engaged in consumer lending. Second, non-bank entities should be cognizant of the line between marketplace lending and consumer lending, in order to be in a better position to assess when their marketplace lending activities could subject them to consumer protection-related risk.

In the absence of established consumer protection-related best practices with respect to marketplace lending, current regulatory guidance addressed to financial institutions provides insight into regulators' expectations for entities that enter into arrangements with third parties, including online lending platforms, for the financing or purchase of loans. In view of recent regulatory guidance9, non-bank entities developing best practices with respect to marketplace lending should consider implementing policies and procedures that include the following:

  • Due diligence prior to entering into relationships with third parties, including with online lending platforms, that includes a review of the third party's business reputation and experience, as well as its policies, procedures and compliance with federal and state laws, rules and regulations, including consumer protection laws and regulations;
  • Due diligence on the terms of any consumer loans purchased through third-party relationships, including online lending platforms, to assess potential regulatory and other risks, including with respect to consumer protection laws and regulations;
  • A risk assessment of the structure of the proposed financial arrangement to understand the degree to which the arrangement directly or indirectly touches consumers and any consumer protection-related risk to which the non-bank entity may be subject as a result;
  • Based upon the results of this risk assessment, procedures to mitigate any consumer protection-related risk, which may include:

    • Structuring the transaction to reduce exposure to consumers, as appropriate, including in consideration of the "true lender" analysis discussed above, or
    • Negotiating the third party contract to include policies, procedures and controls that are designed to address compliance, including with respect to consumer protection laws and regulations. These contractual provisions should include appropriate consequences if the third party violates any compliance-related responsibilities, including by engaging in unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or practices;
  • Ongoing monitoring of the third party, including with respect to its compliance with consumer protection and other laws and regulations; and prompt action to address any issues that may arise, including termination of the relationship, if appropriate;
  • Effective and ongoing monitoring of any consumer loans financed or purchased, potentially including an appropriate investment in evolving technologies that can efficiently and periodically "re-underwrite" consumer loans in real time to detect deficiencies and predict problem loans, while evidencing to regulators that forward looking, risk-based controls were in place at the time the loan was acquired and have been continuously maintained; and
  • Appropriate documentation of the policies and procedures undertaken with respect to each transaction.

Non-bank entities, including hedge funds, that incorporate consumer protection-related best practices into their marketplace lending programs now, and that understand and consider where their marketplace lending activities could one day subject them to scrutiny by the CFPB, will earn dividends in reduced regulatory and reputational risks and costs in the event that the CFPB and other regulators target their marketplace lending practices in the future.


1. Covered entities over which the CFPB has enforcement authority include: (1) any entity, and any service provider to that entity, that engages in offering or providing the following consumer financial products or services: (a) "origination, brokerage, or servicing of loans secured by real estate for use by consumers primarily for personal, family, or household purposes, or loan modification or foreclosure relief services in connection with such loans," (b) private student loans, or (c) consumer payday loans, Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 ("Dodd-Frank Act"), 12 U.S.C. §§ 5481(6), 5514(a)(1), 5514(c); (2) large insured depository institutions, large insured credit unions, and their affiliates and service providers that engage in offering or providing a consumer financial product or service, id. §§ 5481(6), 5515(a), 5515(c), 5515(d); and (3) service providers to a "substantial number" of small insured depository institutions or small credit unions that engage in offering or providing a consumer financial product or service, id. §§ 5481(6), 5516(e).

2. Lael Brainard, Member, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Community Banks, Small Business Credit, and Online Lending, Address at the Third Annual Community Banking Research and Policy Conference (Sept. 30, 2015).

3. Of particular note, on October 29, 2015, Santander Consumer USA announced its intention to sell its entire personal lending portfolio. Press Release, Santander Consumer USA, Santander Consumer USA Holdings Inc. Reports Third Quarter 2015 Results (Oct. 29, 2015). It has been reported that Santander Consumer USA had entered into an arrangement with Lending Club in March 2013 to purchase up to 25 percent of the loans it originated, but exited the arrangement after receiving "regulatory pressure" from the Federal Reserve regarding the level of risk. See Ben McLannahan, Lending Club Delivers Earnings Rebuke to Bears, Financial Times, Oct. 29, 2015; Santander Halts Unsecured-Loan Initiative, Asset-Backed Alert (Nov. 6, 2015).

4. The Dodd-Frank Act defines a "service provider" as "any person that provides a material service to a covered person in connection with the offering or provision by such covered person of a consumer financial product or service." Dodd-Frank Act, 12 U.S.C. § 5481(26). Hedge funds and other non-bank entities that purchase and service consumer loans risk being regarded by the CFPB as "service providers" to the covered loan originator, and thus potentially subject to CFPB supervisory and enforcement authority.

5. See id. § 5531(a).

6. Consent Order, In the Matter of 1st Alliance Lending, LLC, CFPB No. 2014-CFPB-0003 (Feb. 24, 2014).

7. CashCall, Inc. v. Morrisey, No. 12-1274, 2013 W. Va. LEXIS 587 (W. Va. May 30, 2014), cert. denied, 2015 U.S. LEXIS 2991 (May 4, 2015).

8. See, e.g., id.; Sawyer v. Bill Me Later Inc., No. 2:11-cv-00988, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 71261 (D. Utah May 23, 2014); Spitzer v. County Bank of Rehoboth Beach, 846 N.Y.S.2d 436 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007).

9. See, e.g., Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp., Advisory on Effective Risk Management Practices for Purchased Loans and Purchased Loan Participations, FIL-49-2015 (Nov. 6, 2015); Off. of the Comptroller of the Currency, U.S. Dep't of the Treasury, Risk Management Guidance, Third-Party Relationships , OCC Bulletin 2013-29 (Oct. 30, 2013); Consumer Fin. Protection Bureau, Service Providers, CFPB Bulletin 2012-03 (Apr. 13, 2012); Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp., Guidance for Managing Third-Party Risk, FIL-44-2008 (June 6, 2008).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions