NAFCU Compliance Blog

Outstanding Article on Reg E Error Resolution Procedures; Upcoming NAFCU Webcasts

Written by Steve Van Beek

Last Wednesday, I blogged on an article from the Fourth Quarter 2012 Philadelphia Federal Reserve's Consumer Compliance Outlook on Vendor Risk Management. Today, I wanted to share another outstanding free article on Error Resolution Procedures and Consumer Liability Limits for Unauthorized Electronic Funds Transfers.

The article is an absolute must read  - especially the examples which demonstrate the timeframes and liability limits. I strongly suggest passing this around to others at your credit union and consider using for training.

Reg E error resolution procedures has been mentioned by NCUA's Office of Consumer Protection in the past as an area where they see numerous member complaints and technical violations by credit unions (for example, by missing the timeframe requirements).  Again, take a look at the full article and be sure to share liberally at your credit union to ensure everyone is on the same page.

***

Upcoming NAFCU Webcasts.  We have another full slate of webcasts for the next month or so. Registration is open for all the webcasts listed below:

• Which New Requirements Apply to HELOCs? - April 10, 2013.  Register by COB Wednesday to Save $100!
  • Unfortunately, the new requirements applicability to HELOCs are scattered throughout the 3507 pages of mortgage information released by the CFPB. I'll be explaining which requirements apply to HELOCs and, just as importantly, which do not. If your credit union makes HELOCs, be sure to sign up!

• Preparing for New Mortgage Servicing Notices - April 17, 2013
  • Suzanne Garwood of Venable, LLP will explain new mortgage servicing notices including the mortgage periodic statement, interest rate adjustment notices (ARM notices) and force-placed insurance notices. Keep in mind that the small servicer exemption only applies to the periodic statement requirement and all credit unions servicing closed-end mortgages would need to comply with the ARM notices and force-placed insurance notices. Sign up by April 10 to Save $100!

• A Look Inside NCUA's National Supervision Policy Manual - May 1, 2013
  • Hear from experienced credit union attorney David Reed and Larry Fazio, Director of NCUA's Office of Examination & Insurance, on NCUA's new National Supervision Policy Manual. You'll receive an overview of the examination process - including recent (and future) changes by NCUA. Sign up today!

• NCUA's Office of Consumer Protection: Function, Role and Objectives - May 8, 2013 - Free to all credit unions!!
  • Keeping an eye on NCUA's Office of Consumer Protection was a key takeaway from NAFCU's Regulatory Compliance School. The webcast will feature Gail Laster, Director of NCUA's Office of Consumer Protection, and Moisette Sweat, Director of Consumer Compliance Policy & Outreach, as they explain the role of NCUA's Office of Consumer Protection. Because of the importance of this information, we are making this webcast available for free to all credit unions.  Sign-up here (look to the right for the "Register Now" button).

You can find additional information on NAFCU's live and on-demand webcasts here.  

A Final Farewell to the Legacy Forms; eCFR Updated to Reflect ATM Disclosure Amendments; Happy Weekend from the Twins

Written By JiJi Bahhur, Regulatory Compliance Counsel

With April 1 approaching, I thought today would be a good time to remind you all that after March 31, 2013, the legacy reports can no longer be used for filing SARs and CTRs.  Starting April 1, 2013, the new SAR and CTR forms must replace the legacy forms if you have not already said your goodbyes to those forms. 

For more information, check out FinCEN’s guidance on this matter and past blog posts written by NAFCU’s Compliance Team (here, here, and here). 

***

In last Friday’s blog post, Steve mentioned that the CFPB issued a final rule requiring the removal of the Regulation E requirement to place ATM fee disclosure language “on the machine.” He also mentioned that the final rule would be effective immediately upon publication in the Federal Register.  Well, as of March 26, 2013, the final rule has been published in the Federal Register.  And on a grander note, the language has already been removed from the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, thus making everything consistent. 

    “§ 1005.16   Disclosures at automated teller machines.

     (a) Definition. “Automated teller machine operator” means any person that operates an automated teller machine at which a consumer initiates an electronic fund transfer or a balance inquiry and that does not hold the account to or from which the transfer is made, or about which an inquiry is made.

    (b) General. An automated teller machine operator that imposes a fee on a consumer for initiating an electronic fund transfer or a balance inquiry must provide a notice that a fee will be imposed for providing electronic fund transfer services or a balance inquiry that discloses the amount of the fee.

    (c) Notice requirement. An automated teller machine operator must provide the notice required by paragraph (b) of this section either by showing it on the screen of the automated teller machine or by providing it on paper, before the consumer is committed to paying a fee.

    (d) Imposition of fee. An automated teller machine operator may impose a fee on a consumer for initiating an electronic fund transfer or a balance inquiry only if:

     (1) The consumer is provided the notice required under paragraph (c) of this section, and

     (2) The consumer elects to continue the transaction or inquiry after receiving such notice.”

Now when credit unions research Regulation E, the regulation matches the underlying law! Imagine that!

***

The twins and I intend to just relax this weekend.  We hope you can do the same!

CFPB Issues Final Rule to Remove ATM Fee Disclosure; The Cost of Compliance

Written by Steve Van Beek

Yesterday, the CFPB announced - via blog post - that they were issuing a final rule to amend Regulation E to remove the federal "on the machine" requirement for ATM fee disclosures.  Kudos to the CFPB for reading our blog post from last week and taking action to remove this unnecessary regulatory burden (the CFPB's inaccurate regulation; Congress had removed the requirement from the Electronic Funds Transfer Act three months ago).

Of course, it wouldn't be a CFPB blog post without a plea for consumers to submit a complaint.  Here is how the blog post ends:

"Congress recently amended the law about ATM fee disclosures to eliminate the sticker requirement. Now the CFPB is following the law by changing these rules. While this change means that consumers may no longer see a sticker on the ATM telling them that the ATM owner may charge a fee, the information about these charges, including the amount of the charge, will still appear on the ATM screen or a printout. The consumer will be able to cancel the ATM transaction without paying a dime.

At the CFPB, we work to ensure that consumers have the information they need to make informed decisions about their financial products and services. If you have had a confusing experience with ATM fees, you may contact the CFPB to tell us your story or submit a complaint."

Importantly, the final rule will be effective immediately upon publication in the Federal Register. While it took the CFPB three months to follow Congress' command, at least they took the appropriate step and made the rule effective immediately.

***

Cost of Compliance.  Earlier in the week, the CFPB issued a blog post indicating they were studying the cost of complying with consumer financial regulations.  Below is the language from the post:

"We’re studying the costs of complying with consumer finance regulations

Banks, credit unions, and other financial services providers are concerned with compliance costs – how much it costs to comply with financial regulations – and we’re interested as well. Regulations can have many benefits for consumers, but the benefits sometimes come at a cost.

What we want to know
What are the extent and nature of compliance costs?

So, what are we doing?
Our Research, Markets, and Regulations team is studying the costs related to rules we inherited from other agencies. We want to increase public understanding of compliance costs. As a first step, we will talk to banks across the country about the costs they incur to comply with consumer regulations for deposit products and services. These include products like checking accounts and debit cards, which nearly all banks offer and most consumers use. Through our research, we hope to become better and smarter regulators."

Now, you may be thinking - with all the new regulatory requirements - the last thing we have time to do is spend time and resources quantifying the time and resources we're expending on complying with regulations!!

A completely understandable point. But, keep in mind that you don't need to respond directly to the CFPB or conduct a full analysis of your information.  NAFCU's research division collects information on a monthly basis from NAFCU members and uses this information to help inform NAFCU comment letters, letters to the Hill and outreach to the media.

Each month, NAFCU's research division sends out an Economic and CU Monitor survey which is summarized and reported in the Economic and CU Monitor.

So, if you don't have the time or resources to provide a full "compliance cost" evaluation - consider going to NAFCU’s Economic and CU Monitor page and complete the online survey each month. It only takes 15 minutes and you don't need to answer questions that aren't applicable or that you where you don't have the information at hand.

***

Have a great weekend!  And for all those at Compliance School this week - thanks for an outstanding week!  

Regulatory Burden: Update the Regulations, Please!

Written by Steve Van Beek

I have an irregular blog post series where I highlight specific examples of unnecessary regulatory burden.  You can see past blog posts at the bullets below:

• Regulatory Burden: Piles of Old Guidance

• Regulatory Burden: Short-Term

Regulatory Burden - Update the Regulations, Please!  Today I want to look at another form of regulatory burden. And, I'm going to use three different regulators as examples (equal opportunity!) The general gist is that when credit unions look at the regulations - they should be accurate. When Congress changes the law, regulators have an obligation to update their regulations so that entities they regulate - including credit unions - can rely on those regulations. If the regulations aren't updated promptly, the result is a textbook case of unnecessary regulatory burden.

***

Example 1 - Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The CFPB has certainly been busy. However, I'd be shocked if they didn't notice that President Obama signed H.R. 4367 on December 20, 2012. This law removed the federal requirement for the "on the machine" ATM fee disclosures under the Electronic Funds Transfer Act (and implemented by Regulation E). If the CFPB did miss this, they should subscribe to the blog as they would see we were "hopeful" they would take swift action:

"Regulation E implements the EFTA and hopefully the CFPB will move very swiftly to amend Regulation E to ensure that everyone is aware of the change.

...

Note:  The removal of the requirement will occur after President Obama signs the bill and enacts it into law.  Thus, credit unions' litigation and compliance risk will reduce at that point.  The CFPB moving quickly to amend Regulation E and clarify the remaining requirement will be the icing on the cake.  Hopefully we don't have to wait too many birthdays."

Well, here we are on March 12, 2013 and a look to Regulation E - 12 CFR 1005.16 - clearly shows the CFPB hasn't updated Regulation E to implement the amendments to the Electronic Funds Transfer Act.

Where is the Burden? The burden lies in the fact that if a compliance officer was reviewing Regulation E they would come to the conclusion that federal law still requires the "on the machine" disclosure. Which is wrong. The Electronic Funds Transfer Act was amended by H.R. 4367 to remove the federal requirement and the CFPB just hasn't found the time to update Regulation E.

An isolated incident?  Must be due to the unique situations related to a new regulatory agency who was given so many mandates by Dodd-Frank.  Keep reading, it gets worse.

***

Example 2 - Federal Reserve Board. Dodd-Frank adjusted the "next-day availability" requirement under Regulation CC from $100 to $200. We blogged on this issue three times in 2011 and wondered why the Federal Reserve didn't issue a proposal to amend this one section of Reg CC:

"So, the Dodd-Frank change to Regulation CC - the one that bumps the $100 next day availability amount to $200 - when does it become effective?  July 21, 2011.  Some of you are thinking that you can wait, however, until the Fed finalizes its current Regulation CC rulemaking to comply.  Wrong.  Surprise, surprise, but the Fed buried this detail into its Reg CC proposal. 

Section 1086(e) of the Dodd-Frank Act increases from $100 to $200 the minimum amount of funds deposited by check or checks on a given business day that a bank must make available by opening of business on the next business day pursuant to § 603(a)(2)(D) of the EFA Act. That provision of the EFA Act is implemented in § 229.10(c)(1)(vii) of Regulation CC, and the increase is expected to take effect on July 21, 2011, regardless of whether the Board and the Bureau have amended Regulation CC. See, 76 Fed. Reg. 16,869."  [May 9, 2011 Blog Post]

***

"Regulation CC.  A change in Regulation CC from $100 to $200 for next-day availability.  The Federal Reserve has proposed changes to Reg CC that have not been finalized.  This change to $200 becomes effective though the Federal Reserve has not changed the language of Reg CC.  

....

Reality Check: Why didn't the Fed propose two different rules?  Rather than confuse the entire financial industry, the Fed could have easily issued one rule to implement the Dodd-Frank change and a separate rule to propose its other changes to Reg CC." [July 20, 2011 Blog Post]

***

"The letter is dated August 15.  Which is interesting because the change to $200 became effective July 21, 2011.  

Dodd-Frank was signed on July 21, 2010.  The Reg CC proposal was released March 3, 2011.  I'm still puzzled why the Fed did not propose two separate rules - with one proposal solely implementing the $200 change.

These are the types of headaches that do not get captured in any data on regulatory burden." [August 21, 2011 Blog Post]

A brief amendment to that last statement - these headaches do get realized by credit unions. Now, we need the regulators to realize the impact of their actions (or inactions).

Where is the Burden? A credit union searching the requirements for next-day availability under 12 CFR 229.10 of Regulation CC would find this:

"(vi) A check deposited in a branch of the depositary bank and drawn on the same or another branch of the same bank if both branches are located in the same state or the same check processing region; and,

(vii) The lesser of—

(A) $100, or

(B) The aggregate amount deposited on any one banking day to all accounts of the customer by check or checks not subject to next-day availability under paragraphs (c)(1) (i) through (vi) of this section."

And, if they followed that language - they would have a regulatory violation.  Let me repeat that - if a credit union followed the language of Regulation CC - as published by the Federal Reserve in the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations - they would have a regulatory violation as the regulation is incorrect.  If that isn't regulatory burden, I don't know what is!

***

Example 3 - National Credit Union Administration. By now, everyone is aware that the unlimited share insurance coverage for noninterest-bearing transaction accounts expired on December 31, 2012. We blogged on this issue on December 18, 2012 and then again on January 2, 2013. We also had discussions with NCUA about updating 12 CFR 745.14 of their regulations to prevent confusion by credit unions - which we discussed in our February 7, 2013 blog post.

So, here we are on March 12, 2013 and the language of NCUA's 12 CFR 745.14 still hasn't been removed. Granted, this example isn't as egregious due to the inclusion of this language "(a) Separate insurance coverage. Through December 31, 2012, a member's funds in a 'noninterest-bearing transaction account' (as defined in § 745.1(f) of this part)" - however, it still makes a credit union researching 12 CFR 745.14 follow-up with whether this has been unlimited share insurance has been extended or not. It hasn't and NCUA should make that information clear by removing 12 CFR 745.14 from their regulations.

Where is the Burden? There were so many back-and-forths on the unlimited share insurance issue - including Footnote 1 of NCUA's Letter to Credit Unions 12-CU-14 - that it is understandable that credit unions would be unsure whether or not the unlimited coverage was extended. NCUA could ease this burden by updating their regulations.

***

But, Regulating is Difficult. I'm sometimes told that I'm too harsh on regulators. That they have very difficult jobs. I get that. I'm not denying that fact (my wife works at a federal financial regulator and I know how hard she works). However, a basic job of a regulator is to make sure their regulations are clear and understandable. And, accurate.  This last part is extremely important. Credit unions need to be able to rely on the regulations that are published by the regulators. If they have to second-guess whether the regulations are accurate, they cannot perform other tasks - such as serving their members.

***

Summary.  If you are ever looking for an example of regulatory burden to show your Congressman - this blog post is a good start. We have the following:

• One example where a federal regulator failed to promptly update their regulations after Congress explicitly amended the law to remove an unnecessary regulatory burden from financial institutions.

• One example where a federal regulator failed to promptly update their regulations after Congress explicitly amended the law to provide further protections to consumers.

• One example where a federal regulator failed to update their regulations after Congress failed to extend a provision that was explicitly designed to "sunset" after a specific period of time.

I've been in the Washington D.C. area almost nine years and if I've learned one thing it is that Congress does not like to be ignored. 

NAFCU's Regulatory Compliance School Just Got Better - Regulatory Update Day

Written by Steve Van Beek

We've heard you!  For the past couple of years, we've received the following feedback about NAFCU's Regulatory Compliance School (paraphrased, of course):

"School is great and provided a solid foundation for understanding the regulatory requirements credit unions face on a daily basis.  BUT, the rules are changing so fast that it would be great to receive updates on what has just changed and what is changing next."

With this in mind, we've created Regulatory Update Day at NAFCU's 2013 Regulatory Compliance School (March 18-23 in National Harbor, Maryland).  

Regulatory Update Day (Thursday, March 21st) will provide:

• A clear understanding of what changes NCUA has in store for 2013 – including their Exam Focus

• An overview of the scope and applicability of the CFPB’s seven new mortgage regulations*

• A detailed look at the CFPB’s Qualified Mortgage/Ability-to-Repay requirements*

• Answers to Frequently Asked Questions on the mortgage rules from NAFCU’s compliance team*

• Insight from credit union attorneys and practitioners on how best to set up your implementation strategy

You can find more information on Regulatory Update Day here.  The three sessions with the "*" are sessions that are also part of NAFCU's Mortgage Reform Webcast Series.

The other 4 days of Compliance School will remain the same as will the opportunity to take the NAFCU Certified Compliance Officer (NCCO) exams.  Good luck!  

***

And, all attendees at NAFCU's 2013 Regulatory Compliance School will receive NAFCU's 2013 GPS (coming soon!) as well as NAFCU's Scope & Applicability Charts.

Remember:  You do not need to be a NAFCU member credit union to attend NAFCU's conferences or webcasts.  In fact, you don't even need to work at a credit union.  Each School usually features a handful of consultants, vendors and other credit union "peeps" who support credit unions - in one way or another - on a daily basis.      

***

Resources for the CFPB's International Remittances Regulation

Written by Steve Van Beek

A Wild Ride.  The evolution of the CFPB's international remittances regulation has been confusing to everyone.  First, we had the rule proposed by the Federal Reserve.  Then, the CFPB took over on July 21, 2011.  The CFPB finalized the rule but also proposed amendments to the rule at the same time.  Then, realizing the rule was not workable, the CFPB issued a delay of the effective date while it proposed additional changes.  So, that is where we are - trying to figure out where we are at.  And, how your credit union will be able to comply.  The CFPB has indicated the new effective date will likely be 90 days after they finalize the latest proposed changes (although they are taking comments).  That doesn't leave much time if your CU has made a business decision to continue offering remittance transfers to your members.

Below are a variety of resources that may be helpful to understand the new requirements and what steps your credit union will need to take to comply.

• The CFPB's Main Remittance Regulation Webpage

• Small Entity Compliance Guide

• Safe Harbor Countries List

• The CFPB's October 2012 Webinar on the Remittances Rule (also available here)

• Presentation Slides from October 2012 Webinar

• CFPB Bulletin 2012-08 Announcing Delay of Implementation Date

• Proposal to Amend Certain Provisions of Remittance Rule (but not the 100 transaction safe harbor level)

NAFCU also has these resources available to NAFCU-member credit unions:

• Regulatory Alert on Latest Remittance Proposal (13-EA-01) - Covers the Latest Proposed Changes

• Final Regulation on Remittance Requirements (12-EF-10) - Covers the Rules after the Concurrent Proposal was Finalized

• Final Regulation on Remittance Requirements (12-EF-02) - Covers the First Remittance Regulation Finalized by the CFPB

Throughout the process NAFCU has sent numerous comment letters to the CFPB on the remittance requirements.  Recently, we sent a letter urging the CFPB to further delay the requirements to ensure the rules do not unnecessarily burden credit unions trying to comply:

“First, NAFCU requests that the CFPB further extend the 90-day delay of the effective date to allow credit unions sufficient time to comply with the proposed rule and to make the required disclosures of fees, taxes, and exchange rates. Second, NAFCU continues to believe that the CFPB should exempt federally regulated credit unions, or, alternatively, small entities consistent with the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act, from the purview of the final remittance transfer rule. The regulatory burden that the remittance transfer rule places on credit unions will lead to a significant reduction in consumers’ access to remittance transfer services. Many credit unions already facing an enormous compliance burden have or will be forced to discontinue their remittance programs, and those that continue to offer remittances will be forced to significantly increase their members' fees.  

Further, NAFCU would like to reiterate the necessity for the CFPB to respond to credit union concerns during the rulemaking process, rather than implementing remedial measures after the fact. Although NAFCU appreciates the CFPB’s responsiveness to reconsider the remittance rule, proactive efforts by the CFPB to address potential problems and reduce the future compliance costs and regulatory difficulties faced by credit unions would be far more effective when conducted prior to and during the rulemaking process.”  (Emphasis added).

The last paragraph is especially important.  The process this regulation has taken has left everyone's head spinning.  The CFPB had opportunities to listen to industry feedback and make changes upfront.  Instead, they finalized the rules and only then did they realize they were not workable.  Unfortunately, the lack of operational experience and background at the CFPB was on full display.  They had a rule and were going to finalize it no matter what the consequences.  

***

NAFCU Remittances Webcast Today.  We also have a webcast on the Remittances Webcast today at 2:00 p.m. EST.  Be sure to tune in.  We've extended the early-bird deadline indefinitely, so you can purchase the webcast at any time (including after today) at the early-bird price.  To learn more about the webcast, click here.  

ATM Fee Disclosure Bill Signed; HMDA Reporting Threshold

Written by Michael Coleman, Regulatory Compliance Counsel

ATM Fee Disclosure Bill. On Thursday, December 20^th, 2012, President Obama signed the ATM Fee Disclosure bill (H.R. 4367) into law. We previously blogged about the impact this law has for credit unions, including the reduction of litigation risk, state law impacts, removal of the physical signs, and updates to Regulation E.

Now that the bill has been signed into law, the federal requirement for posting a physical notice on the ATM itself has been removed. Therefore, the credit union’s litigation and compliance risk going forward was reduced effective December 20, 2012.  This will allow credit unions to reduce the time and effort and costs spent tracking, photographing, documenting and auditing the notices on your ATMs.

State Law. As noted before, although the federal requirement for the physical notices has been eliminated, there still may be state laws which require a physical notice on ATMs. Two states that we are aware of that have such laws are New York (NY Gen Bus § 399-y) and Nevada (Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 660.052). You might want to check your own state’s laws and perhaps consult your local counsel with regards to any state law requirements that might affect your credit union. If you find applicable state law citations, please feel free to let us know.  

Removal of Notices. While the notices are no longer required on the actual ATMs, there is really no harm in leaving them there, and no reason to immediately remove the existing notices from the machines. The extra notice provided by the sign is still a service to member and non-member ATM users, and as mentioned above, there may be state law requirements for on machine disclosures.

***

2013 HMDA Asset Threshold. On December 28, 2012 the CFPB announced  the 2013 HMDA asset threshold, the final rule was published in the Federal Register on December 31, 2012. Institutions with assets of $42 million or less as of December 31, 2012, are exempt from HMDA reporting in 2013. The CFPB was a bit more timely with the publication of the threshold this year (they announced the 2012 threshold on February 15, 2012), let’s hope the trend continues.

HMDA Data Entry Software.  The free FFIEC HMDA Data Entry Software, version 2013 for calendar year 2013 data due March 3, 2014 is now available for download.

NCUA HMDA Webinar. NCUA will host a free webinar on January 24, 2013 at 2pm EST entitled “HMDA: Accuracy and Timeliness.” During the webinar experts from NCUA and the Federal Reserve Board will:

• address common errors identified in HMDA LAR data and submissions;
• provide tips for preparing and submitting accurate and timely HMDA LARs; and
• discuss financial institution management responsibilities in the HMDA process.

You can register for the webinar here. See NCUA’s press release for more details.

2012 HDMA Data. Reminder: For those credit unions over the 2012 threshold, your HDMA data for calendar year 2012 must be submitted by March 1, 2013.

***

Redskins, Again. Last week was the end of the NFL’s regular season, and the Redskins came up big time defeating Dallas to win the NFC East for the first time since 1999 and secure their first playoff berth since 2007. Needless to say, this weekend’s playoff game against Seattle has this Skins fan excited!

  

The ATM Fee Disclosure Bill & What it Means to Your Credit Union

Written by Steve Van Beek

By now, you'd probably heard that the ATM Fee Disclosure bill has passed the Senate and awaits President Obama's signature.  Great news to be sure, but there are some things to keep in mind.

Summary.  A quick summary of the issue may be useful.  The bill would remove the federal requirement for posting a physical notice on the ATM itself.  The on-the-screen notice will still be required in all situations.  

Biggest Impact.  The biggest impact this change will have is that it will reduce your litigation risks related to ATM notices.  Of course, you could still get sued after this law is in place (this is America, you can be sued for anything) - but you'd have an outstanding defense (I can't think of a better defense than Congress specifically looked at this and decided it shouldn't be law of the land).  

Note:  This law wouldn't change the outcome of any ongoing lawsuits or settlements.  The allegations in those suits came from when the underlying requirement was still law (and it still is until the President's signature).  

State Laws.  Another big issue to consider is that this bill will change the federal law on ATM fee disclosures.  There are state laws that could still require an "on the machine" fee disclosure even after this law is passed.  I know New York state has such a law and I'm sure there are others (if you know of others - please feel free to leave a comment on this blog post along with the citation if you have it).  

Remove Notices?  This all leads to the question of what your credit union should do after this law is passed.  The clearest is that you can reduce the time and effort spent tracking, photographing, documenting and auditing the notices on your ATMs.  These additional resources were all needed to help reduce the litigation risk.  When the bill is signed, the need for that amount of due diligence and documentation is removed.  

But what about the actual notices on our ATMs?  My thought is there is no reason to take any action to remove your existing notices.  While they would no longer be required, there is no harm in keeping them on the ATMs.  And, there are still benefits to keeping the notices.  

1. If you were sued after the law change, you'd have another defense.
2. As mentioned above, there could be a state law that requires the disclosure "on the machine."
3. Members (and non-members) are given additional notice about any fees (of course, they'll still receive the "on the screen" notice prior to being charged a fee.

Amendments to Regulation E.  When signed, this law will amend the Electronic Funds Transfer Act (EFTA).  Regulation E implements the EFTA and hopefully the CFPB will move very swiftly to amend Regulation E to ensure that everyone is aware of the change.  

Stepping into the wayback machine, here is a link to a blog post from April 2011 where I took a look at how confusing the existing language of Regulation E was and that this could actually be part of the reason there have been issues with fee disclosure notices.  Here is a snippet from that post:

"Here is my two-cent answer:  When small institutions are being sued around the country for ATM fee disclosures issues, it might be prudent to take a look at the underlying regulatory requirement to see if the disclosure requirements are clear and straightforward.  Credit unions want to comply with the regulations - don't make it harder than it needs to be." 

Obviously, the CFPB didn't make this issue a priority previously (remember their plans to streamline?).  But, kudos to Congress for stepping up and making this commonsense change to help remove one burdensome requirement from credit unions.  

Note:  The removal of the requirement will occur after President Obama signs the bill and enacts it into law.  Thus, credit unions' litigation and compliance risk will reduce at that point.  The CFPB moving quickly to amend Regulation E and clarify the remaining requirement will be the icing on the cake.  Hopefully we don't have to wait too many birthdays.  

ATM Fee Disclosure & CFPB Privilege Bills Pass Senate; NCUA Webinar; Member Call-In

Written by Steve Van Beek

Yesterday, we gave a roundup of various issues On the Hill.  Last night, the Senate passed both the ATM Fee Disclosure bill as well as the CFPB Privilege bill.  These will both move along to President Obama's desk for his signature.  You can find additional details in the NAFCU Today.  The NAFCU Today also has the latest on the TAB/NIBTA bill which would extend the unlimited share insurance on noninterest-bearing transaction accounts.  

***

NCUA Webinar.  NCUA recently announced a free webinar on Mergers this Friday.  The webinar will address the following questions:

• Why do mergers happen?
• Should merger scenarios be a part of strategic planning?
• Who is responsible for protecting the interests of members during a merger?
• How to maintain viability and avoid administrative mergers?
• How to find the ideal merger partner?
• What is the merger process?

Registration is now available.  The webinar is slated for 2:00 p.m. EST on Friday, December 14th.    

***

NCUA Small Credit Union Website.  NCUA also announced new features and a new design for their Office of Small Credit Union Initiatives (OSCUI) website.  The new website is here.    

***

NAFCU Member Call-In.  If you missed the live call-in last Thursday, you can still listen to the audio version here (NAFCU member log-in required).  The total call is just under 43 minutes.  If you don't have 43 minutes, you can listen to the compliance discussion from the 26:00 mark until the 35:30 mark.  

Remittances Webinar; Fair Lending Webinar; Archived Nonaccrual/TDR Webinar

Written by Steve Van Beek

Remittances.  The CFPB recently opened their Remittances Webinar to everyone - without the need to register (the webinar is free).  The webinar will be available on this page beginning at 2:30 p.m. Eastern.  The webinar will last 90 minutes.

That is TODAY at 2:30 p.m. Eastern.  Be sure to tune in.    

NOTE - The CFPB issued their small entity compliance guide yesterday.  

*** 

Fair Lending.  The Philadelphia Federal Reserve's Consumer Compliance Outlook will be hosting a Fair Lending Webinar tomorrow - October 17th from 2:00 - 3:30 p.m. Eastern.  You can register here.   

The presentation slides are already available here.  Topics to be discussed are:

• Recent Fair Lending Enforcement Actions
• Risk Assessments
• Fair Lending Compliance Management
• Data Reporting and Analysis
• FHA LGBT Rule, Disability Discrimination, Maternity Leave Discrimination
• Loss Mitigation and Loan Modification
• Redlining

Remember - TOMORROW at 2:00 p.m. Eastern.  Register here.   

***

Nonaccrual and TDR Webinar.  NCUA's webinar on Workouts, Nonaccrual and TDRs is now archived and available.  The webinar can be watched here.  A transcript is also available inside the webinar (or at this link).