Phillip Schofield Quotes

The creation of a consumer agency, structured similarly to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, levels the playing field. It gives consumers a powerful advocate at the federal level.

My pet hate, with customers, is those that think it's all about wallets.

Know how to effectively voice a complaint or make a claim at a retail store.

From the very start, I thought there were four key principles that the agency should focus on: driving private investment, driving innovation, promoting competition, and protecting consumers.

Many people want the government to protect the consumer. A much more urgent problem is to protect the consumer from the government.

I've spent a lot of time trying to understand how all the big cosmetics companies get away with the placebo science and unscientific claims.

I don't think we can go back to the old days. But I think that what the government needs to do is it needs to make sure that the pricing is fair, that you don't have monopolies out there, so that people don't have a chance to compete fairly.

From the right to know will flow the right to demand, and get, tougher laws and safer practices.

… a federal industrial commission comparable to the Interstate Commerce Commission and the protection of the people from concerns offering worthless investments under highly colored and specious appearances

Competition does a much more effective job than government at protecting consumers.

The Consumer Finance Protection Bureau supposedly exists to protect you, but instead it tries to micromanage your everyday life.

In the old days, you dealt with one regulator. Now it's five or six. You all should ask the question how American that is.

Frankly, I do like the idea that we centralize consumer protection for financial products into one agency.

I want to protect consumers from their government.

A network neutrality rule could result in mere 'slaps on the wrist' or involve such expensive and difficult litigation procedures that no small company or consumer could ever bring a case.

Preemption is not about the Essure women - it affects all consumers. If someone had a medical device installed, there's no recourse for victims, and the company is protected. If there's a problem, the company gets a pass because they have preemption. It dawned on me the consumer didn't know. The women didn't know that this existed.

Our job, which Congress gave us, was to protect consumers. That work needs to be done in our communities for people regardless of what happens with elections, regardless of what happens with particular people and particular offices, and that is something that I have tried to stress at my agency.

I have and will continue to oppose any legislation that would undermine the important consumer protections provided under Dodd-Frank.

Protecting consumers goes beyond just fighting illicit schemes. It also involves making sure that they get what they pay for. Unfortunately, rural telephone customers aren't always assured of that.

I actually thought that the marketplace was pretty imbalanced when the consumer bureau was first created and financial institutions did not have someone looking carefully over their shoulder to look after the interest of consumers.

We marked a milestone for consumer empowerment when we began to publish consumer complaint narratives which allow people to share in their own words their experiences in the consumer financial marketplace.

I understand that some people are angry about taxi services. A taxi fare hike should be accompanied by better customer service.

Requiring forced arbitration agreements limits consumer rights and protections.

Reasonable regulations are essential to protect consumers from harmful practices and ensure that consumer financial markets operate in a fair, transparent, competitive manner.

We owe it to consumers to treat their dollars with respect and to double- and triple-check our assumptions about complex marketplaces rather than getting locked into a regulatory tunnel vision that will ultimately leave consumers with fewer, more expensive choices.