2. Articulating Acts or Practices that Violate the
Abusiveness Standard
The CFPB will generally avoid challenging conduct as
abusive if it relies on all or nearly all of the same facts
the CFPB alleges are unfair or deceptive. The CFPB
intends to plead alleged abusiveness violation claims
in a manner designed to clearly demonstrate the
nexus between the cited facts and legal analysis of
the claim. In its supervision activity, the CFPB similarly
intends to provide more clarity as to the specific
factual basis for determining a covered person has
violated the abusiveness standard.
3. Limits on Monetary Relief in Abusiveness
Enforcement Actions
The CFPB generally does not intend to seek certain
types of monetary relief for abusiveness violations
where the covered person was making a good-faith
effort to comply with the abusiveness standard.
If a covered person makes a good-faith, but
unsuccessful, effort to comply with the abusiveness
standard, the CFPB still intends to seek legal or
equitable remedies, such as damages and restitution,
to redress identifiable consumer injury caused by the
abusive acts or practices that would not otherwise be
redressed. They do not intend to seek civil penalties
related to unusual circumstances if a covered
person made good-faith efforts to comply with the
abusiveness standard.
In determining whether a covered person made a
good-faith effort to comply with the abusiveness
standard, the CFPB intends to consider all
relevant factors, including but not limited to, the
considerations outlined in CFPB Bulletin 2013-06
regarding Responsible Business Conduct.
The Policy Statement also reminds covered persons
believing regulatory uncertainty is hindering the
development of new products or services that the CFPB’s
Office of Innovation was installed to encourage consumer-
beneficial innovation. More information about the Office
of Innovation and how your institution can apply for a safe
harbor testing period of a new financial product or service
can be found at www.consumerfinance.gov. lll
3