Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

CFPB Advisory Opinion: Pay-to-Pay, “Convenience” Fees Prohibited by FDCPA

By Moorari Shah, A.J. Dhaliwal & Pouneh Almasi on July 14, 2022
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Fees Prohibited by FDCPA

On June 29, the CFPB issued an advisory opinion affirming that the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and Regulation F prohibit debt collectors from collecting pay-to-pay or “convenience fees” imposed for making a payment in a particular way, such as by phone or online, when such fees are not expressly authorized by the underlying agreement or otherwise permitted by law. In interpreting FDCPA Section 808, the Bureau’s advisory opinion explains that:

  • Scope of fees: Section 808(1) permits collection of an amount only if the underlying agreement creating the debt expressly permits the fee and is not otherwise prohibited by another law, or if the amount is expressly permitted by law, even if the underlying agreement creating the debt is silent on this point.
  • Silence in the law: If both the underlying agreement creating the debt and other laws are silent, the fee is prohibited, even if such amounts are covered under a separate, valid agreement under state contract law. The Bureau further clarifies that even though some courts have interpreted the FDCPA to allow collection of fees under this “separate agreement” theory, the CFPB declines to follow such interpretation.
  • Payment processors: Debt collectors can violate Section 808 if the payment processor charges unlawful pay-to-pay fees by, for example, charging convenience fees to pay by phone.

While most debt collectors do not charge such illegal pay-to-pay fees, the CFPB reports that some debt collectors do, even if it is cheaper and faster for them to process payments by phone or online than by paper checks delivered via mail or in person.

Putting It Into Practice: The CFPB and other U.S. regulators have recently shown greater focus and scrutiny on illegal junk fees, including pay-to-pay fees, across multiple consumer finance industries. (See our previous blog posts here and here.) As a matter of best practices, before charging additional fees for certain payment methods, debt collectors and payment processors should have business processes in place to ensure such fees are authorized by the underlying agreement or otherwise permitted by another law.

Photo of Moorari Shah Moorari Shah

Moorari Shah is a partner in the Finance and Bankruptcy Practice Group in the firm’s Los Angeles and San Francisco offices.

Read more about Moorari ShahEmail
Photo of A.J. Dhaliwal A.J. Dhaliwal

A.J. is a partner in the Finance and Bankruptcy Practice Group in the firm’s Washington, D.C. office.

Read more about A.J. DhaliwalEmail
Photo of Pouneh Almasi Pouneh Almasi

Pouneh Almasi is an associate in the Intellectual Property Practice Group in the firm’s San Francisco office.

Read more about Pouneh AlmasiEmail
  • Posted in:
    Banking, Finance and Securities
  • Blog:
    Consumer Finance and Fintech Blog
  • Organization:
    Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo