Archive

USAA ENFORCEMENT ACTION

When a big bank gets hit with a big penalty I often find that community banks think it is a “big bank thing” that does not impact community banks. Big banks make the same mistakes as community banks but they do it on a bigger scale. The recent settlement between the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and USAA Federal Savings Bank (USAA) is a good case in point. The CFPB found that USAA: Violated the […]

Read More…

PREPAID RULE LIVES TO FIGHT ANOTHER DAY

For those banks that fervently prayed the almost 1,700-page Prepaid Account rule would be banished by the Party of Lincoln – sorry but it survived the recent round of regulatory rollbacks.  Courtesy of the law firm, Ballard Spahr, and its Consumer Finance Monitor (CFM) webpage and Politico, we have learned that the joint resolutions introduced in the Senate and House in February to kill the upcoming Prepaid Account regulation, died on the vine of apathy.  […]

Read More…

REGULATION E ERROR RESOLUTION AND POLICE REPORTS – NEITHER THE TWAIN SHALL MEET?

During a recent Regulation E training event, the class and I discussed the Regulation E Section 1005.11 “Procedures for resolving errors” and there, as always, was very active discussion of what a bank may request, but not require. I brought up the prohibition against requiring police reports as a requirement for the bank to either begin the investigation provision or to provide provisional credit and there were a number of questions.  Many banks have in […]

Read More…

WORKS IN PROCESS

“For the rest of this year and the next, our rulemaking agenda at the Consumer Bureau will remain quite active.” Director Richard Cordray recently stated. So what can we expect to see from the CFPB? The agency is working on new or revised rules for: Overdraft fees, including the opt-in process for overdraft coverage of electronic transactions; Collection and publication of data on small business lending (The Dodd-Frank Act required final rules by July 21, […]

Read More…

REGULATION E CIVIL MONETARY PENALTIES

Case 1 – In late July an Indiana bank was assessed a $70,000 penalty for engaging in unfair and deceptive acts or practices by the imposition of requirements on consumers in the resolution of electronic transfer errors which were more onerous than those set forth in Regulation E, thereby effectively delaying, denying or discouraging error resolution claims. Case 2 – In mid-July a bank located in Kentucky was assessed a $100,000 penalty for engaging in unfair […]

Read More…