Section 202.2 (c)(v) of Reg. B states that adverse action is not needed is the type of credit is not offered. We offer home equity lines of credit, but with a minimum line amount of $5,000. Is there anyway that you could consider applications received below this minimum as not meeting the type of credit thus avoiding AA? Better yet, is there a reference to some exam findings or regulator interpretations that I can show some people around here to support that these applications should be given a formal AA?

If the applicant is credit worthy, why not counter with your minimum? Let the applicant decide. They could always use the unnecessary excess funds to make a principal reduction.

For business reasons that are not clear to me, they would like to avoid the counter offer (as that would include adverse action language).

Any thoughts on whether the minimum loan amount is a 'term' of a product or a 'type'?

I think it is clear to me, but maybe I am missing something.

It is a term and you are not going to get out of sending an adverse action notice.

Paragraph 2(c)(2)(v)
1. Terms of credit versus type of credit offered. When an applicant applies for credit and the creditor does not offer the credit terms requested by the applicant (for example, the interest rate, length of maturity, collateral, or amount of downpayment), a denial of the application for that reason is adverse action (unless the creditor makes a counteroffer that is accepted by the applicant) and the applicant is entitled to notification under § 202.9.

Great, I am not crazy....do you know of any other examiner guidance that I could send to reinforce this view.

I'm not sure how much clearer it can get???