RMAI Update July 2025 - Receivables Management Association International

In This Update

A federal judge in Texas has struck down the Chopra‑era Consumer Financial Protection Bureau rule that barred medical debt from appearing on credit reports. The rule, aimed at removing nearly $50 billion in medical bills affecting 15 million Americans and potentially boosting scores by ~20 points, also prohibited lenders from considering medical debt in underwriting decisions. U.S. District Judge Sean D. Jordan of the Eastern District of Texas invalidated the CFPB’s medical debt rule, dismissing it with prejudice. He ruled that the prior administration overstepped the agency’s legal authority in issuing the regulation.

Meanwhile, Congress has spent recent weeks advancing a major reconciliation package, commonly referred to as the “Big, Beautiful Bill.” One of the most consequential provisions reduces the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) funding from the Federal Reserve’s operating budget, capping it at 6.5%, a 46% cut from the 12% cap. While significant, this reduction is less drastic than earlier proposals. The Senate Banking Committee initially sought to eliminate Fed funding for the Bureau altogether, while the House Financial Services Committee proposed a 5% cap. The Senate parliamentarian ultimately ruled out fully eliminating the funding source, allowing the 6.5% cap to stand.

The bill also includes sweeping reforms to federal student loan programs, scheduled to take effect on July 1, 2026. Key changes include lifetime borrowing caps of $100,000 for graduate students, $200,000 for medical and law students, and annual limits of $20,000 per child for Parent PLUS borrowers, with a $65,000 lifetime cap. It also simplifies repayment plans for loans disbursed after July 1, 2026, and modifies forgiveness, deferment, and forbearance provisions.

After considerable debate, the Senate removed a controversial provision that would have imposed a 10-year ban on state regulation of artificial intelligence. That proposal, which originated in the House, would have barred states from enacting laws governing AI systems, models, or automated decision-making tools. Supporters viewed it as a way to establish uniform federal standards, but opponents emphasized the importance of allowing states to act in the absence of comprehensive federal legislation.

Meanwhile, the CFPB continues to experience internal instability, with ongoing staff departures and scrutiny from congressional leaders. On June 26, Rep. Dan Meuser (R-PA), Chairman of the House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, sent a letter to the acting inspector general. The letter called for an investigation into the Bureau’s activities under the Biden administration, accusing the former Director, Rohit Chopra, of exceeding the Bureau’s statutory authority. The letter cited several actions for review, including:

The 2022 expansion of UDAAP to cover discriminatory practices
Reinterpretation of “credit” under the Truth in Lending Act (TILA)
Coordination with state attorneys general
Increased time and cost of enforcement actions compared to prior directors

The Supreme Court issued a major decision on June 20, 2025, ruling that federal district courts are not required to follow Federal Communications Commission (FCC) interpretations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). This overturns precedent in several appellate circuits that had treated FCC orders as binding under the Hobbs Act. District courts can now apply their own statutory interpretations, which introduces uncertainty into TCPA compliance and enforcement and may significantly impact litigation strategies in the receivables industry.

RMAI monitors, tracks, and responds to legislative and regulatory activity in all 50 states as the need arises. Backed by RMAI’s State Legislative Committee and a team of state lobbyists, RMAI educates legislators and regulators about the industry and the negative impacts or unintended consequences a bill would have on businesses and consumers. If you have an interest in volunteering in RMAI’s grassroots advocacy efforts, please contact RMAI General Counsel & Senior Director of Government Affairs David Reid at (916) 779-2492 or [email protected].

Record Number of State Lobbyists Retained in 2025
In 2025, RMAI has had to retain 12 state lobbying firms to assist our state advocacy efforts. This breaks our prior record of 10 lobbying firms which was set in 2014. The states/territories where RMAI retained lobbyists were California, Colorado, Delaware, Maine, Michigan, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Puerto Rico, Vermont, and Wyoming. In many respects, this is a glass half full record. While it is unfortunate the financial services industry is facing such a high volume of negative state legislative proposals, RMAI is nonetheless fortunate that we have the resources to defend the industry due to the generosity of the association’s membership to the RMAI Legislative Fund.

Top Issue: Medical Debt
Medical debt legislation remains the most active subject matter that RMAI is lobbying on in 2025. Currently, we are tracking 139 medical debt bills in the nation and are actively lobbying bills with a strong likelihood of passage in over a dozen states. RMAI’s singular concern on these bills is the definition of “medical debt.” We are advocating for a narrow definition that ensures the definition does not include various consumer credit products, including credit cards, bank loans, and home equity lines of credit. There are 33 states (also Puerto Rico) with medical debt bills, including: Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming.

Several important non-medical debt bills RMAI is engaged on include:

Massachusetts SB 2551 – This bill would, among other things: (1) increase the garnishment exemption from 50x state minimum wage to 65x state minimum wage; (2) reduce the statute of limitations (SOL) in an action for the collection of a consumer debt from six to five years; (3) prohibit the revival of a debt that is beyond the statute of limitations through the making of a payment; and (4) reduce the time allowed to take action to enforce a judgment from 20 to 10 years but allows renewing the judgment for an additional 10 years. If passed, the bill would take effect on January 1, 2026. [RMAI had been opposing this bill since 2014 when it was first introduced. After eight years of negotiations and countless amendments, RMAI, other industry participants, and consumer advocates agreed to amendments that resulted in a neutral position by the industry. Among items removed from the bill through RMAI’s efforts from its 2014 introduction: (a) 90x minimum wage garnishment exemption; (b) expungement of the debt once the SOL expires; (c) reducing the SOL from six to three years; (d) preventing the tolling of the SOL through a payment prior to the expiration of SOL; (e) reducing the enforcement of a judgment from 20 to 5 years with no renewal; (f) applying the bill’s provisions to real property; and (g) once the consumer exceeds the exemption threshold, only being able to garnish on income above the threshold.]

New York AB 8427-A/SB 8416 (NY Attorney General Program Bill) – This bill would enact the “Fostering Affordability and Integrity through Reasonable (FAIR) Business Practices Act” to expand the attorney general’s ability to protect New Yorkers from unfair, deceptive and abusive business practices. [RMAI was in strong opposition due to the bill containing: (1) an enhanced private right of action where the consumer does not have to show an actual injury and (2) a public registry of all UDAAP settlements. RMAI has had three very constructive meetings with the New York Attorney General’s Office in the past month explaining our opposition. Through RMAI’s efforts and that of the New York Business Council, of which RMAI is a member, the bill was amended to resolve the concerns raised by RMAI. Removed from the version which passed the Senate was language that: (i) allowed a third party to bring a private right of action on behalf of others without their consent, (ii) allowed the plaintiff to bring suit without actual injury, (iii) created a public registry, and (iv) created higher penalties for a private right of action. With these changes, the bill is generally in line with existing UDAAP laws from other states. This bill has passed both houses of the legislature and is awaiting to be sent to the Governor.]

Eleventh Circuit Holds “Clickwrap” Arbitration Agreement Enforceable
Lamonaco v. Experian Info. Sols., Inc., No. 24-11270, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 16473 (11th Cir. July 3, 2025)

A consumer notified a consumer reporting agency (“CRA”) that she disputed a sizable auto loan that had been reported on her credit file. She requested correction of the information, claiming someone else had fraudulently used her personal information. Initially, the CRA verified the loan but later removed it from her credit history.

The consumer filed a lawsuit against the CRA alleging it “violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by failing to implement reasonable procedures to ensure credit report accuracy and by failing to conduct a proper reinvestigation,” as required by 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681e(b), 1681i(a)(1).

The CRA answered the complaint, submitted a case management report, filed its Rule 26 disclosures, and later moved to compel arbitration. In support of its motion, the CRA provided an officer’s declaration that the consumer had enrolled in a service that provided her access to her credit report and score and credit monitoring services. It also explained that “the enrollment process required [the consumer] to input personal information and click a ‘submit’ button below a bolded notice referencing the service’s Terms of Use,” and that she “could not proceed without agreeing to the Terms of Use.”

The Terms of Use contained “a broad arbitration clause covering ‘all disputes and claims’ between the user and [the CRA] or its affiliates, along with a delegation clause assigning to the arbitrator any dispute about the ‘scope and enforceability’ of the arbitration clause.”

The CRA’s motion was denied because it “failed to carry its burden to show that an arbitration agreement existed and that, even if one did, [the CRA] had waived its right to compel arbitration” by failing to bring it up until 3 months into litigation.”

On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit first addressed whether there was sufficient evidence demonstrating the parties “mutually assented to be bound” by the arbitration agreement. In the “clickwrap” context, where the consumer “assent to terms by clicking a button near a disclosure referencing those terms agree to terms by clicking on a button located near a disclosure,” the question “turns on whether the relevant terms were reasonably presented and whether the user took clear, affirmative steps to accept them.”

Here, the Court determined that the declaration from the CRA’s officer with the Terms of Use and arbitration agreement were sufficient to satisfy the CRA’s initial burden and “made it ‘more likely than not’ that [the consumer] agreed to the Terms of Use.”

The Court next addressed the trial court’s holding that the CRA had waived its right to arbitration. The Court, rather bluntly, stated “that was not the [trial court’s] decision to make.” Here, the arbitration agreement “contained a delegation clause assigning to the arbitrator all disputes over the interpretation, applicability, or enforceability of the arbitration agreement.” Relying on decisions from its own circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer & White Sales, Inc., 586 U.S. 63, 139 S. Ct. 524 (2019), the Court explained “that when a delegation clause is ‘clear and unmistakable,’ courts must respect it—even if they would otherwise view the issue as one for judicial resolution.”

Accordingly, the Eleventh Circuit concluded that the trial court “erred in deciding that [the CRA] did not meet its burden and in resolving the waiver issue itself,” and reversed the ruling with instructions to grant the motion to compel arbitration.

Eleventh Circuit Finds Bona Fide Error Defense Lacking Evidence and Substance
Crawford v. N. Am. Credit Servs., Inc., No. 24-13931, 2025 U.S. App. LEXIS 16105 (11th Cir. July 1, 2025)

A consumer was injured on the job and received treatment at a hospital. Although workers’ compensation covered all his medical bills, the hospital nevertheless sent the consumer several bills and then sent the matter to a collection agency which also sent several collection letters.

The consumer filed a lawsuit against the collection agency alleging it violated the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) by falsely representing he owed the hospital for his work-related injuries. The trial court granted the consumer’s motion for summary judgment and the collection agency appealed.

On appeal, the collection agency argued the trial court erred in granting the consumer’s motion for two reasons: “(1) the medical bills at issue were not a ‘debt’ as that term is defined in the [FDCPA]; and (2) [the collection agency] satisfied the requirements of the bona fide error defense.”

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, in an unpublished decision, disagreed with the first argument. It explained:

The “transaction” at issue here was the provision of medical services to [the consumer] in exchange for money—and receiving medical care was not part of [the consumer’s] job as a courier. That the employer was obligated to pay for those services under Florida’s workers’ compensation scheme does not mean that the medical treatment was performed for the employer’s business purposes.

On the second argument, the Court considered whether the collection agency met its burden of proof for the bona fide error defense. The Court specifically examined whether the collection agency has shown that it “’maintained—i.e., actually employed or implemented—procedures to avoid errors,’ and that ‘the procedures were reasonably adapted to avoid the specific error at issue.’”

In support of its position, the collection agency argued it met the burden by: “(1) relying on [the hospital] to not send work-related medical debts to [the collection agency] for collection; (2) complying with the [FDCPA’s] debt-validation requirements in its collection letters; and (3) employing a document titled ‘insurance work instructions,’ which appears to provide instructions for assisting patients with making insurance or workers’ compensation claims.”

The Court determined this was insufficient. First, while the collection agency argued it satisfied the bona fide error defense elements, it did not point “to testimony or any other evidence supporting its claim that it ‘actually employed or implemented’ relevant procedures.” “Argument and an unauthenticated work-instruction document are not evidence—and without evidence that it maintained adequate procedures, [the collection agency] cannot survive summary judgment on a defense for which it would bear the burden of proof at trial.”

Second, none of the procedures outlined by the collection agency were “reasonably adapted to avoid the specific error at issue.” Affirming the decision of the trial court, the Eleventh Circuit explained:

[A] debt collector cannot fulfill its affirmative statutory obligation to maintain procedures reasonably adapted to avoid readily discoverable errors’ by delegating that obligation entirely to creditors, or by simply complying with statutory requirements. . . after-the-fact procedure designed to prevent the error from occurring again—like the validation notice in [the collection agency’s] collection letters, or the work instruction for assisting with a workers’ compensation claim—is inadequate to prove the bona fide error defense because such procedures are not adapted to avoid errors.

RMAI’s Legislative Fund Supports a Record-Breaking Year for State Lobbyists
2025 has been an amazing year for our state lobbyists. Thanks to your generous donations, RMAI was able to add lobbyists in Delaware and Puerto Rico, retaining a record-breaking number of lobbyists. We look forward to continuing our efforts state-to-state next year, advocating for you and your businesses. You can donate now to the Legislative Fund to lay the foundation of another successful year of state and federal advocacy!

If you would like to contribute to the Legislative Fund and be featured on our website, you can donate here. You can view a list of current Legislative Fund donors here.

About the Legislative Fund
RMAI actively monitors and responds to state and federal measures affecting how our members do business. Your contributions to the Legislative Fund extend the reach of RMAI’s advocacy across the country where and when needed. Read more about the Legislative Fund.

2025 Webinar Programming
Register for our July 29^th Preparing for a Smooth System Conversion: What Every Organization Needs to Know Before Making the Leap webinar where our presenters will guide you through the critical pre-conversion steps your organization must take to reduce risk, maintain operation continuity, and ensure a successful transition.

Recorded Webinar
Recorded on June 24, 2025 you can register for U.S. Privacy Law Update 2025. In this presentation, our presenters provide an overview of comprehensive state-level consumer privacy laws in the U.S.

Click here for more information on our live and recorded educational webinars. Contact Shannon Parod at [email protected] to find out more about sponsoring an RMAI webinar.

Congratulations to our new and renewed Certified Receivables Compliance Professionals (CRCP) & new & renewed Certified Receivables Businesses (CRB)!

CRCP New
Cathy Buxbaum, PRA Group
Jonathan Burrell, TRAKAmerica
Sarah Cupp, Velocity Portfolio Group
Ashley Nelson, Dobberstein Law Firm
Lena Nieves, Get Remynt
Cullen Porter, Red Target dba SCJ Commercial Financial Services
Shirelle Reed, Leafy Financial
Michael Stillman, Stillman PC dba Stillman Law Office

CRCP Renewals
Craig Antico, ForgiveCo PBC
Kimberlee Basha, AutoVest
Caylon Cannon, Capio
Sarah Daley, Galaxy Capital Acquisitions
Shaun Ertischek, Cascade Receivables Management
Kerstin McFarlane, River Heights Capital
Alicia McKeighan, ConServe
Marian Meyer, Red Target dba SCJ Commercial Financial Services
Shannon Parod, RMAI

CRB New
Credit Control, LLC

CRB Renewals
Superlative RM
Velo Law Office

View all certified businesses and vendors.
View all certified individuals.

Affiliate Members Can Get Their Business Certified Too!
RMAI Affiliate members can earn the Certified Receivables Vendor (CRV) designation which includes the General Vendor Certification (Series 100), Broker Certification (Series 200), and Process Server Certification (Series 300). Any Affiliate member that is not a broker or process server can apply for the General Vendor Certification which is a smaller certification and half the price of Series 200 & Series 300 and consists of seven (7) standards of compliance including:

Chief Compliance Officer: one person from your company must maintain individual certification
Criminal Background Checks: maintain a policy based on requirements for vendor certification.
Employee Training Programs: maintain a policy based on requirements for vendor certification.
Insurance: maintain E&O and Cyber insurance policy limits based on requirements for vendor certification.
Data Security: maintain a data security policy based on the requirements for vendor certification.
Website & Publication: RMAI requires you to publish certain certification on your website.
Vendor Management: maintain a policy based on requirements for vendor certification.

Refer to our Governance Document (Appendix B) for a full breakdown of the requirements for each standard. Read our 7 Steps to Vendor Certification for a easy to read list of steps to complete the certification. View our timeline for completing the vendor certification so you can plan your process.

Contact Shannon Parod-Tsui @ [email protected] or call 916-482-2590.

View our full list of certification resources.

There’s Still Time to Register for Executive Summit
Remember, one of the most valuable and popular benefits of your RMAI membership is attending our events at a discounted member registration rate. Registration is still open for the Executive Summit, taking place at the Woodstock Inn & Resort in Woodstock, VT, August 5-7th! Connect with industry colleagues during our education sessions while you enjoy the picturesque New England countryside. Sponsorship is available too! Register and find out more.

Send Us Your Press Releases and Boost Your Reach with a Sponsored Social Media Post
We want to share your news! Make sure RMAI is on your press release distribution list. As a benefit of membership, RMAI posts members’ press releases to Member News on the RMAI website. As another benefit of membership, RMAI members can purchase sponsored social media posts ($200 each). To get in front of RMAI’s audience, contact Communications & Administrative Coordinator, Aurora Sain at [email protected].

Help RMAI Grow
Membership dues are 50% off during the third quarter of 2025. Do you know a company that would make a great RMAI member? Offer to be one of their references and refer them to the online membership application. Now is a great time to join RMAI!

For a complete list of RMAI members (including contact information), login to check out the Member Directory.

2025 RMAI Executive Summit | August 5-7, 2025

2026 RMAI Annual Conference | February 9-12, 2026

Call for Presentations – Due August 11, 2025

RMAI is now accepting presentation proposals for the 2026 RMAI Annual Conference. RMAI designs Annual Conference programming to further the education of receivables management industry professionals and support the RMAI Receivables Management Certification Program. Limited slots are available. RMAI is seeking presentations with the following criteria:

An interactive and engaging program format
Audience participation and/or discussion
Presenters identified in advance
Preference on speakers from more than one company
Innovative and insightful content
Educational focus (no sales pitch)

PREVIEW the Proposal Form: It is recommended to review the proposal form first so you can provide a complete proposal.

PROPOSE an Education Session

For questions, please contact Shannon Parod-Tsui at [email protected] or (916) 482-2590.

LEGISLATIVE FUND CONTRIBUTORS JULY 1, 2024 – JULY 11, 2025

DIAMOND
Absolute Resolutions Corp.
Cavalry Investments, LLC
Crown Asset Management, LLC
Resurgent Holdings, LLC
Second Round, LP
TRAKAmerica
Velocity Portfolio Group, Inc.

TITANIUM
Cascade365 Family of Companies
Financial Recovery Services, Inc.
Garnet Capital Advisors, LLC
Rausch Sturm, LLP

PLATINUM
Andreu, Palma, Lavin & Solis, PLLC
Blitt and Gaines, P.C.
DebtNext Software, LLC
InvestiNet, LLC
Klima, Peters & Daly, P.A.
Pharus Funding, LLC
Plaza Services
Stenger & Stenger P.C.

GOLD
D & A Services, LLC

SILVER
Halsted Financial Services, LLC
National Credit Adjusters, LLC
Pressler, Felt and Warshaw, LLP
Velo Law Office

BRONZE
Central Portfolio Control, Inc
Corporate Advisory Solutions, LLC
Couch Lambert
Equabli, Inc
Resurgence Capital, LLC
Security Credit Services, LLC
Stillman Law Office
Tromberg, Morris & Partners, PLLC

BRASS
Acctcorp International, Inc.
Advancial Federal Credit Union
AgreeYa Solutions, Inc.
Aldridge Pite Haan, LLP
ARM Compliance Business Solutions LLC
ARS National Services, Inc.
Balbec Capital
Basham & Scott, LLC
Bayview Solutions, LLC
CBE Companies
Cedar Global Solutions LLC dba Remote Scouts
Channel Payments, Inc.
CMS Services
CNG/Axcess Financial Services, Inc.
Collection Attorneys USA LLC
CompuMail Information Systems
ConServe
Cornerstone Licensing Services
Credit Control, LLC
Credit Corp Solutions Inc.
FDR Alliance LLC
FLOCK Specialty Finance
FMA Alliance, Ltd
ForgiveCo PBC Inc
Frost Echols LLC
G. Reynolds Sims & Associates, P.C.
Genesis Recovery Services
Gordon, Aylworth & Tami, P.C.
Grassy Sprain Group, Inc
Guglielmo & Associates, PLLC
InterProse
Jefferson Capital Systems, LLC
Kino Financial Co., LLC
Law Office of James R. Vaughan, P.C.
Mandarich Law Group LLP
Markoff Law LLC
Moss & Barnett, P.A.
Mountain Peak Law Group, PC
National Debt Holdings, LLC
NCB Management Services, Inc.
Nelson & Kennard
NICE
Nuvei Technologies Inc.
PaymentVision (Autoscribe)
PCI Group Inc.
Phin Solutions, LLC
Premium Asset Recovery Corp (PARC)
RAS LaVrar LLC
Reassigned Numbers Database (RND)
Remitter
Revenue Assistance Corporation dba Revenue Group
Robinson Hoover & Fudge, PLLC
SAM – Solutions for Account Management, Inc.
Scott & Associates, PC
Shepherd Outsourcing, LLC
Slovin & Associates
Smith Debnam Narron Drake Saintsing & Myers, LLP
SMS Financial, LLC
Stone Creek Financial Inc.
Stone, Higgs & Drexler
Superlative RM
Suttell & Hammer
The Cadle Company
The Moore Law Group
The Oakes Law Firm, LLC
Tratta
Troutman Pepper Locke
Troy Capital, LLC
Vertican Technologies, Inc.
Womble Bond Dickinson
Zarzaur & Schwartz, P.C.

OTHER
Actuate Law, LLC
Alliance Credit Services, Inc.
Bedard Law Group, P.C.
C & E Acquisition Group, LLC
Caddis Funding LLC
CASA Receivables Management, LLC
Ceteris Portfolio Services LLC dba J.J. Marshall & Associates
Cohen & Cohen Law, LLC
Complete Credit Solutions, Inc.
Consuegra & Duffy, PLLC
Convoke, Inc.
Credit Management Corporation
Denali Capital, LLC
First Credit Services, Inc
First Financial Asset Management, Inc. (FFAM 360)
Harvest Strategy Group, Inc.
Hudson Cook, LLP
Indiana Receivables, Inc.
Kaleo Legal
London & London
Martin Golden Lyons Watts Morgan PLLC
MauriceWutscher LLP
McGlinchey Stafford, PLLC
National Recovery Associates, Inc.
National Recovery Solutions, LLC
Payment Savvy, LLC
Pro Forma Inc
SIMM Associates, Inc.
Sonnek & Goldblatt, Ltd.
Tavelli Co., Inc. dba Tavco Credit Services
The Law Offices of Ronald S. Canter, LLC
Vargo & Janson, P.C.