September 28, 2022

Volume XII, Number 271

Advertisement

September 28, 2022

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

September 27, 2022

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

September 26, 2022

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Adding Fuel to the Fire: Is the FDIC Inadvertently Encouraging Lawsuits Against Banks Over NSF Fees?

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) on August 18, 2022 issued updated Supervisory Guidance on banks assessing multiple re-presentment fees against customers’ accounts. This follows the March 2022 FDIC Consumer Compliance Supervisory Highlights, which also raised similar concerns. The guidance focuses upon banks that charge a fee each time an item is presented and then returned. If insufficient funds (“NSF”) fees are being assessed by the bank, this is generally the default setting for most core processor systems (and often cannot be changed). The guidance raises two significant issues, both under the prohibition on unfair and deceptive acts and practices (“UDAP”) in Federal Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”). In addition, both of these claims presumably would serve as a basis for a claim under the prohibition on unfair, deceptive, and abusive acts and practices (“UDAAP”) under the Dodd-Frank Act.   

First, the FDIC notes that many banks are not adequately disclosing how they assess their NSF fees. In particular, these banks are not clearly describing that an NSF fee will be assessed for each presentment, as opposed to being assessed for each item. The FDIC concludes that a lack of clarity could serve as a basis for a claim that the bank is engaging in deceptive practices—a basis for a claim under UDAP (and presumably UDAAP).

Second, and most importantly for many banks, the FDIC notes that — even if the disclosure is clear — the assessment of multiple NSF fees may still constitute an unfair practice. The FDIC reasons that charging multiple NSF fees in a short time period would effectively prevent a customer from bringing the account positive and avoiding the ongoing fees. The FDIC notes that “[w]hile revising disclosures may address the risk of deception, doing so may not fully address the unfairness risks.” 

There are a number of key takeaways from this guidance:

  • This will likely embolden plaintiffs in ongoing lawsuits against banks relating to their overdraft and NSF practices.

  • This guidance should be read both as a warning about the FDIC’s position and a basis for the CFPB to assert UDAAP violations.

  • Banks should carefully review and understand how NSF and overdraft fees are assessed against customers and review what options (if any) they have with their core processing system providers.

  • Banks should carefully review their overdraft and NSF disclosures with their outside counsel and compliance professionals.

  • Banks should carefully review any outside vendor relationships when those third parties are involved in managing or advising on an overdraft or NSF program.

  • Banks should understand the scope of their overdraft and NSF programs so that any tail risk can be quantified for management and the Board of Directors.

Copyright ©2022 Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLPNational Law Review, Volume XII, Number 264
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

About this Author

Brad Rustin Finance Attorney Nelson Mullins South Carolina
Partner

Brad chairs the firm’s Financial Services Regulatory Practice. His career began as a litigator focusing on consumer financial services litigation and defense of regulatory claims against chartered and non-chartered financial institutions, finance entities, and money services business. Following in the wake of the fiscal crisis, he began working with financial institutions, state-licensed lenders, money transmitters, non-traditional lenders, check cashers, and mortgage brokers on issues of regulatory compliance. As the regulatory environment facing financial institutions...

864-373-2320
Erin Kolmansberger Partner Nelson Mullins
Partner

Erin assists clients in regulatory and compliance issues, helping them respond to subpoenas and other alleged violations. She advises clients on their compliance obligations and legal risks in their business. She also helps clients plan and navigate internal investigations.  In the financial sector, Erin assists clients in negotiating and drafting master service agreements between banks and FinTechs. She has substantial experience managing and successfully resolving a wide range of complex disputes in federal and state trial courts, mediations, FINRA arbitrations, and...

305-373-9448
Anastasia D. Stull Of Counsel Nelson Mullins
Of Counsel

Anastasia (“Tasia”) is a senior financial services executive and attorney who brings over 20 years of experience to the Financial Services Regulatory Team. Tasia counsels banks, non-bank lenders, FinTechs, and financial services companies in matters involving consumer, commercial, retail, and institutional financial services. Her hands-on perspective and knowledge of industry trends enables her to provide strategic and practical advice to financial services companies on the challenges they face today. Tasia is also the Executive Director of Assureg, the firm’s regulatory...

202-689-2964
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement