More

Elizabeth Warren: Pricing Needs To Be Clearer

CANDICE CHOI   01/31/11 03:28 PM ET   AP

Consumer Protection
Head of Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Elizabeth Warren

WASHINGTON — No tricks. Less fine print. Clearer agreements.

That's how banks should market products to consumers, says Elizabeth Warren, the Harvard law professor in charge of setting up a new federal agency that will police credit cards, mortgages and other financial services.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau was created as part of the sweeping overhaul of financial regulations last year known as the Dodd-Frank Act. Proponents said such an agency could have sounded an early warning for the abusive lending practices that precipitated the economic meltdown.

It's not clear when a permanent head will be named to lead the new agency. Warren, a vocal consumer advocate who first championed the creation of the agency, is a possibility but is regarded as a contentious choice. President Obama did not need Senate confirmation when he named her in September as a special adviser to help oversee the creation of the agency.

The CFPB won't be able to exercise its rule-making powers until July 21. In the meantime, Warren has been making key appointments and meeting with banking executives and consumer groups to get the agency up and running.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Warren said one of the first goals will be to make the true cost of financial products easier to understand. She said that should eventually drive down prices for consumers.

Here is an excerpt:

___

Q: You've said improving the disclosure of credit card terms is going to be a top priority. How is the CFPB going to change what's provided to consumers?

A: Think about how long a credit card agreement has become – it's become pages and pages and pages of largely incomprehensible fine print. In effect, it's paperwork that says "Don't read me," and that's a real problem. Because hiding in that fine print can be anything.

So one of the things we want to push toward is trying to clear out that kind of shrubbery. So that if there are real changes that a company is proposing, they stand out. They're not camouflaged by all those other words.

Q: And what's the timetable for when consumers can expect to see such changes?

A: Well, it's interesting. I think people are starting to see somewhat clearer disclosures. For example, there are a couple of major credit card issuers who – following our early conversations last fall – went back and voluntarily rewrote their own credit agreements and began to shrink them down. There have been others who've advertised their credit products along the lines of "No Tricks," "Less Fine Print," "Clearer Agreements."

This agency, even before it has its full legal authority, has driven a conversation and driven a direction for the industry. And it's toward a better informed customer who can make apples-to-apples comparisons among products.

Q: In terms of the required disclosures – do you see new forms replacing the Schumer box, which is already intended to clearly lay out the APR, fees and other terms for a credit card?

A: We're having conversations with credit card issuers right now and talking through what the Schumer box does and how it might be improved.

You know, even the Schumer box has gone from smaller and skinnier to longer and more complicated. So I will readily admit it's an uphill walk to try to get there. But I think we're developing a path in working with the companies.

In terms of a timetable, I just have to remind you. We won't have legal authority to do anything by way of rule-making authority until after July 21.

But we've started now with the industry and with consumer groups and with other stakeholders, investors – talking with them, showing them what we have in mind, asking for their input, asking for their data, asking for information.

Q: More banks began to cut back on free checking last year in response to new regulations. Do you think further regulation by the CFPB will drive up the price of banking?

A: If the consumer knows the price of a good, the risk associated with it, and can make apples-to-apples comparisons, that's what makes markets work for consumers. They can figure out who's offering the most expensive product and who's offering the cheapest product. And I'm of the belief that over time, that's going to make financial products cheaper for consumers, not more expensive.

Q: Online banking is top-of-mind right now. With so many new mobile and online banking options, is the CFPB dedicating a team to ensure these options are safe?

A: We've organized the new consumer agency to be market facing. That means that we have divisions dealing with (1) revolving debt and credit cards, (2) mortgages and installment loans, like student loans (3) with payments and deposits and (4) credit reporting and (5) debt collection.

We want to be a very data driven agency around those five markets. Technology and innovation is hitting all of them. And so a big part of what we're doing is hiring people who are technology savvy and actually deeply interested in it.

Q: Another area the CFPB will be reviewing is services for people who don't have a bank account. How do you regulate services like payday loans and still ensure people have access to small loans?

A: Well you know, access to small dollar loans is critical to many families. The notion that we somehow try to eliminate that, it's just not going to happen.

It can force people into unregulated markets, including "Jimmy the Leg Breaker," which is not where we want people to be.

So it is important from a regulatory standpoint that people are not at the mercy of lenders who build business models around fooling people. They're drawn in the front door thinking they're going to pay one price and then beat about the head and ears, financially speaking, so that they're paying much, much more.

On the other hand, there's a real problem. And that is how to get good, small dollar lending started in areas where there's great need.

Sometimes that's going to be by community banks. Sometimes it's going to be by non-bank lenders and sometimes it's going to be innovations and new technology that's going to open up markets for the currently underserved population.

I anticipate a lot of change in this area.

Q: Is the idea to bring the unbanked population into the traditional banking world? Or is there a valid place for services like check cashing?

A: I think the traditional banking world concept is going to change over the next 10 years. I think technology changes it and I think the needs of an unmet population (change it).

I'm going to take a little bit of a side step from the question. The basic paradigm in which we've thought about this is actually starting to break apart.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST BUSINESS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Money newsletter!
WASHINGTON — No tricks. Less fine print. Clearer agreements. That's how banks should market products to consumers, says Elizabeth Warren, the Harvard law professor in charge of setting up a new...
WASHINGTON — No tricks. Less fine print. Clearer agreements. That's how banks should market products to consumers, says Elizabeth Warren, the Harvard law professor in charge of setting up a new...
Filed by Nicole Hardesty  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 52
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
12:57 PM on 02/02/2011
This is not going to be a popular comment, but payday loans are some of the most straightforward transactions out there, unlike mortgages and credit cards, which are immensely complex. I took out a loan, and it was clear that a $100 loan costs $15 every 30 days the loan goes unpaid. I don't know how the CFPB will make that any clearer, maybe they just intend to decide for us.
02:58 PM on 02/01/2011
Here's what to expect. More bureaucracy, more federal employees, more costs, higher taxes, more regulations, little benefit.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:38 AM on 02/01/2011
She's been "Volkered."
Sad.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ChasG
Unborn, unchanging, undying Universe
01:35 PM on 02/01/2011
Wow.  There are more assumptions in your comment than there are words.
11:37 AM on 02/01/2011
What To Expect From The New Consumer Agency?

Not much.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ChasG
Unborn, unchanging, undying Universe
01:36 PM on 02/01/2011
So, making contracts easier to understand, and making personal responsibility easier to manage, aren't good enough?  What were you expecting?
blogisti
Approved Knowledge Only
08:48 AM on 02/01/2011
Reality Check: The Government is captured by the Power Elite. The Consumer Protection Agency was placed inside the Fed, which is wholly owned, operated, controlled and in the service of, the large Wall Street financial institutions. Therefore, it is at least highly likely that the new agency will be as effective as the old financial regulatory agencies(i.e., SEC, FDIC) which are, as all evidence indicates totally ineffective. When they do act, they are ineffective. Why? They too are thoroughly owned by the elite who know very well how to take care of themselves and not leave anything to chance. They will co-opt the new Consumer Protection Agency in the same manner. It will function only as a hollow shell of an agency. Once in a while offering some obvious fix to a widely perceived problem, only to discover later that the same problem still exists in another form.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ChasG
Unborn, unchanging, undying Universe
01:39 PM on 02/01/2011
So, now that you've drawn your conclusions about Elizabeth Warren, will you start looking for "facts" that support it?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Longtimeliberal
06:50 AM on 02/01/2011
Elizabeth Warren is great.
06:45 AM on 02/01/2011
Hello -- I think re arranging deck chairs on the titanic is a good start ...

However ..

Ms Warren .. the sea is so big and your boat is so small ..

The sea of corruption within the FIRE sector ...

That isn't an inditement on you or your good intentions ..

I believe you are noble and wise ..

Unfortunately these measures are not going to stem the hemorrhaging still taking place due too systemic corruption within the "financial community" --

Not to mention continued

Flat wage -- chronic high unemployment -- continued marginalization of poor and working poor, "middle class" etc who frankly have largely decimated / destroyed their heretofore credit worthiness for many moons to come -- grotesque social and economic injustice, inequality --- continuing foreclosures, deflating housing "assets", bankruptcies, loads of student debt ..

70% of the working US population is one "paycheck" away from the street .. highest number since that number tracked and reported ..

Energy and food inflation eating away those few meager dollars ..

The entire globe is in crisis -- largely due to the wild speculations, exotic financial "innovations" of the parasitic class .. that attempts to convince same that the Titanic hasn't already sunk.

Other than that ... as always I commend your efforts ...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ChasG
Unborn, unchanging, undying Universe
01:53 AM on 02/03/2011
By systemic corruption do you mean irs in every company?  Every branch office manager?  Every employee from middle management on up?  Or are you talking about something else?
MyrtleJune
STOP negotiating! End the American hostage crisis!
02:08 AM on 02/01/2011
Here's the latest BIG screw: I refinanced my home through the Obama program. The value on my home was assessed by FreddieMac at 195. The refi was for 10 less than that. Pretty good deal and helped out alot. HOWEVER, there was NO appraisal and the loan was based on Freddie Mac's number. This was 3 months ago. THREE.

This week I noticed a place in my complex had sold for 48,000 less than what FreddieMac valued MY place at. SAME size as mine. same thing. FOURTY EIGHT THOUSAND DOLLARS less than what Freddie Mac evaluated MY place at and on which my refi was based.

I call the listing agent and inquired as to why the huge price difference and had to go round and round with him trying to determine what was wrong with that house to warrent such a low price. Finally, he said the bank was the owner. It was a foreclosure house! NOWHERE in the listing did that little bit of information appear! Not one clue it was bank-owned! The agent said the bank asked him NOT to disclose that! SHADY SHADY SHADY.

Now, you expect foreclosures to be lower and "as is" and a big hassle and maybe they don't count as heavily in comps or something. BUT to undercut the value of my home and NOT disclose that in the listings I think is SHADY at best. The bank/owner just drove down MY home's value! bastids.
nothingchanges
too soon old, too late smart
01:38 AM on 02/01/2011
I saw a comment about credit card companies interest rates being usurious.

Makes me want to ask the question, what exactly is usurious, and why does it vary from state to state and industry to industry?

A local business in my town makes "pay day" loans. The interest rates are over 1100% (that's not a typo, one thousand one hundred percent), yet it's perfectly legal, posted right on the documents.

I guess the real definition of usurious depends on whose paying, and whose receiving.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Kevin Atlanta
Active Citizen 54
11:39 PM on 01/31/2011
I thought the Rham Emmanuel tossing them to the lions kind of political "Initiation" to the wonder-world of Inside the Beltway elitist suburbs of fawning court, rather than substance and clear direction.  I would love to see President Obama mount a round-table Town Halls with Elizabeth and Imelt and let them inform the huddled masses of just what the Banksters did to feed the Wall Street Greed that drove the Heist of History.
Keep pushing Elizabeth and just get the facts out there.
Midwestern sensibility at its best.
We're out here working and defending you Elizabeth.
Keep pushing back.
You are on our side.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
themodernleader
11:19 PM on 01/31/2011
   This is the first government that is truly administered by an intellectual.  When the intellectual rules, words become everything.  Words are more important than action.  Words are subsittuted for change. Changeless  and stagnation  become the expectation and actual.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Kevin Atlanta
Active Citizen 54
11:47 PM on 01/31/2011
OOOOOh...  I'm having a Chris Matthews "thrill up my leg" moment from the delightfully Orwellian description.
I would follow you anywhere...
Oh! Wait. Can't do that; its called "stalking" these days.
F&F 449  Eloquent Orwellian is an added bonus.  
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:33 AM on 02/01/2011
yes, that bush era was a great success huh?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ChasG
Unborn, unchanging, undying Universe
02:01 AM on 02/03/2011
Yeah, the Bush era, the good old days... say, how'd that "ownership society" thing work out for Georgie?  I remember how everyone buying homes was just bubbling with excitement!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
themodernleader
11:06 PM on 01/31/2011
    I read that credit cards hlders are being charged usurious interest rates commonly over 30 percent, even over 50 percent.  There is no change in financial exploitation.  There is no fairness.  There is no sense of justice.  There is only the strong taking advantage of the desperation of the weak.  The claim of reform is  chimerical.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ChasG
Unborn, unchanging, undying Universe
01:52 PM on 02/01/2011
Most people I know who use credit cards pay them off every month and pay zero interest and fees.
 
People who are using credit cards and paying those usurious rates need counseling, and should give Suzy Orman a call.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
PhilipTaylor
Legalized Bribery is an Oxymoron - must END
12:56 AM on 02/03/2011
Everyone should be JUST LIKE YOU!  RIGHT?
photo
Jamf
Friends Don't Let Friends Watch Fox News
10:12 PM on 01/31/2011
Good as far as it goes, but where is a resolution of the insolvent zombie bank problem? The economy is not going to be stabilized until such time as these large institutions (B of A, Wells, Citi, Chase, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, etal) are placed into receivership and broken up. Not insolvent, you say? Mark the assets to actual real market value and then see what those balance sheets look like. Break them up and vigorously prosecute for any and all crimes found to have been committed.

Real solutions or window dressing? That's where we're at.
10:44 PM on 01/31/2011
As time goes by...

You are so stuck in 2008. No big banks are going to be splattered to pieces. Dizzy Lizzy failed.
photo
Jamf
Friends Don't Let Friends Watch Fox News
08:22 AM on 02/01/2011
I'm not "stuck in 2008." I keep pounding the drum because sooner or later, someone might do something. We've still got AG's across the country looking at foreclosure fraud. That might be the door in. I'm not letting this go because it's the single biggest item adversely affecting the economy. Teabaggers need to understand it, too.
09:38 PM on 01/31/2011
She speaks the truth.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dadw5boys
Disabled Vietnam Vet
09:23 PM on 01/31/2011
She has her work cut out for her the Predatory Capitalist are not going away anytime soon.

They seem bound and determines to make Americans into Paranoid Blood Thirsty Animals/