Previous: WALZ Compliance Solutions to Host Webinar on Wednesday, September 30 Next: Delinquency Rate Experiences Largest Year-Over-Year Decline in Four Years Governmental Measures Target Expanded Access to Affordable Housing 2 days ago Data Provider Black Knight to Acquire Top of Mind 2 days ago Servicers Navigate the Post-Pandemic World 2 days ago Tagged with: CFPB Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Department of Justice Discrimination in Lending Fines and Penalties Hudson City Savings Bank Redlining in Daily Dose, Featured, Government, News The Week Ahead: Nearing the Forbearance Exit 2 days ago About Author: Xhevrije West The Best Markets For Residential Property Investors 2 days ago Sign up for DS News Daily Print This Post Home / Daily Dose / CFPB and Justice Department Fine Hudson City Bank $27 Million for Redlining Governmental Measures Target Expanded Access to Affordable Housing 2 days ago Xhevrije West is a talented writer and editor based in Dallas, Texas. She has worked for a number of publications including The Syracuse New Times, Dallas Flow Magazine, and Bellwethr Magazine. She completed her Bachelors at Alcorn State University and went on to complete her Masters at Syracuse University. Data Provider Black Knight to Acquire Top of Mind 2 days ago September 24, 2015 1,162 Views Servicers Navigate the Post-Pandemic World 2 days ago Share Save The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) have taken action against Hudson City Savings Bank for alleged discriminatory redlining practices, according to a joint announcement from the two government agencies Thursday.Hudson City was accused of denying access to mortgage loans from residents that dwell in majority-Black-and-Hispanic neighborhoods. Additionally, the CFPB and DOJ also alleged that the bank illegally provided unequal credit access to neighborhoods in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania.If the court approves the proposed consent order, Hudson City will pay the largest redlining settlement in history. The fines, which total $27 million, will include a $25 million in direct loan subsidies to qualified borrowers in the affected communities, $2.25 million in community programs and outreach, and a $5.5 million penalty.”It is apparent to everyone that discriminatory practices in the mortgage market undermine people’s ability to buy a home and build long-term wealth,” said Richard Cordray, CFPB director. “Without access to affordable credit to buy or improve a home, without a mortgage broker nearby, without a bank branch to offer basic services, neighborhoods deteriorate in the long shadow cast by discriminatory practices. The integrity of the consumer financial marketplace is diminished.””It is apparent to everyone that discriminatory practices in the mortgage market undermine people’s ability to buy a home and build long-term wealth.”According to the announcement, the bank was allegedly found in direct violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), which prohibits creditors from discriminating against applicants in credit transactions on the basis of characteristics such as race, color, and national origin.The DOJ also alleges that Hudson violated the Fair Housing Act.Hudson City apparently found branches and loan officers, selected mortgage brokers, and marketed products to that discouraged potential borrowers in Black and Hispanic communities.The complaint alleged that these discriminatory practices went on from at least 2009 to 2013.“Hudson City Savings Bank structured its business operations to systemically avoid providing credit services in predominantly minority neighborhoods,” said U.S. Attorney Paul J. Fishman of the District of New Jersey. “There is no room for such behavior in our banking system. In addition to paying $25 million for a loan subsidy program, today’s settlement agreement will require the bank to take a number of concrete steps to ensure that they improve access to responsible and affordable credit to qualified borrowers in Black and Hispanic neighborhoods.” The joint action alleges that Hudson City illegally avoided and thereby discouraged consumers in majority-Black-and-Hispanic neighborhoods from applying for credit by:Avoiding locating branches and loan officers in majority-Black-and-Hispanic communities.Avoiding using mortgage brokers in majority-Black-and-Hispanic communities.Excluding majority-Black-and-Hispanic communities from its marketing strategy.Excluding majority-Black-and-Hispanic neighborhoods from its credit in assessment areas.In addition to the aforementioned fines Hudson City must also:Offer full-service banking in majority-Black-and-Hispanic communities.Expand assessment areas to include majority-Black-and-Hispanic communities.Assess the credit needs of majority-Black-and-Hispanic communities.Develop a fair lending compliance and training plan.Click here to view the compliant filed in the U.S. District Court.Click here to view the CFPB and DOJ joint announcement. Demand Propels Home Prices Upward 2 days ago The Best Markets For Residential Property Investors 2 days ago Related Articles Demand Propels Home Prices Upward 2 days ago CFPB and Justice Department Fine Hudson City Bank $27 Million for Redlining CFPB Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Department of Justice Discrimination in Lending Fines and Penalties Hudson City Savings Bank Redlining 2015-09-24 Brian Honea Subscribe
The debate involved whether a judicial hearing should be required to give up Amendment 3 rights Gary Blankenship Senior Editor A mandatory judicial review when a client wants to waive the right to a reduced contingency fee in medical malpractice cases would protect those clients, supporters of the constitutional provision limiting such fees have argued to the Supreme Court.But The Florida Bar contended that while judicial review would be acceptable, there should not be restrictions on a client’s right to waive the fee limits or clients might have trouble hiring the attorney of their choice or finding the best attorneys.Those were among the reasonings presented to the Florida Supreme Court on June 8 when it heard oral arguments on a proposed Bar rule to enforce Amendment 3, approved by voters in November 2004.That amendment limits contingency fees in medical malpractice cases to 30 percent of the first $250,000 awarded and 10 percent above that. Lawyers representing malpractice plaintiffs responded to its passage by having clients waive their right to the lower fee.Last year the Florida Medical Association got former Supreme Court Chief Justice Stephen Grimes to file a petition, signed by him and 53 other attorneys, to amend Bar rules to incorporate the contingency fee restrictions of Amendment 3.The court heard oral arguments on that petition late last year. It then ordered the Bar to prepare a draft rule that would require that clients be informed of the constitutional limitation but also be given the chance to “knowingly and voluntarily waive the rights” given by the amendment. It also asked the Bar to examine whether a judicial hearing should be required when signing the waiver.The Bar filed the proposed rule earlier this year. It did not require the judicial hearing, but left it as an option. Most of the June 8 oral argument focused on the proposed rule and the necessity for a hearing.Attorney Barry Richard, representing the Bar, said the Bar did not have strong feelings about having a hearing. He said it was not made a requirement because circuit judges told the Bar that the waiver hearing requirement in current Bar contingency fee rules is mostly perfunctory and a poor use of judicial time.Justice Charles Wells noted that in a case where the defendant had admitted liability and where damages would likely be $5 million, attorneys’ fees would be $550,000 under the amendment and $1.23 million under Bar contingency fees rules. He said that could give attorneys a conflict of interest when discussing the waiver with clients and that might merit judicial review.Richard replied that the rule still provided for judicial oversight even without a hearing. He also said, “I think that the proposal that the Bar made was not intended to eliminate prior judicial review [but] make the court aware of the opinion of the judges who had dealt with this.”In response to a question from Justice Kenneth Bell, Richard said the Bar would oppose requiring a judge in a waiver hearing to find a necessity that the constitutional fee limit be waived, as advocated by Grimes in his brief on the rule.“The client has a right to a lawyer of the client’s choice,” Richard said. “If you do that [impose a necessity test], you are saying that plaintiffs in these cases are limited to that pool of lawyers willing to take a case with this cap on it, whereas the defense lawyers have no limitation on the fee they can take.”It would also imply that every adult client was incapable of making up his or her own mind, he said.Grimes, representing the rule-change petitioners, argued that having hearings would protect clients, especially in such a case as cited by Wells.“I submit that the premise of Amendment 3 is that there are many lawyers, many good competent lawyers who would gladly take these cases for the constitutional fee,” he said. “You have to make sure that the client understands that there is going to be a dramatic difference in the amount of fees.”In his brief, Grimes argued that lawyers have an inherent conflict of interest because they are advising the client to give up a constitutional right which results in a higher fee for the lawyer.“If The Florida Bar’s proposal is adopted, judicial oversight will be required only for fee arrangements which exceed the current limits in the existing rule, yet the client will be permitted to waive the constitutional limits without judicial oversight,” Grimes wrote. “It is anomalous to give more protection to the client when waiving his or her rights under a Florida Bar rule than when waiving a right established by the Florida Constitution.”Chief Justice Barbara Pariente said she was concerned that such a hearing could be held early in a case, while the lawyer is still investigating and determining the difficulty and the time and resources necessary.“This is at the outset. That is when the contract gets signed. The lawyer doesn’t really know at that point. . . [in most cases] whether there is even a chance that they are actually going to bring this to court,” she said.“It would be on a case-to-case basis and each case would be different,” Grimes replied. “The lawyers would certainly have some idea. The lawyer isn’t going to take a case to start with, and shouldn’t, if he has no idea of the possibility of liability.”Justice Harry Lee Anstead asked what the court should tell judges who find the current fee waiver hearing largely unnecessary.“The difference here is this is a waiver of a constitutional right, as contrasted to a court rule, and the judges need to go into it more,” Grimes replied.University of Florida law Professor Joe Little argued to the court that it should reject any waiver from the fee restriction, but appeared to run into skepticism from several justices.Justice Raoul Cantero noted that criminal defendants can waive basic rights, including the right to counsel and the right to a jury trial, without going before a judge.Little replied that the waiver is inherent in those rights under common law, but not in the contingency fee limit. He added that citizens cannot waive their rights and enter into usurious contracts or contracts that would bind them into slavery.He also argued that when the court considered the constitutionality of the amendment and its ballot summary in 2004, it would have rejected the summary if the amendment had included the right to a waiver but it had not been mentioned in the summary.But Justices Fred Lewis and Peggy Quince said the court is concerned with the accuracy of the ballot summary, among other things, and not how the amendment might be applied in the future.“We strike these if they are misleading because of the actual language that is being used in the ballot summary is misleading, not because what may happen in the future with that proposed amendment is misleading,” Quince said.“I disagree with you, your honor, and I think you are wrong,” Little replied.“I accept that you think I am wrong,” Quince responded, smiling.In his rebuttal, Richard addressed Little’s example, and noted if the amendment had contained language prohibiting a waiver, the amendment would have been struck if that hadn’t been mentioned in the ballot summary.“So the suggestion now, after the fact, when there was no notice to that effect to the public, that this court could engraft those limitations on it, in the first place makes no sense and in the second place would be exactly the type of judicial activism that many of the persons who are advocating the additions to the amendment decry,” he argued. “It wasn’t in the amendment.”The court gave no indication when it would rule in the case. Med mal fee waiver procedures argued Med mal fee waiver procedures argued July 1, 2006 Regular News
Crystal Palace boss Hodgson can’t fault players for Watford defeatby Paul Vegas9 months agoSend to a friendShare the loveCrystal Palace boss Roy Hodgson couldn’t fault his players after defeat to Watford.The Eagles were winning 1-0 at the break thanks to Craig Cathcart’s own goal, but would see that quickly turned around thanks to two goals in seven minutes as Cathcart gained some retribution before a fine volley from Tom Cleverley settled matters in south London.Hodgson said, “It’s tough to lose any game, especially at home and it’s made tougher that we’ve been doing quite well lately. I was hoping that this would be the chance for us to get that elusive third victory that would have lifted us to a much more comfortable place in the table.“We were unable to get it, and when that happens there is no other emotion that I can display other than the obvious one of feeling very sad that we couldn’t do it.”He added: “If you want to win games, then you have to take the chances that come your way. Watford must be comfortable in that respect because they hit the post twice and had one cleared off the line and chances to score their two goals. We perhaps weren’t as effective and only scored one goal, but that’s what football is.“There aren’t many games this year where I have thought we were outplayed or didn’t deserve to win, but there have been games like this where the game could so easily have gone either way and you get questions about regrets or frustrations. I don’t think I could have asked for a lot more from the players; we certainly didn’t lose the game because there wasn’t the desire to win it.” About the authorPaul VegasShare the loveHave your say
TagsLoan MarketAbout the authorPaul VegasShare the loveHave your say Bielsa insists he wants Arsenal striker Nketiah’s Leeds loan to be successfulby Paul Vegas7 days agoSend to a friendShare the loveLeeds United boss Marcelo Bielsa insists he wants Eddie Nketiah’s loan spell from Arsenal to be a success.Nketiah was loaned out to Elland Road this summer in search of more regular playing time to continue his development. But despite scoring four times in nine appearances in all competitions, the 20-year-old is yet to start a Championship game, with Bielsa sticking by Patrick Bamford.”For me it is very important that Eddie has a good spell at Leeds,” Bielsa said.”If Nketiah doesn’t do well here in Leeds, the responsibility is going to be mine. That will be fair because Nketiah is a player full of results and as coach, I have to know how to manage all this skill to improve the team.”The person who most wants Nketiah to have success at Leeds is me, but also I value Bamford, I value him a lot.”
BOULDER, CO – SEPTEMBER 29: The Bruins flag flies as the UCLA Bruins score a touchdown against the Colorado Buffaloes at Folsom Field on September 29, 2012 in Boulder, Colorado. UCLA defeated Colorado 42-14. (Photo by Doug Pensinger/Getty Images)Update: An interesting development from the Roquan Smith commitment:BREAKING: Despite announcing his commitment to #UCLA, 4* LB Roquan Smith tells me he has not reached final decision, has not signed LOI.— Jake Reuse (@ReuseRecruiting) February 4, 2015Earlier: UCLA may wind up being the winners of this year’s National Signing Day. Jim Mora’s program has already had a big day, landing top-rated recruits like Soso Jamabo over Texas and Chris Clark over Michigan, and now they’ve plucked a top five outside linebacker out of Georgia’s back yard. Roquan Smith was down to Georgia, Michigan, Texas A&M, and UCLA during his ceremony today. After having signs for the Wolverines and Aggies flipped over to indicate that the schools were out, Smith put on UCLA gloves under the table to reveal his commitment.Some UCLA fans may be concerned about the program’s ability to compete at the top of the Pac-12 without Brett Hundley, but Mora is proving that the Bruins should not be a flash in the pan. [@BoltonSports]
EDMONTON – Aurora Cannabis Inc. is taking further steps to convince CanniMed Therapeutics Inc. shareholders that the proposed acquisition of Newstrike Resources Ltd. is a “terrible deal” compared to its own hostile bid of the Saskatoon-based medical marijuana producer.Aurora (TSX: ACB) plans to file a dissident circular and will solicit votes against CanniMed’s resolution to issue shares in connection with its proposed acquisition of the Tragically-Hip backed Newstrike (TSXV:HIP).Edmonton-headquartered Aurora argues that CanniMed (TSX:CMED) is Newstrike’s “last lifeline” and a significant portion of its capacity is unfunded.Last month, Aurora launched an all-stock takeover bid for CanniMed, with one of its conditions being that CanniMed abandon its own proposed deal for Toronto-based Newstrike.“We reviewed all disclosed and public information on Newstrike and on CanniMed management’s proposed acquisition, and in our opinion it’s a terrible deal for CanniMed shareholders,” said Terry Booth, CEO of Aurora, in a statement Monday.“It doesn’t take a genius to see that a company with no revenues, no sales licence, no patients, no intellectual property of significant value… should not be worth giving 35 per cent of CanniMed away to Newstrike shareholders,” he said of the smaller Newstrike.CanniMed has said its plan to acquire Newstrike is the better plan and alleges that Aurora has launched an “insider bid” working jointly and in concert with some of its shareholders.Both CanniMed and Aurora have called on regulators to intervene, with a hearing scheduled for Wednesday.CanniMed’s chief executive Brent Zettl on Monday called Aurora’s plan to file a dissident circular a “desperate attempt to stop what they know is a better deal for CanniMed shareholders” and “take the spotlight off its own operational deficiencies.”“Aurora is a pumped-up stock listing which relies on proven producers to supply its customers and has had two product recalls in the last year it has been in business,” he said in a statement.“The uncertainty around Aurora’s projected production capacity is one of the main reasons — along with its Monopoly Money offer for CanniMed — why the CanniMed Board rejected its offer.”Note to readers: This is a corrected story. A previous version said Aurora’s headquarters is in Vancouver.
MILLVILLE, Ky. – The whiskey quit flowing decades ago from a landmark Kentucky distillery housed in a picturesque castle. Nearly a half-century of neglect reduced the one-time tourist draw to a decaying relic.Now, two newcomers to the whiskey business have resurrected the Old Taylor distillery and renamed it. And along with bourbon and rye, they hope once again to generate tourism.Will Arvin and Wes Murry saw potential where others perceived only blight. In the past four years they’ve spent millions to restore the old glory of the castle-like entrance, sunken garden and colonnaded springhouse.“The spirit of the place really called to us,” Arvin said. “The bones of the building were solid. And we could just see through the decay and the brush to know that this place really needed to be brought back and saved as an iconic place.”Renamed Castle & Key Distillery, the facility resumed spirits production in late 2016 — the first year whiskey was produced there since the distillery shuttered in 1972.On Wednesday, the grounds reopened to visitors.Arvin and Murry are following in the footsteps of the distillery’s founder, Col. E.H. Taylor. A bourbon giant of his time, he built the Old Taylor distillery in the late 1880s and made it a forerunner of today’s bourbon tourism business. Ownership eventually passed to National Distillers, and production ended during a lean time for bourbon producers.Now bourbon sales are booming again, and the new owners are preparing bourbon and rye whiskey to hit the market under the Castle & Key label. The brown spirits are still maturing in barrels nestled in the distillery’s warehouses. Master distiller Marianne Eaves hopes rye can make its debut in about a year, and says the brand’s bourbon could be ready in 2021.“We’re letting flavour drive the decision on the release date,” she said.Murry said they hope to turn a marginal profit within a couple of years. In the meantime, the owners have found other ways to generate income. The brand’s vodka and gin reached store shelves in April. The distillery also produces bourbon and rye on contract for several corporate customers.Tourism should help the bottom line, especially if the iconic facility joins the Kentucky Bourbon Trail.Kentucky Distillers’ Association President Eric Gregory is among those predicting tourism success for Castle & Key. The central Kentucky distillery between Frankfort and Versailles sits a few miles from the Woodford Reserve and Buffalo Trace distilleries.“It will be one of the most visited bourbon tourism sites in Kentucky — quickly,” Gregory said.Bill Samuels Jr., who retired after a long career as top executive at Maker’s Mark, remembers admiring the castle-like distillery on a boyhood trip with his father. As years passed and the decay took its toll, he wondered if it would ever return. Twenty-five years ago, there was exciting talk of a restoration — but it came to nothing. Finally, he said, “we just gave up, thinking this will never happen.”Enter Arvin and Murry. Looking to become a distillery owner and tap into bourbon’s resurgence, Arvin discovered the Old Taylor site on the internet. A mutual friend connected him with Murry, 40, who was looking for an entrepreneurial venture.They paid about $950,000 for the distillery in 2014. Restoring it took longer and cost more than expected, and it meant career changes. Arvin, 51, left a law career behind; Murry worked in finance.The enormity of the renovation would have driven many to drink. Most of the windows were boarded up. One storage warehouse had collapsed. Roofs were failing. The grounds were a jungle of weeds.“You only walked where animals had beaten a path,” Murry said. “That was how you got around.”Gregory, who trudged through the thicket with Arvin during an early visit, said, “You were expecting some ghost at any moment … because it was just so overgrown and so abandoned.”Eaves, 31, was a rising star during her time at Brown-Forman Corp., whose products include Jack Daniel’s Tennessee Whiskey and Woodford Reserve bourbon. She was drawn by the Old Taylor site and the new owners’ ambitious plans to revive it. Creating the Castle & Key spirits lineup as master distiller seemed a “once in a lifetime opportunity” when she signed on in early 2015. Soon, though, the size of the challenge became apparent — and that was long before whiskey was mentioned as a tariff target in an international trade war.“We didn’t have any heat, no running water, no restrooms,” she said. “It was a stark change from working at a very comfortable corporate job to coming to this start-up environment.”Now, the distillery hums with activity seven days a week. The workforce is 60 and growing. The grounds are manicured, thanks to renowned Kentucky landscaper Jon Carloftis, and a quarter-mile botanical walking trail beckons.Gregory said the hidden treasures among Kentucky’s abandoned distilleries “are getting very few and far between.” But as Castle & Key achieves more milestones, he thinks some of the prospective buyers who passed up the chance might regret their decision.“They’re probably kicking themselves already,” he said.
TORONTO — The New York Rangers are the NHL’s most valuable franchise for a fourth consecutive year, according to Forbes.The Rangers top the annual list of franchise valuations at $1.55 billion, up 3 per cent from last year.The Toronto Maple Leafs are second at $1.35 billion, and Montreal Canadiens third at $1.3 billion, 4 per cent increases for both clubs.Original Six clubs make up the top five, with the Chicago Blackhawks fourth at $1.05 billion and the Boston Bruins fifth at $925 million. The Detroit Red Wings are not far behind in eighth ($775 million) and have seen an 11 per cent increase thanks to a new downtown arena.Los Angeles (sixth, $810 million), Philadelphia (seventh, $800 million), Vancouver (ninth, $735 million) and Washington (10th, $725 million) round out the top 10. The Capitals enjoyed a league-best 16 per cent boost with their first Stanley Cup title.The Vegas Golden Knights are 12th at $575 million after reaching the Cup final as an expansion team.At the other end of the list are the Florida Panthers (30th, $295 million) and Arizona Coyotes (31st, $290 million). The clubs were the only two to lose value according to Forbes, down 3 per cent each.___More AP NHL: https://apnews.com/tag/NHL and https://twitter.com/AP_SportsThe Associated Press
SEATTLE — The hemp industry still has work ahead to win legal status for hemp-derived cannabidiol, or CBD oil. The head of the Food and Drug Administration says adding CBD to food or dietary supplements is still illegal.President Donald Trump signed a farm bill Thursday designating hemp as an agricultural crop. The same day, FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb issued a statement saying CBD is a drug ingredient and therefore illegal to add to food or supplements without approval from his agency.Courtney Moran, a lobbyist for Oregon hemp farmers, says she plans to work with U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, to nudge the FDA toward greater acceptance of CBD.CBD is a non-psychoactive compound found in hemp, a type of cannabis plant.Carla K. Johnson, The Associated Press
FORT ST. JOHN, B.C. – Residents are being reminded to make sure all campfires are out this long weekend.The B.C. Conservation Officers shared a tweet on Friday showing a campfire they found left unattended and still smouldering. Although so far this long weekend, there haven’t been any major new forest fires, Fire Information Officer Amanda Reynolds said that most of Northeast B.C. is currently sitting at a ‘high’ fire danger rating, with pockets of ‘extreme’ fire danger near Hudson’s Hope, Mackenzie, and Fort Nelson. Reynolds said that there isn’t any precipitation in the forecast east of the Rockies this weekend, which could see the fire danger upgraded to ‘extreme’ in more areas. A theme encountered this weekend by Peace BCCOS patrolling the backcountry. An abandoned & smouldering campfire. Please ensure your fires are out before leaving them. “Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I’m not sure about the former”- A. Einstein pic.twitter.com/u5JVHf1yEO— BC CO Service (@_BCCOS) May 19, 2018 Reynolds said that this has so far been a fairly active fire season, though not nearly as bad as last year or the year before. Despite this, she said that residents looking to go camping for the unofficial start of summer need to take precautions, especially when having a campfire.Category 2 fires are currently prohibited across the Prince George Fire Centre – which includes all of Northeast B.C. – meaning that campfires need to be smaller than a half-metre in dimension. Sky lanterns, burning barrels, and binary exploding targets are also prohibited, as are grass fires smaller than 2,000 square metres. Reynolds said that in anticipation of a spike in wildfires this weekend, the BC Wildfire Service does have firefighters on standby in Fort St. John, Dawson Creek, Chetwynd, and Fort Nelson at the ready to respond to any flare-ups. Smokejumpers and an air tanker are also in Fort St. John on standby. The Fire Danger rating in Northeast B.C. remains at High – B.C. Wildfire Service