On October 30, the California DFPI entered a consent order with a residential mortgage lender and servicer following a regulatory examination and a directed self-audit. The DFPI alleged violations of the California Residential Mortgage Lending Act and California Civil Code provisions governing when per diem interest may begin to accrue.Continue Reading DFPI Orders Mortgage Lender to Pay $100,000 for Alleged Per Diem Interest and Recordkeeping Violations
On October 30, the California DFPI announced a consent order against a Nevada-based crypto kiosk operator for alleged violations of the Digital Financial Assets Law and the California Consumer Financial Protection Law. The action follows a DFPI investigation into widespread noncompliance among crypto ATM operators, which the agency has identified as a growing consumer-protection concern.Continue Reading DFPI Fines Kiosk Operator $675,000 for Alleged Violations of the Digital Financial Assets Law
On October 17, 2025, the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) entered a consent order with a licensed consumer lender, alleging violations of the Fair Access to Credit Act, which amended the California Financing Law to cap interest rates and fees on consumer loans between $2,500 and $10,000. The DFPI alleged that the lender charged rates and administrative fees above those limits and continued the practice as recently as January 2023.Continue Reading DFPI Orders Lender to Pay $1 Million for Alleged Violations of the Fair Access to Credit Act
On October 6, the DFPI issued a Desist and Refrain Order against a digital-asset ATM operator for alleged violations of the California Digital Financial Assets Law (DFAL) and the California Consumer Financial Protection Law (CCFPL). The DFPI alleged that the company, which operates cryptocurrency kiosks throughout Northern California, repeatedly accepted and transmitted cash in excess of statutory transaction limits, charged unlawful fees, and failed to provide required disclosures and receipts to consumers in connection with the purchase and sale of digital assets.Continue Reading DFPI Orders Crypto Kiosk Operator to Cease Operations for Alleged Violations of Digital Financial Assets Law
On August 18, the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) announced a $2.3 million settlement with a former mortgage lender and servicer for alleged violations of the California Residential Mortgage Lending Act and California Financing Law. According to the DFPI, the company improperly charged thousands of California borrowers per diem interest in excess of what is permitted under state law.Continue Reading DFPI Orders Mortgage Lender to Pay $2.3 Million for Per Diem Interest Overcharges
On March 4, the California DFPI finalized regulations under the Debt Collection Licensing Act (DCLA). The final regulations, which take effect July 1, 2025, clarify key licensing and reporting requirements.Continue Reading DFPI Finalizes Debt Collection Licensing Regulations, Effective July 1
California has recently proposed legislation that, if enacted, would impose a new licensing requirement for any person providing “commercial brokerage” services to a borrower in connection with a commercial loan of $5,000 or more. The legislation, Senate Bill 869, would expand the current commercial loan broker licensing requirements under the California Financing Law, which, as of now, does not require a license to broker non-real estate secured commercial loans.Continue Reading California Bill Proposes to License All Commercial Loan Brokers
On October 30, the Superior Court of California County of Los Angeles denied the DFPI’s motion for a preliminary injunction to force a Chicago-based fintech company to stop facilitating loans to California borrowers from its bank partner at interest rates above California’s interest rate cap (generally 36% for loans less than $10,000) (we previously discussed this case here and here).Continue Reading California Court Denies DFPI’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction Against Fintech
Recently, the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) approved the final rule implementing and interpreting certain sections of the California Consumer Financial Protection Law (CCFPL) that prohibit persons from engaging in unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices (UDAAP) related to commercial financial products and services and establishes data collection and reporting requirements.Continue Reading California DFPI Finalizes Small Business UDAAP Rule
On February 27, the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) issued new guidance with respect to the performance of remote work by mortgage loan originators (MLOs) working for licensees under the California Residential Mortgage Lending Act (California Financial Code Sections 50000 et seq., the “CRMLA”). The CRMLA does not expressly prohibit employees of a licensee from working at a remote location, such as an employee’s home. A licensee may authorize an employee to perform limited functions at a remote location that is not considered a branch office, provided that the location does not have the indicia of a branch office and is not advertised to the public as a business location. However, the guidance noted that a branch manager must continue to supervise employees who are working remotely, and that the DFPI will continue to examine the supervisory activities of a branch manager to ensure that the branch manager is adequately supervising each MLO and employee regardless of whether they are working at a remote location or a branch office.Continue Reading California DFPI Publishes New Guidance on Remote Work by MLOs
On January 26, the California DFPI announced its participation in a $22.5MM multi-state into a settlement with a with a Cayman Islands digital asset firm to resolve a securities enforcement action in connection with the platform’s earn interest product program. A North American Securities Administrators Association working group—composed of the DFPI and state regulators from Washington, Kentucky, New York, Oklahoma, Indiana, Maryland, South Carolina, Vermont, and Wisconsin—collaborated in the investigation into the firm. The group alleged that the platform failed to register as a securities and commodities broker but told investors that it was fully in compliance (we discussed similar actions in a previous blog post here). The DFPI’s previous desist-and-refrain order concluded that the earn interest accounts, which enables retail investors to earn interest upwards of 36% APR on crypto assets, constituted the unqualified sale of securities in the form of investment contracts in violation of California law.Continue Reading Recent Crypto Settlements Signal State and Federal Enforcement Trends