InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
House Committee Approves Legislation to Alter ATM Fee Disclosure Requirement
On June 27, the House Financial Services Committee unanimously approved H.R. 4367, which would amend the Electronic Fund Transfer Act to remove the requirement that ATMs attach a placard disclosing fees. Instead, the bill would require only that fees be disclosed on the ATM screen.
State Law Update: North Carolina Overhauls Banking Statute
On June 21, North Carolina Governor Bev Perdue signed Senate Bill 816, which rewrites substantial portions of the states banking laws. The bill derives from a Joint Legislative Study Commission report, which found several deficiencies in the states existing state banking laws. In particular, the report found that the states banking laws (i) needed to be modernized in the wake of the Dodd-Frank Act and other changes in federal law, (ii) encouraged banks to avoid the burden of the banking law by forming holding companies under the more liberal standards of the North Carolina Business Corporation Act, and (iii) failed to address changes in banks capital needs. To remedy these and other issues, the bill revises several parts of the existing law, including: (i) the size and composition of the Banking Commission, (ii) the rules regarding bank governance, powers, and operations, and (iii) the framework for bank supervision and liquidation.
State Law Update: NAAG to Focus on Privacy; Vermont, Connecticut, Oklahoma Make E-Commerce Changes
Incoming NAAG President to Focus on Privacy Issues. On June 22, after being elected president of the National Association of State Attorneys General (NAAG), Maryland Attorney General Doug Gansler announced a year-long Presidential Initiative titled “Privacy in the Digital Age.” The Initiative will explore the best ways to manage consumer privacy risks in light of “emerging technologies and business models” that are challenging consumers’ ability to control their personal information. Through the Initiative, state Attorneys General will attempt to ensure that “the Internet’s major players protect online privacy and provide meaningful options for privacy control” to consumers.
Two States Expand Data Breach Notification Requirements. Recently, Connecticut and Vermont altered state requirements for firms experiencing a data breach to report the breach. Connecticut’s revision – in the state’s annual budget bill, House Bill 6001 – expanded existing breach notification provisions to include notification to the state attorney general and takes effect October 1, 2012. Vermont amended, in House Bill 254, its breach notice law to require consumer notice of a security breach within 45 days and notification to the attorney general within 14 days of discovery of the incident. The Vermont requirement was effective as of May 8, 2012.
Oklahoma High Court Approves Rules for Electronic Filing and Signatures. On June 21, the Supreme Court of Oklahoma issued new state court rules governing the electronic filing of court documents in that state. These rules apply to a new statewide electronic management system that will replace the mix of electronic and paper-based record systems previously used in Oklahoma. Among other things, the rules provide for the use of electronic signatures where any statute or court rule requires a person’s signature in an Oklahoma state court. Like the new electronic system, the new rules will be phased in gradually; they become effective in each district and appellate court at the time the Oklahoma Unified Case Management System is implemented in that court.
California Appeals Court Holds Brokerage Agreement Sufficiently Incorporated Arbitration Provision
On June 21, the California Second District Court of Appeal held that a defendant brokerage firm had established an agreement to arbitrate, where the brokerage account application signed by the plaintiffs incorporated by reference certain arbitration provisions of a separate client agreement. Rodriguez v. Citigroup Global Markets, Inc., No. B230310, 2012 WL 2354637 (Cal. Ct. App. June 21, 2012). The appeals court observed that the plaintiffs had signed an account application that explicitly stated that any signatories had also agreed to all terms of a separate client agreement. Another paragraph of the same application, located directly above the signature lines, included an express acknowledgement that the client agreement included an arbitration provision. The court rejected several arguments proffered by the plaintiffs, including that (i) the references to the arbitration provision were unreadable, (ii) the plaintiffs had never received the client agreement containing the arbitration provision, (iii) the client agreement itself was not signed, and (iv) the client agreement was confusing.
FHFA, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac File Suit Challenging Imposition of State and Local Taxes
On June 22, the FHFA, along with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (the Enterprises), filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois challenging the authority of Illinois state and county officials to impose transfer taxes on transactions moving property to or from the Enterprises. Although the complaint concedes that federal law requires the Enterprises to pay real estate taxes on the value of properties held, it asserts that federal law exempts the Enterprises from other state and local taxation, including taxes tied to property transfers. This suit follows a class action raising the same issues, which was filed by a Florida county against FHFA and the Enterprises on June 15.
FinCEN Offers Guidance on Application of BSA Regulations to Daily Money Management Services and Prepaid Card Vendors
Recently, FinCEN released two Administrative Rulings, FIN-2012-R003 and FIN-2012-R004, that provide guidance on the application of Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) regulations to certain types of businesses. In the first ruling, FinCEN analyzed a prepaid access arrangement where a bank exercises primary control over the arrangement, while a bank vendor distributes and sells the prepaid access (via prepaid cards). FinCEN determined that the vendor would not be required to register as a prepaid access provider. Still, the vendor may be a seller of prepaid accesswho would be required to registerin certain listed circumstances. In the second ruling, FinCEN advised that companies that offer daily money management services may be subject to FinCENs regulations implementing the BSA. The company that requested the ruling facilitated the payment of monthly expenses for its customers and managed customers day-to-day finances. FinCEN concluded that the company was a money transmitter under FinCEN regulations because (i) the company disbursed company checks on its customers behalf, (ii) the company was not engaged in core debt management services, and (iii) the disbursements were not ancillary to some other good or service.
New York Appellate Court Holds Electronically Signed Affirmations Admissible
On June 21, a New York state appellate court held that an electronically signed affirmation is admissible under state court rules. Martin v. Portexit Corp., No. 303854/07, 2012 WL 2344889 (N.Y. App. Div. June 21, 2012). In this personal injury case, the defendants moved for summary judgment in the trial court and relied on two electronically signed expert affirmations. In opposing the motion, the plaintiff argued that the electronically signed affirmations were inadmissible because they did not comply with court rules. The trial court agreed. On appeal, the court determined that the term “subscribed” in state court rules does in fact include electronic signatures; as such, electronic signatures have the same legal effect as handwritten signatures. Further, the court held that under the federal E-SIGN Act and state law, a party to a suit need not prove who placed the electronic signature on an affirmation.
Regulators Extend Foreclosure Review, Issue Financial Remediation Framework, Publish Status Report
On June 21, the OCC and the Federal Reserve Board announced that the deadline for borrowers to seek review of foreclosures under the Independent Foreclosure Review program has been extended through September 30, 2012. At the same time, the regulators released a Financial Remediation Framework that sets out specific recommendations for remediation of financial injury for servicing errors, depending on the type of error and whether the foreclosure was in progress or complete at the time of remediation. Independent consultants will use the Framework to recommend remediation for financial injury identified during the Independent Foreclosure Review. Each servicer will prepare its own remediation plan based on independent consultant recommendations, which must be approved by the federal banking regulators. Also on June 21, the OCC published its second interim report on the status of the Independent Foreclosure Review and actions required under the April 2011 consent orders.
Federal Agencies Announce New Mortgage-Related Policies to Support Military Homeowners
On June 21, the CFPB, the federal prudential banking regulators, and the FHFA announced new policies to support servicemember homeowners. The CFPB, the Federal Reserve Board, the FDIC, the NCUA, and the OCC issued joint guidance that identifies specific servicing practices deemed by regulators to present risks to servicemembers. For servicemember homeowners who have received Permanent Change of Station Orders, the guidance instructs servicers to maintain adequate policies and procedures disallowing the identified practices. The guidance also informs servicers that if an agency determines that a servicer has engaged in any acts or practices that are unfair, deceptive, or abusive, or that otherwise violate federal consumer financial laws, the agency will take appropriate supervisory and enforcement actions. Concurrent with the regulators’ announcement, the FHFA announced that military homeowners with Permanent Change of Station Orders and with Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac loans will be eligible to sell their homes in a short sale even if they are current on their mortgage. Under the new policy, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will not pursue a deficiency judgment or any cash contribution or promissory note from covered servicemembers for any property purchased on or before June 30, 2012.
Supreme Court Asked to Hear New Case Involving Disparate Impact Claims Under the Fair Housing Act
On June 11, the New Jersey Township of Mount Holly petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to hear a case involving the use of disparate impact claims under the Fair Housing Act. Specifically, Mount Holly asks the Court to determine whether disparate impact claims are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act, and, if so, how such claims should be analyzed. The issues presented in this case are substantially similar to those the Supreme Court agreed to hear in Magner v. Gallagher, but was unable to hear because the petitioner in Magner withdrew its petition prior to oral argument. As detailed in a recent BuckleySandler article about Magner and the history of the Fair Housing Act, the Supreme Court has never decided whether the FHA permits plaintiffs to bring claims under a disparate impact theory. The U.S. Department of Justice and HUD, relying on lower court rulings permitting disparate impact claims, have increasingly employed the theory to further their policy goals. More recently, the CFPB repeatedly has stated its intention to apply disparate impact in enforcing ECOA. The instant petition could present an opportunity for the Court to alter the landscape within which federal authorities enforce the Fair Housing Act and other antidiscrimination laws.