Takeaway: We maintain a strong conviction in our longer-term thesis, viewing this latest action as favorable noise allowing for a better entry-point.

In an 8-K released this morning, Encore disclosed that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has filed a lawsuit against the company and its U.S.-based subsidiaries alleging a failure to implement certain practices required under a consent order entered into with the CFPB back in 2015.

The largest debt collector in the U.S., Encore is no stranger to finding itself in regulatory cross-hairs, although this latest lawsuit is the first regulatory move against Encore under the Trump administration.

In summary, the CFPB is seemingly accusing Encore of three things:

  1. Since 2016, the company collected more than $300M from accounts using practices deemed improper in the 2015 order
    • Recall, the 2015 order required Encore to acquire and maintain proper documentation for all debts it sought to collect on
    • This sum represents 3.5% of cumulative collections from 1Q16-2Q20
  2. Encore pursued time-barred debts
    • Recall, in most states, there is a statute of limitations of about 8 year on debt collection, and debt collectors are required, but often fail to tell consumers that the debt they are attempting to collect on is in fact time-barred 
  3. Encore used an offshore company to process debit and credit card payments, failing to disclose the accompanying international transaction fee and the option for consumers to pay, without fee, through their bank accounts


It remains unclear exactly how much money the CFPB is seeking here, although for reference, in the 2015 order, Encore settled for $42 million in consumer redress as well as another $10 million in penalties. 

Based on Encore's 8-K, the company does not expect the outcome of this suit to be material, and our sense is the same as, in all likelihood, any impact will be dragged and fizzled out over several years of litigation.

This news has clearly triggered selling among those without proper context, whereas we continue to maintain a strong conviction in our longer-term thesis and view this latest regulatory development as favorable noise allowing for a better entry-point.