Archive - 2010 Comment Letters

 Current Comment Letters

 Archive: 1999-2013


Technical Corrections, Part 704, Corporate Credit Unions
December 29, 2010
CUNA supports NCUA’s interim final rule to Part 704, Corporate Credit Unions, to make three technical corrections to the final amendments adopted September 24, 2010. The three corrections are: 1) A correction to the definition of "collateralized debt obligation" (CDO) in Section 704.2 of NCUA’s rules on corporate credit unions; 2) A correction to Section 704.6, Credit Risk Management; and 3) A correction in the date in the language in Model Form H, which should be used "on or after" and not "before" October 20, 2011.

Amended PCA Definition of Low-risk Assets
November 29, 2010
CUNA supports the National Credit Union Administration's (NCUA's) recent interim final rule that amends the definition of "low-risk assets" under prompt corrective action (PCA). In October, following a meeting with some of our largest credit union members where this issue arose, CUNA requested the definition be amended as NCUA has done. The final rule NCUA has adopted amends the PCA definition of "low-risk assets" to expand this category of investments to include "debt instruments unconditionally guaranteed by NCUA." Assets in the low-risk category are considered to be riskless and, therefore, receive a risk-weighting of zero percent for PCA purposes. While it is now clear that the amended definition of "low-risk assets" includes credit union investments in the NCUA Guaranteed Notes (NGNs), we believe the expanded definition could be broader than investments in the NGNs, and could include other types of permissible credit union investments. We ask NCUA to consider issuing a separate rulemaking to broaden the scope of the new definition to include similar low-risk investments, such as credit union investments in Federal Home Loan Bank securities.

CUNA CEO Cheney Urges More Time For CUs To Comment on Corporate Proposal
November 23, 2010

Proposed IRPS on Corporate Credit Union Chartering; RIN 3133-AD80
November 1, 2010
As described in the comment letter, CUNA generally supports NCUA's proposed Interpretive Ruling and Policy Statement (IRPS) that would establish guidance on the chartering of corporate federal credit unions. CUNA appreciates NCUA's initiative in addressing the current lack of guidance in this area, as we think such guidance is important for developing and reorganizing corporate credit unions. Generally, the proposed IRPS explains the requirements that must be met in seeking approval for a new corporate credit union and describes the standards NCUA will use for evaluating charter applications. The proposal also provides a timeline of the application review process. While CUNA generally supports the proposal, the letter discusses issues we believe need to be clarified and offers recommendations for improving the final IRPS that we request NCUA consider.

CUNA Comments on Interim Final Rule (Truth in Savings)
October 4, 2010
In our comment letter to NCUA, CUNA requests that for the disclosure of overdraft fees on periodic statements, credit unions and others should have the option to title these as "Total Overdraft Fees for Paid Items" instead of "Total Overdraft Fees," which will further distinguish the paid overdraft items from items that are returned unpaid and that are also required to be disclosed. Also, although the interim final rule makes minor changes to the sample form that is to be used to disclose the total overdraft and returned item fees, NCUA should provide the flexibility necessary so that credit unions may continue to use the original version of this sample form.

Low-income Definition Interim Final Rule; RIN 3133-AD75
October 4, 2010
CUNA generally supports the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA’s) interim final rule to amend NCUA's low-income definition regulation. Specifically, we support the interim final rule's clarification that, when a credit union relies on member income information as opposed to NCUA's geocoding software to apply for low-income status, only like data from relevant categories of information should be used. For example, individual member income data should be measured against individual median earnings and not against median family income. However, we remain concerned with the low-income rule relating to a provision in the 2009 amendment that permits a credit union applicant to "… demonstrate the actual income of its members based on data it has, for example, from loan applications or surveys of its members." Specifically, the rule characterizes a "survey" as a census of all credit union members showing that more than 50% of members qualify as "low-income." We encourage NCUA to remove the 50% requirement, as we believe it is needlessly burdensome and sets an unnecessarily high bar for credit unions to cross.

NCUA's Proposal on Golden Parachute and Indemnification Payments
September 7, 2010
CUNA does not support NCUA's proposal on golden parachute and indemnification payments and has urged the Board to drop these amendments. CUNA raises points for NCUA to consider when establishing the rules for these issues, including the protection and encouragement of the system of credit union board governance. CUNA cautions NCUA against the possible appearance of tipping the scales of justice in its favor by writing rules that would disadvantage credit unions or their officials should challenges under such rules occur, especially since NCUA has much greater resources to pursue litigation than do either credit unions or their officials.

2010 NCUA Regulatory Review
August 6, 2010
This letter responds to the request for comments under the National Credit Union Administration (NCUA)’s Regulatory Review for 2010. By way of background, CUNA is the largest credit union advocacy organization in this country, representing approximately 90% of our nation’s 7,700 state and federal credit unions, which serve 93 million members. Many of these comments draw on past letters to the NCUA Board and comment letters we filed with the agency on pending proposals.

CUNA CEO Bill Cheney Writes to NCUA on Supervisory Concerns and Other Issues (sent to all three (3) Board Members)
August 3, 2010

CUNA Comments on Notice of Proposed Rulemaking – Short-term, Small Amount Loans
July 2, 2010
In our comment letter to NCUA, CUNA supports the ability of credit unions to provide beneficial short-term, small amount loans as alternatives to predatory payday lending. However, CUNA requests that NCUA provide additional flexibility for those credit unions that want to offer these types of programs. This includes allowing credit unions to charge an annual percentage rate of 36% that incorporates other fees, as an alternative to the proposed 28% in which only a $20 application fee would be permitted; flexibility to "roll-over" the loan beyond the stated maturity date under certain, limited circumstances; allowing loans for less than the proposed minimum of $200; and recognizing that a $25 application fee may be appropriate, instead of the proposed $20 limit. CUNA also believes that other features should be at the discretion of the credit union, including the imposition of a length of membership requirement, using payroll deduction or direct deposit, and the specific lending caps that should be used for these programs.

Fiduciary Duties at Federal Credit Unions; Mergers and Conversions of Insured Credit Unions
May 28, 2010
CUNA has a number of significant concerns on NCUA's proposed rule for fiduciary duties at federal credit unions, and mergers and conversions of insured credit unions. With respect to federal credit union fiduciary duty, we recognize that in a limited number of conversions, and in at least one credit union takeover attempt, the members’ interests did not seem to be the primary concern. A better approach to fiduciary duty would be to issue a regulation clarifying in what ways state corporate law applies to federal credit unions, as the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) has done for national banks. The proposed prohibition on director indemnification is unnecessary because of existing state law and FCUA provisions and may have the unintended consequence of making it difficult for federal credit unions to find qualified, volunteer board members. We support ensuring directors should understand the finances and balance sheet of the credit union they serve. However, it should be the credit union board's collective responsibility to ensure this is the case for each board member and not an authority that an examiner could enforce against an individual director. While we support adequate due diligence and integrity in the voting process, the proposed rules would increase the complexity and lead times of the affected transactions, especially for credit union to credit union mergers. In general, we strongly urge NCUA to support greater regulatory relief for credit unions because credit unions continue to face a challenging business and regulatory environment.

Comments on NCUA's Proposed Rule on Part 742, Regulatory Flexibility Program
May 24, 2010
As outlined in our comment letter to the NCUA, CUNA does not support the proposed rule to amend certain provisions of NCUA's regulations as they apply to federal credit unions that participate in the Regulatory Flexibility Program. Specifically, the proposal would eliminate RegFlex authority for credit unions in regard to requirements for fixed asset investments, member business lending, stress testing of certain investments, and discretionary control of investments. As explained in our letter, CUNA does not support the proposal as issued for comment, and we urge that the NCUA Board not adopt it, or at least substantially revise it before it is approved in final form. If the Board feels changes to the RegFlex program are warranted, we urge a more targeted approach. We believe such an approach would facilitate the agency's ability to address problem situations for individual credit unions as opposed to eliminating key aspects of the RegFlex program for all federal credit unions, regardless of whether NCUA has concerns about their activities or not.

Proposed Rule on Chartering and Field of Membership of Community Credit Unions
April 15, 2010
In CUNA’s comment letter responding to NCUA’s proposed changes to its current field of membership policy, CUNA urges NCUA not to adopt the changes without making important amendments. The comments incorporated in this letter were developed by CUNA’s Field of Membership Task Force. CUNA does agree with the proposal that NCUA should retain its current treatment of single political jurisdictional areas and believes use of statistical data for multiple jurisdictional areas can be useful, but does not agree that applicants should have to meet all of the criteria proposed to establish a "well-defined local community" for multiple political jurisdictional areas. CUNA strongly opposes changes restricting credit unions’ use of narrative information. CUNA also comments on changes to the grandfathering provision as well as to provisions defining rural districts. CUNA urged changes to the current requirements on underserved areas. CUNA opposed allowing examiners to review marketing plans and subject credit unions to possible sanctions if they are not complying with their marketing plans. CUNA urges NCUA to resume processing FOM applications as expeditiously as possible.

NCUA's Proposed Changes to Part 704, Corporate Credit Unions
March 5, 2010
See the special Corporate Credit Union Report Resource page

Reverse Mortgage Comments
February 16, 2010
In our comment letter in response to proposed guidance for reverse mortgages, CUNA generally supports the guidance, especially since reverse loans are very complex, often with significant fees, and which will become more prevalent as the population ages and seeks to use their current home equity to supplement their retirement income. CUNA specifically supports the requirement for financial counseling and believes that, with limited exceptions, such counseling should be done in-person, as opposed to telephone conversations. However, although consumers should receive general information and guidance about reverse mortgages before the application is submitted, much of the required counseling should occur after the application is submitted for a proprietary reverse mortgage loan, since the counseling will be more targeted and, therefore, more beneficial after the consumer applies for a specific loan. CUNA also supports the provisions addressing conflicts of interests, as well as the provisions addressing the policies, procedures, and internal controls that lenders should have, including the requirements with regard to managing third-party relationships.

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act – Strengthening the "Required Use" Prohibition
September 1, 2010
In our comment letter, CUNA encourages HUD in its efforts to ensure that consumers are protected when they are encouraged to use a specific lender or settlement service provider that is affiliated with the homebuilder. CUNA is concerned that the benefits provided to consumers are illusory and that consumers are not provided with an adequate amount of time to shop for mortgage loans and settlement services, either from credit unions or other financial service providers. CUNA also believes that the disclosures required in these situations can be improved. For example, we would support enhanced disclosures in these situations for first-time homebuyers since they may be more likely to rely on the homebuilder for objective advice.

Federal Housing Administration

Federal Housing Administration Risk Management Initiatives
August 16, 2010
In our letter, CUNA supports the proposed changes that would impose down payment requirements, based on the borrower’s credit scores as developed by the FICO Corporation, and would support even more stringent requirements if imposed on a graduated basis. In the proposal, the FHA indicated it would consider a temporary exemption to the credit score requirements for borrowers who refinance current loans, and we agree with this approach. CUNA also supports the proposed changes that would reduce the amount of the buyer’s closing costs that may be paid by the seller from 6% to 3% of the purchase price of the home.

Federal Reserve Board

Interim Final Rule on Appraisal Independence (Docket No. R-1394)
December 23, 2010
As detailed in CUNA’s comment letter to the Federal Reserve Board regarding its interim final rule to amend Regulation Z, Truth in Lending, CUNA supports a number of the aspects of the Board’s interim-final rule on appraisal independence. More specifically, CUNA supports the Board’s approach to prohibit actions designed to coerce or manipulate appraisers, as long as the compliance requirements for small institutions are not overly-burdensome. CUNA also agree with the treatment of "reasonable and customary fees" under the interim final rule. However, CUNA believes that the asset threshold for the small institution safe harbor—$250 million in assets—is too low and urges the Board to raise it to $1 billion.

Regulation Z – Truth in Lending
December 23, 2010
CUNA recently commented on the proposed rule issued by the Federal Reserve Board to amend Regulation Z as part of a comprehensive review of the rules for home-secured credit under the Truth in Lending Act. CUNA supports a number of provisions in this comprehensive proposal but in particular does not support the proposed credit protection product disclosures because they will be misleading to consumers and flow from faulty assumptions about credit insurance.

Interim Final Rules on Disclosures Required Under the Mortgage Disclosure Improvement Act
November 23, 2010
In our letter, CUNA opposes the interim final rule as the disclosures required under this rule are duplicative of disclosures required under recent revisions to the rules that implement the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA). In addition, the disclosures required under this interim final rule will likely be changed again since the new financial reform law requires that the RESPA disclosures be combined with the Truth in Lending Act disclosures. If the rule is not withdrawn, CUNA would prefer that the disclosure reflect the maximum rate at the first adjustment, instead of the maximum rate during the initial five-year period. CUNA also requests more guidance on disclosing escrow payments, since they will change over time, and CUNA also requests a delay in the January 30, 2011 effective date.

Letter to Treasury and Federal Reserve Board Urging Suspension of the Current Regulation Z Rulemaking
October 27, 2010
In an unsolicited letter to the Treasury and Federal Reserve Board (Board), CUNA stated its concern with the Board's current piecemeal process for amending Regulation Z, the rules that implement TILA, particularly since the Dodd-Frank Reform Act will be under the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's (Bureau) purview starting in July of next year. This process has imposed staggering costs and burdens on credit unions and has in many respects caused confusion for credit union members, which will be compounded if the Board continues issuing rules at the same time Treasury and the new Bureau proceed with similar efforts to integrate the TILA and RESPA disclosures. Thus, CUNA is urging the Board to suspend the current Regulation Z rulemaking.

Proposed Revisions to the Escrow Requirements for Jumbo Loans
October 25, 2010
In our comment letter, CUNA requests that the Fed recognize that lenders will need six to twelve months of additional time to implement this change. This additional time will be especially important for credit unions and others that rely on third parties, such as software vendors. These third parties will need time to incorporate the necessary updates, complete the necessary testing, and then include this change into their regularly scheduled releases.

Interim Final Rule Extending the Effective Date for Certain Gift Card Provisions of the CARD Act
September 15, 2010
In our comment letter, CUNA supports the flexibility in the interim final rule with regard to the extended effective date for the gift card rules under the CARD Act, which for the most part mirrors the legislation that was signed by President Obama. We also appreciate the additional clarifications in the rule that will help facilitate compliance with these provisions. These include the clarification that the required qualifying disclosures are not subject to the requirement that they be in retainable form in order to permit, for example, oral disclosures and that these qualifying disclosure requirements will not apply to cards issued prior to April 1, 2010 if they are already in compliance with the CARD Act gift card rules.

Home Mortgage Disclosure Act
August 20, 2010
Although CUNA does not at this time advocate that specific, additional information be reported under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA), credit unions could support additional changes to the HMDA requirements if it is demonstrated that the new information would further the goal of ensuring fair lending and antidiscriminatory practices, while minimizing the additional burdens of providing the new information. CUNA also suggests that certain information reporting be deleted, suggests other changes to current HMDA requirements, and notes the need to clarify certain HMDA changes that are included in the new financial reform law. In addition, CUNA requests that credit unions be given at least two years to implement any changes and that additional meetings be conducted as this review process unfolds, which should include credit unions.

Proposed Rule on Implementation of the CARD Act
April 14, 2010
In our letter to the Fed, CUNA expresses concern because credit unions will only be able to use one of the three alternatives for determining penalty fees, namely the list of specific fees that will be determined by the Fed at a later time. This is because the other alternatives will be too burdensome for smaller financial institutions. For these specific fees, we suggest they be no lower than the upper range of fees that credit unions currently charge. CUNA is also concerned with the provisions that would prohibit the imposition of multiple penalty fees based on a single event or transaction in certain situations. In addition, CUNA believes that the provisions requiring six-month reviews of rate increases be limited to the first two years after the initial increase and requests that the Fed provide guidance on what would be considered "reasonable" policies and procedures that credit unions need to develop with regard to this review process. CUNA also believes credit unions should have 45-days to implement any rate decrease that would result from this review process.

Proposed Clarifications to Regulations E and DD for Overdraft Protection Plans
March 31, 2010
In our comment letter to the Fed, CUNA expresses concern with the situations in which credit unions are not able to avoid paying certain ATM and one-time debit transactions but will not be able to charge a fee under these rules for an overdraft, unless the member opts-in. We strongly urge the Fed to reconsider this position and to also become involved in industry efforts to address these situations. The Fed should also provide additional clarifications, beyond those addressed in this proposal, in response to the numerous questions that credit unions and others have raised.

Establishment of Term Deposits
February 1, 2010
As indicated in our comment letter, CUNA generally supports the Federal Reserve Board's proposed amendments to Regulation D, Reserve Requirements of Depository Institutions, to authorize the establishment of term deposits at Federal Reserve Banks. CUNA believes the authorization of term deposits may provide a favorable option for credit unions to earn interest on short term investments without credit risk. However, we are concerned that the proposed auction method for determining which eligible institutions participate in each round of deposits may be dominated by the larger institutions. We encourage the Board to address this concern in the final rule, such as by allowing for aggregation by smaller institutions.

Proposed Rule to Amend Regulation Z for Closed-end Mortgage Loans
January 19, 2010
As outlined in our comment letter to the Federal Reserve Board, CUNA has no objections to the intent of the provisions of the interim final rule, which is to provide notification to borrowers when their loans are sold. However, we urge the Board to expand the exception provided for participation loans to include those in which legal title is transferred to some portion, but not for the entire loan, especially when the servicer does not change.

Federal Trade Commission

Mortgage Acts and Practices
November 12, 2010
CUNA submits a comment letter to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in response to a proposed rule addressing unfair and deceptive acts or practices that may occur with regard to mortgage advertising. The proposal would include prohibiting misrepresentations in commercial communications and advertisements regarding any term of any mortgage credit product and would also impose corresponding recordkeeping requirements. This rule would only apply to state-chartered credit unions, and not to federal credit unions, and it would also not apply to banks and thrifts. In our letter, CUNA emphasizes that state-chartered credit unions should not be the only heavily-regulated financial institutions covered under this rule, as they already are subject to staggering burdens in complying with other current and future rules with regard to mortgage lending, many of which are similar to the requirements outlined in this proposal. In addition, credit unions have not engaged in any of the practices addressed in this proposal. As an alternative, the FTC should consider state-chartered credit unions to be "deemed" in compliance with this proposal if they are in compliance with the other current and future mortgage lending rules that also apply to financial institutions that are not subject to this rule.

Mortgage Assistance Relief Services
March 25, 2010
This comment letter responds to a proposed rule that is intended to protect consumers from those who offer loan modification and foreclosure rescue services to consumers at a very high cost without any tangible benefits. As proposed, the rule would, in effect, exclude state-chartered credit unions that are subject to the FTC’s jurisdiction under the FTC Act, while federal credit unions would be excluded since they are not subject to FTC jurisdiction. The comment letter strongly supports this approach.


Cross Border Electronic Transmittals of Funds
December 29, 2010
While we generally support FinCEN’s objective to track money laundering and terrorist financing through CBETFs for the purposes of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), we have concerns about aspects of the proposal and offer recommendations for FinCEN’s consideration to improve the proposal. CUNA has significant concerns about the regulatory burdens and compliance costs to credit unions that the proposed requirements for CBETFs would impose, as well as under the separate proposal for the annual report of TINs. We also support minimizing unintended consequences for legitimate remittances. For example, the proposal would deter consumers from using credit unions and banks to send remittances in comparison to MSBs, because only credit unions and banks would have to report CBETFs that are less than $1000. In addition, both the proposed CBETF reporting requirements and the annual report of TINs would deter consumers from remittances in general because of privacy concerns.

Bank Secrecy Act Suspicious Activity Report Database Proposed Data Fields
December 14, 2010
CUNA supports FinCEN’s efforts to further modernize the SAR filing process. However, CUNA does have concerns that transitioning to a new database may prove to be burdensome for some of our less technologically advanced institutions. Additionally, we believe the transition will require substantial monetary and manpower investments from our institutions, which may be difficult during these economic times. We asked that FinCEN take all necessary steps to minimize the burdens accompanying this modernization effort.

Amendment to the Bank Secrecy Act-Reports of Foreign Financial Accounts
April 27, 2010
CUNA generally supports FinCEN's proposal. However, CUNA believes additional clarification is needed regarding the exemption provided for officers and/or employees of financial institutions that have a federal regulator and where the officer and/or employee has signature or other authority over a foreign financial bank account but no financial interest in that account. While this exemption may exempt most of our institutions, we believe that some of our state-chartered credit unions would be negatively by the exemption in its current form.

Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB)

Accounting for Financial Instruments Proposal
October 1, 2010
In our comment letter to the Financial Accounting Standards Board in response to its proposal on accounting for financial instruments, CUNA strongly opposes the aspects of the Board’s proposal that would direct entities to report most financial assets and liabilities at fair value on the balance sheet and apply an expected loss method of loan loss provisioning. If the proposal is adopted, credit unions will be forced to incur substantial direct and indirect costs to come into compliance, with little or no benefit to credit unions, or their members or other stakeholders. A major direct cost to credit unions would be related to hiring outside valuation firms capable of measuring the fair value of the credit union’s financial assets and financial liabilities. In addition, CUNA believes the proposed shift from the incurred loss model to the expected loss model would accelerate credit losses and likely require loss reserve estimates to be increased without producing any benefit to stakeholders.


Information Reporting Under the Amendments to Section 6041
September 29, 2010
CUNA filed a comment letter with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in response to its request regarding IRS Notice 2010-51, Information Reporting Under the Amendments to Section 6041 for Payments to Corporations and Payments of Gross Proceeds and With Respect to Property, that is intended to facilitate public input to be used by the IRS as it drafts official guidance. The Notice, and anticipated guidance, is necessary to implement amendments made to section 6041 of the Internal Revenue Code under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (Act). CUNA does not support the Notice as issued because we believe it is inconsistent with the plain language of section 9006 of the Act that tax-exempt organizations be exempt from the new requirement. However, if the reporting requirement is construed to apply to tax-exempt organizations, we believe the burden and overhead costs associated with complying with the requirement would exceed any benefit.


Addressing Problem Areas in its Rules
September 30, 2010
NACHA’s proposed rules attempt to address issues that were raised and identified as "pain points" during the detailed review of the Rules during the Rules Simplification process conducted earlier this year. We generally support NACHA’s proposal to clarify and eliminate areas of misunderstanding or problems in the Rules. These changes were technical in nature and were designed to improve the understanding of and compliance with the Rules. However, we do not support the requirement for ODFIs to provide information regarding return entries to Originators. We believe that the current framework is adequate, and existing business relationships and agreements between ODFIs and their Originators should continue to define the information regarding return entries.


Draft National Strategy for Financial Literacy 2010
September 17, 2010
In our comment letter to the Financial Literacy and Education Commission in response to the Draft National Strategy for Financial Literacy 2010, CUNA supports the goals and action areas the Commission has identified. In addition, CUNA agrees with the Commission's proposed vision statement, which describes the National Strategy's long-term vision of financial success, financial stability, and financial security for all individuals and families in the U.S. While we support the Commission's proposed goals and generally support the proposed objectives for each goal, we encourage the Commission to consider tailoring certain programs to the specific demographic for which they are intended.

Treasury Core Competencies
September 10, 2010
"As outlined in our comment letter to the Financial Literacy and Education Commission (Commission), CUNA supports the proposed core concepts and competencies, which will be used as a foundation for future financial literacy efforts. The five proposed core concepts appear to be clear, concise, and thorough. While CUNA agrees with the Commission’s proposed list of knowledge and corresponding actions, we offer a number of suggestions to supplement the list."

Notice and Request for Information: Public Input on Reform of the Housing Finance System
July 23, 2010
In our comment letter in response to the Treasury's Department request for input on a new housing finance plan, CUNA urges that such a plan recognize that credit unions perform, and can continue to perform, a valuable role in the mortgage lending system. The plan must ensure that all segments of the financial services industry can take full advantage of the opportunities to sell their loans into the secondary market and to receive services from the Federal Home Loan Banks or other entities that may be created under a new housing plan. Also, the overriding goal of a new housing finance system should not be on increasing home ownership, but ensuring that consumers receive mortgage loans that they can afford and that any new housing finance plan that is developed must minimize additional legislative and regulatory burdens for credit unions, which are already subject to very substantial burdens that have escalated in recent years. As the process of developing a new housing finance system unfolds, CUNA will be working closely with our member credit unions to develop specific positions in response to the proposal that will be issued at a later date by the Obama Administration and in response to future legislative proposals.

Garnishment of Accounts With Federal Benefit Payments
June 18, 2010
In our comment letter, CUNA expresses serious concerns with the provisions that would require credit unions to review the account history during a 60-day period preceding the receipt of the garnishment order. Many credit unions do not have the data processing capability to perform such a review. A better alternative would be to permit credit unions to provide a flat amount in which the member would have access. CUNA also supports the provisions that would not require further review if funds are transferred to a second account but opposes the provisions that would exclude garnishment orders in which the United States is a plaintiff. CUNA also requests that credit unions have at least five days to provide the required garnishment notices to consumers.

Right Promo-AdvocacyRight Promo- Membership