InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
Texas agencies issue emergency guidance for home equity lenders
On April 22, the Texas Department of Banking, Department of Savings and Mortgage Lending, Office of Consumer Credit and Credit Union Department issued revised home equity lending guidance related to making new loans or adjusting existing loans to facilitate recovery efforts. The agencies encouraged lenders to work with borrowers to assist recovery while providing guidance on how lenders can ensure they maintain a valid home equity lien.
Special Alert: OFAC encourages humanitarian aid, promises consideration of Covid-19 compliance challenges
The Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control recently took two actions to address the impact of Covid-19. First, OFAC issued a fact sheet that consolidates existing authorizations and guidance permitting humanitarian, agricultural, and medical aid to six jurisdictions subject to sanctions. Second, OFAC encouraged companies facing compliance challenges due to Covid-19 to shift resources to higher-risk areas, noting that it would take this move into consideration if it leads to a violation during the pandemic. Companies facing compliance challenges may wish to consider such a shift, while documenting their risk-based rationale for doing so.
Humanitarian fact sheet
Last week, OFAC issued a fact sheet regarding the provision of Covid-19-related assistance under its Iran, Cuba, North Korea, Syria, Ukraine/Russia, and Venezuela sanctions regimes. The fact sheet made no changes to existing laws and guidance, but consolidated existing licenses, exemptions, authorizations, and related FAQs relevant to humanitarian aid and medical equipment for these regimes. The fact sheet should prove to be a valuable resource for financial institutions and other organizations confronting a wave of transactions to provide personal protective equipment to sanctions-targeted jurisdictions wracked by Covid-19, while complying with OFAC regulations.
Korean bank settles investigation into Iran transfers; resolves BSA/AML violations allegations
On April 20, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York and the New York attorney general announced that a Korean bank will pay $51 million in penalties to resolve a six-year investigation into the bank’s transfer of more than $1 billion to Iranian entities in violation of U.S. economic sanctions. According to the U.S. Attorney’s press release and deferred prosecution agreement and statement of facts (as well as a press release from the state attorney general), the bank violated the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) by “willfully failing to establish, implement, and maintain an adequate anti-money laundering (‘AML’) program” at its New York branch—even though its compliance officer repeatedly asked it to do so—which led to the illegal transfer of approximately $1 billion in transactions to Iran in violation of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. According to the government, the bank’s lack of an effective AML program resulted in its failure to detect and report $10 million in payments through the bank and other U.S. financial institutions from Korean entities to Iranian entities, as well as its failure to “report the balance of the $1 billion of such sanctioned transactions” between the parties. Furthermore, the bank also failed to self-report to the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control its wrongdoing in a timely manner or its willful violations of the BSA prior to the investigation. Under the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement, the bank will pay $51 million through a civil forfeiture action, half of which will go to the United States Victims of State Sponsored Terrorism Fund, and will undergo regular reviews of its AML and sanctions compliance programs.
The bank also reached a separate agreement with NYDFS for violating state regulations, under which it will pay an additional $35 million penalty for violations of BSA/AML laws. Among other things, NYDFS found that the compliance program of the bank’s New York branch failed to achieve satisfactory levels until its 2019 examination. “While the department applauds the bank for its ultimate efforts after eight examination cycles of noncompliance, one positive examination report does not equate to a sustainable, safe and sound financial institution,” NYDFS said in its consent order. Under the terms of the order, the bank is required to revise its BSA/AML compliance program and enhance its customer due diligence program to ensure compliance with relevant state laws and regulations. NYDFS acknowledged the bank’s substantial cooperation in the matter, including remediating identified shortcomings.
6th Circuit affirms access-device fraud and identity theft convictions
On April 17, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed a district court’s access-device fraud and aggravated identity theft convictions, finding that there was sufficient evidence to support the court’s factual findings on both charges. According to the opinion, the defendant applied for a debit card for his great-grandfather’s bank account without authorization and used the card to pay for his own expenses. The defendant was also seen multiple times on bank security cameras withdrawing money from an ATM using this card. The district court also heard testimony that the defendant opened accounts and applied for loans under his own name but used his great-grandfather’s social security number. The district convicted the defendant on one count of access-device fraud and two counts of aggravated identity theft. The defendant appealed, arguing that the district court failed to make adequate findings of fact and that the government failed to present sufficient evidence to support the charges for which he was convicted.
On appeal, the 6th Circuit reviewed the factual findings underlying the convictions, and first concluded that, with respect to the count of access-device fraud, the government proved each element: that the defendant (i) knowingly used an access device assigned to another individual; (ii) possessed an intent to defraud; (iii) obtained a thing or things with an aggregate value of $1,000 or more within a year using the access device; and (iv) affected interstate or foreign commerce in using the access device. The appellate court explained that there was ample circumstantial evidence to support lack of authorization from the proper owners of the accounts at issue, and that the card was issued in Kentucky and the bank issuing the card was headquartered in Minnesota. The appellate court next considered whether evidence supported the district court’s finding that the defendant committed aggravated identity theft under the bank-fraud statute by opening a checking account and applying for a loan using his great-grandfather’s social security number. The appellate court held that the defendant’s use of his great-grandfather’s social security number properly supported the district court’s finding that the defendant knowingly used, without lawful authority, another person’s means of identification and that the defendant committed a predicate felony under the bank-fraud statute.
SEC issues multiple whistleblower awards
On April 20, the SEC announced a $5 million award to a whistleblower in an enforcement action. According to the SEC’s press release, the whistleblower “provided critical evidence of wrongdoing, which helped save time and resources in the SEC’s investigation.” The formal order also states that the whistleblower “promptly reported the information” and “suffered a unique hardship” by being terminated shortly after raising concerns internally.
Earlier on April 16, the SEC announced an award of more than $27 million to a whistleblower in an enforcement action. According to the SEC’s press release, the whistleblower provided “critical investigative leads,” tied in part to misconduct occurring overseas, that “advanced the investigation and saved significant Commission resources.” The formal order also stated that the whistleblower, among other things, provided substantial assistance and cooperation, relayed information that “helped the Commission further significant law enforcement interests,” and “repeatedly and strenuously” raised concerns about internal misconduct within the whistleblower’s organization. The award is the sixth largest overall award since the program began.
According to the SEC, as of April 20 it has awarded 80 individuals a total of approximately $430 million in whistleblower awards since its first award in 2012.
District court says $267 million robocall verdict is not unconstitutionally excessive
On April 17, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued an order granting in part and denying in part several motions pertaining to a class action lawsuit, which accused a debt collection agency (defendant) of violating the TCPA, FDCPA, and the California Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by using repeated robocalls and pre-recorded voices messages to collect debt. As previously covered by InfoBytes, last September the court entered a $267 million final judgment against the defendant, consistent with a jury’s verdict that found the defendant liable for violating the TCPA by making more than 500,000 unsolicited robocalls using autodialers. Under the terms of the judgment each class member was awarded $500 per call. The defendant argued that the award was unconstitutionally excessive and violated due process, and requested that the court reduce the per violation amount. The court was unpersuaded and upheld the judgment, stating that the defendant failed to identify (and the court could not find) any “Ninth Circuit authority on how a district court should reduce damages that are found to be unconstitutionally excessive.” While acknowledging that the award was “significant,” the court stated that it also “evidences the fervor with which the United States Congress was attempting to regulate the use of autodialers for non-consensual calls” and that “the unilateral slashing of an award does not only ignore the plain words of the statute, the task is devoid of objectivity.” Among other actions, the court granted the defendant’s request to amend the final judgment to reflect that allegations concerning “willful and/or knowing violations of the TCPA” were dismissed with prejudice and that the defendant succeeded at summary judgment on the FDCPA and state law claims. However, the court denied the defendant’s request to release any surplus or residue amounts not distributed to a class member back to the company. The court also approved the class counsel’s motion for more than $89 million in attorneys’ fees and non-taxable costs of $277,416.28, and awarded the named plaintiff a $25,000 service award.
FHFA: Fannie, Freddie to temporarily buy mortgages in forbearance due to Covid-19
On April 22, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) announced that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (GSEs) will purchase “certain single-family mortgages in forbearance that meet specific eligibility criteria” for a limited period in an effort to provide liquidity to ensure continued lending. Current policies dictate that the GSEs do not purchase loans that are in forbearance; however, due to the economic effects of Covid-19, FHFA will begin allowing the GSEs to buy certain mortgages that enter forbearance within the first month after loan closing, prior to delivery to the GSEs. The temporary selling requirements in Freddie Mac Bulletin 2020-12 allow lenders to sell to the GSE mortgages in forbearance only on mortgages for home purchases or “no cash-out” mortgage refinances. Further, the mortgages must have note dates between February 1, 2020 and May 31, 2020, the dates of settlement must be after May 1, and the mortgages must not be more than 30 days delinquent. Fannie Mae Lender Letter 2020-06 follows most of the same guidelines provided in the Freddie Mac bulletin, but Fannie Mae will also buy mortgages for limited cash-out refinances. To limit losses, the GSEs will charge sellers loan-level price adjustments of 5 percent for loans to first-time homebuyers, and 7 percent for all others.
NCUA amends capital regulation to conform to CARES Act
On April 22, the NCUA approved an interim final rule (IFR) amending its capital adequacy regulation to align with the CARES Act. The NCUA amended its risk-based capital requirements to provide for a zero percent risk weight for Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans. Further, to neutralize the effect of the PPP loans on credit unions, the IFR will allow credit unions to omit covered loans from their total assets calculation when determining their net worth ratios. However, the covered loans must be “pledged as collateral for a non-recourse loan that is provided as part of the [Fed’s] PPP Lending Facility.” The IFR also amended “the definition of a commercial loan in the NCUA’s member business loans and commercial lending rule” to exclude PPP loans. This IFR is effective upon publication in the Federal Register, after which comments will be accepted for 30 days.
Vermont attorney general declares CARES stimulus checks exempt from garnishment/collection
On April 21, Vermont’s attorney general issued a directive to debt collectors, creditors, and financial institutions declaring that CARES Act stimulus payments are exempt from garnishment or collection under Vermont law. In addition, the directive asks banking institutions to voluntarily suspend any set-offs or other collection activity for overdrafts and fees that could impact the stimulus payments.
Maine governor relaxes certain lending requirements for Covid-19 loan guarantee program
On April 21, Maine’s governor issued an executive order concerning the Covid-19 Loan Guarantee Program recently established by Maine’s legislature. The order suspends the enforcement of certain statutory lending requirements law to allow financial institutions to consider a consumer’s creditworthiness and extent the amortization period of loans issued pursuant to the program. The order also extends certain grace periods, repayment periods, and claims provisions.