InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
Final rule subject to approval will require federally regulated lending institutions to accept private flood insurance
Recently, the FDIC and OCC approved a joint final rule governing the acceptance of private flood insurance policies. (The final rule must also be approved by—and is still under review with—the other agencies jointly issuing the rule: the Federal Reserve Board, Farm Credit Administration, and National Credit Union Association.) The final rule amends regulations governing loans secured by properties in special flood hazard areas to implement the provisions of the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012 (Biggert Waters) concerning private flood insurance (see previous InfoBytes coverage of the proposed rule here). The National Flood Insurance Act and the Flood Disaster Protection Act require flood insurance on improved property that secures a loan made, increased, extended, or renewed by a federally regulated lending institution (lending institution) if the property is in a special flood hazard area for which flood insurance is available under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). Biggert Waters required the Agencies to adopt regulations directing lending institutions to accept insurance that meets the definition of “private flood insurance” in lieu of NFIP flood insurance.
The final rule, once approved by all five regulators, will institute the following provisions to take effect July 1:
- Lending institutions must accept private flood insurance policies meeting the definition of “private flood insurance.”
- Lending institutions may rely on a “streamlined compliance aid provision” to determine, without further review, that a policy meet the definition of “private flood insurance” if the policy (or an endorsement to the policy) contains the following language: “This policy meets the definition of private flood insurance contained in 42 U.S.C. 4012a(b)(7) and the corresponding regulation.”
- Lending institutions may choose to accept private policies that do not meet the statutory criteria for “private flood insurance” as long as the policies meet certain criteria and the lending institutions document that the policies offer “sufficient protection for a designated loan, consistent with general safety and soundness principles.”
- Lending institutions may exercise discretion when accepting non-traditional flood coverage issued by “mutual aid societies,” subject to certain conditions including that the lending institutions’ primary federal supervisory agency has determined that the plans qualify as flood insurance. However, the final rule does not require lending institutions to accept coverage issued by mutual aid societies.
Federal Reserve issues flood insurance enforcement action against Illinois bank
On November 13, the Federal Reserve Board announced an enforcement action against an Illinois state bank for allegedly violating the National Flood Insurance Act (NFIA) and Regulation H, which implements the NFIA. The consent order assesses a $15,000 penalty against the bank, but does not specify the number or the precise nature of the alleged violations. The maximum civil money penalty for a pattern or practice of violations under the NFIA is $2,000 per violation.
Federal Reserve Board issues flood insurance enforcement action against New York bank
On August 28, the Federal Reserve Board (Board) announced an enforcement action against a New York state bank for allegedly violating the National Flood Insurance Act (NFIA). The consent order assesses a $16,000 penalty against the bank, but does not specify the number or nature of the alleged violations. The maximum civil money penalty under that NFIA is $2,000 per violation.
FDIC releases March enforcement actions, fines banks for flood insurance violations
On April 27, the FDIC released a list of 20 administrative enforcement actions taken against banks and individuals in March. Civil money penalties were assessed against several banks including one against a Michigan-based bank citing violations of the Flood Disaster Protection Act (FDPA) for allegedly: (i) failing twice “to obtain flood insurance on a building securing a designated loan at the time of origination”; (ii) failing to obtain flood insurance on a borrower’s behalf in multiple instances, in addition to twice failing to maintain adequate flood insurance; and (ii) failing to follow force placed flood insurance procedures for several loans. A second civil money penalty was assessed against a New Jersey-based bank for allegedly engaging in a pattern of violating requirements under the FDPA and the National Flood Insurance Act, which included (i) failing to notify borrowers that they were required to purchase flood insurance; and (ii) failing to obtain flood insurance on a borrower’s behalf in a timely fashion for those borrowers who failed to obtain insurance within 45 days after receiving notification.
Also on the list are seven Section 19 orders, which allow applicants to participate in the affairs of an insured depository institution after having demonstrated “satisfactory evidence of rehabilitation,” and six terminations of consent orders, among others.
There are no administrative hearings scheduled for May 2018. The FDIC database containing all 20 enforcement decisions and orders may be accessed here.
FDIC fines banks for flood insurance violations, releases January enforcement actions
On February 23, the FDIC released a list of 12 administrative enforcement action orders taken against banks and individuals in January. Civil money penalties were assessed against two banks, including one against a Michigan-based bank citing violations of the Flood Disaster Protection Act (FDPA) and the National Flood Insurance Act (NFIA) for allegedly: (i) failing to obtain flood insurance on a borrower’s behalf at origination in multiple instances, and twice failing to maintain adequate flood insurance; (ii) failing twice to follow force placed flood insurance procedures; and (iii) failing to notify borrowers in multiple instances that the “collateral for the loan was in a designated special flood hazard area.” The other civil money penalty was assessed against a Wisconsin-based bank for allegedly engaging in a pattern of violating requirements under the FDPA and the NFIA, which included failing to provide borrowers with a “Notice of Special Flood Hazard and Availability of Federal Disaster Relief Assistance” in a timely fashion.
Also on the list are four Section 19 orders, which allow applicants to participate in the affairs of an insured depository institution after having demonstrated “satisfactory evidence of rehabilitation,” and three terminations of consent orders, among others.
There are no administrative hearings scheduled for March 2018. The FDIC database containing all 12 enforcement decisions and orders may be accessed here.
FDIC Fines Puerto Rican Bank for Flood Insurance Violations, Releases November Enforcement Actions
On December 29, the FDIC released a list of 29 administrative enforcement action orders taken against banks and individuals in November, as well as one termination order issued in October. The FDIC assessed a $153,000 civil money penalty against a Puerto Rican bank, citing 321 violations of the Flood Disaster Protection Act (FDPA) and the National Flood Insurance Act (NFIA) for (i) failing to notify borrowers that they were required to purchase flood insurance; and (ii) failing to obtain flood insurance on a borrower’s behalf in a timely fashion for those borrowers who failed to obtain insurance within 45 days after receiving notification. A second civil money penalty was issued against an Ohio-based bank for allegedly engaging in a pattern of violating requirements under the FDPA and NFIA, including by failing to obtain flood insurance at the time of origination.
Also on the list are consent orders issued against two banks related to unsafe or unsound banking practices, four Section 19 orders allowing applicants to participate in the affairs of an insured depository institution after having demonstrated “satisfactory evidence of rehabilitation,” five terminations of consent orders, and two adjudicated decisions, among others.
There are no administrative hearings scheduled for January 2018. The FDIC database containing all 30 enforcement decisions and orders may be accessed here.
OCC Recent Enforcement Actions Target BSA/AML Compliance Programs and National Flood Insurance Act Violations
On December 14, the OCC released a list of recent enforcement actions taken against national banks, federal savings associations, and individuals currently and formerly affiliated with such parties. The new enforcement actions include cease and desist orders, civil money penalty orders, removal/prohibition orders, and restitution orders. The list also includes recently terminated enforcement actions.
Cease and Desist Order. On November 9, the OCC issued a consent order (2017 Order) two days after converting a Japanese bank’s two New York branches under the supervision of the New York Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) to federally licensed branches under the supervision of the OCC. As part of the OCC’s approval process, the bank’s federal branches and New York branches agreed to the issuance of the 2017 Order, which requires adherence to “remedial provisions . . . substantively the same as those” in consent orders entered into in 2013 and 2014 with NYDFS. The previously issued consent orders addressed deficiencies related to the bank’s Bank Secrecy Act/Anti-Money Laundering (BSA/AML) sanctions compliance programs, specifically concerning the removal of key warnings to regulators on transactions with sanctioned countries.
The 2017 Order, among other things, requires the bank to: (i) submit an action plan on enhancing internal controls and updating policies and procedures to correct BSA/AML deficiencies, address provisions applicable under the Office of Foreign Assets Control’s requirements, and implement requirements outlined in the 2013 and 2014 consent orders; (ii) ensure adherence to the action plan and 2017 Order under the direction of the bank’s general manager; (iii) submit a management oversight plan designed to improve and enhance the bank’s sanctions compliance programs; and (iv) prevent the retention or future engagement of any individual identified and “barred by the 2014 Consent Order from engaging, directly or indirectly, in any duties, responsibilities, or activities at or on behalf of the [b]ank or the [b]ank’s affiliates that involve their banking business in the [U.S.].” The 2017 Order does not require the bank to pay a civil monetary penalty.
Civil Monetary Penalty. On October 10, the OCC assessed a $452,000 civil monetary penalty against a national bank lender for alleged violations of the National Flood Insurance Act and/or the Flood Disaster Protection Act. The bank agreed to pay the penalty without admitting or denying any wrongdoing.
FDIC Releases List of Enforcement Actions Taken Against Banks and Individuals in September 2017
On October 27, the FDIC released a list of 23 orders of administrative enforcement actions that it has taken against banks and individuals in September, as well as one consent order termination issued in August. Civil money penalties were assessed against two banks, including one citing violations of the Flood Disaster Protection Act and the National Flood Insurance Act for (i) failing to obtain flood insurance during loan origination or to obtain “adequate” flood insurance, and (ii) failing to provide written notice in a timely fashion—or at all—to borrowers that the property securing the loan was in a special flood hazard area.
Consent orders were issued against eight institution-affiliated parties related to unsafe or unsound banking practices and breaches of fiduciary duty concerning their actions when supervising a Pennsylvania bank’s mortgage division. Also on the list are five Section 19 orders, which allow applicants to participate in the affairs of an insured depository institution after having demonstrated “satisfactory evidence of rehabilitation,” and three terminations of consent orders, among others.
There are no administrative hearings scheduled for November 2017. The FDIC database containing all 24 enforcement decisions and orders may be accessed here.
FDIC Releases August 2017 Enforcement Actions
On September 29, the FDIC released its list of 27 orders of administrative enforcement actions taken against banks and individuals in August. The FDIC assessed civil money penalties against three banks, including one citing violations of the National Flood Insurance Act (NFIA) and the Flood Disaster Protection Act for (i) failing to obtain flood insurance before loan origination; (ii) failing to provide flood insurance coverage for the full term of the loan; (iii) failing to ensure the amount of flood insurance coverage was “at least equal to the outstanding principal balance of the loan or the maximum limit of coverage” under the NFIA, including numerous instances where coverage options were not provided to borrowers; and (iv) failing to provide written notice in a timely fashion—or at all—to borrowers that the property securing the loan was in a special flood hazard area.
Also on the list are six removal and prohibition orders against institution-affiliated parties related to unsafe or unsound banking practices and breaches of fiduciary duty leading to financial loss. One of these orders fines an individual $200,000 for expense account-related misconduct, concealing the ownership of certain stock from the FDIC, and causing dividends on this stock to be placed into his personal account. The list also contains seven Section 19 orders allowing applicants to participate in the affairs of an insured depository institution after having demonstrated “satisfactory evidence of rehabilitation,” and eight terminations of consent orders.
There are no administrative hearings scheduled for October 2017. The FDIC database containing all 27 of its enforcement decisions and orders may be accessed here.
OCC, Federal Reserve Issue Flood Insurance Violations; Reauthorization of National Flood Insurance Program Discussions Continue
During the month of May, the OCC and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve (Board) took action against certain banks for violations of the Flood Disaster Protection Act (FDPA) and National Flood Insurance Act (NFIA). Concurrently, House Financial Services Subcommittee Republicans circulated a package of draft legislation to reform and reauthorize the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), which expires at the end of September.
OCC Action. On May 19, as part of its monthly listing of enforcement actions taken against national banks, federal savings associations, and former institution-affiliated parties, the OCC announced that it had fined a Texas-based federal savings association $87,500 in April for violations of the FDPA. According to the consent order, the bank allegedly failed to “ensure the timely notification and force-placement of the requisite amounts of flood insurance on property securing loans in a special flood hazard area in which flood insurance is available under the NFIA.”
Federal Reserve Action. On May 25, the Board announced an enforcement action against a Georgia-based bank for violations of the NFIA. Although the consent order fines the bank $1.5 million, it does not specify how many violations there were or what they related to. However, the maximum civil money penalty under that law is $2,000 per violation. The NFIA has a number of requirements for banks, which include ensuring that a borrower has adequate flood insurance before originating a loan for a property in a special flood hazard area and providing notice to the borrower in a reasonable time before closing that they are required to have flood insurance.
National Flood Insurance Program Discussion. As previously covered in InfoBytes, several committees—including the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs and the House Financial Services Committee—are discussing the reauthorization of the NFIP. On May 25, Rep. Sean Duffy (R-Wis.), Chairman of the House Financial Services Subcommittee, issued a series of reauthorization discussion drafts and summaries. The six bills (see below) included in the package would (i) reauthorize the NFIP for five years; (ii) limit annual premium increases; (iii) authorize states to voluntary create flood insurance affordability programs; (iv) eliminate the mandatory purchase requirement for commercial properties; (v) establish a private market for flood insurance; (vi) reform the flood zone mapping process to increase accuracy and fairness in mapping; (vii) require covered flood prone areas to develop plans to mitigate flood risks if they have repeated structure losses; and (viii) address fraud in the claims process.
- National Flood Insurance Program Policyholder Protection and Information Act of 2017—Discussion Draft and Summary;
- Private Flood Insurance Market Development Act of 2017—Discussion Draft and Summary;
- National Flood Insurance Program Mapping Fairness Act of 2017—Discussion Draft and Summary;
- Flood Risk Mitigation Act of 2017—Discussion Draft and Summary;
- National Flood Insurance Program Integrity Improvement Act of 2017—Discussion Draft and Summary; and
- National Flood Insurance Program Administrative Reform Act of 2017—Discussion Draft and Summary.
Duffy noted, “We’re releasing this discussion draft so that all sides can continue to provide input into protecting the program integrity of the NFIP.” He added, “The ideas stemming from this open process will ensure that everyone who needs flood insurance will have access to it while ensuring that the NFIP does not fall further into debt.”
Pages
- « first
- ‹ previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4