Learn More - Click Here!

Page 2 of 2 1 2
Thread Options
#2129090 - 05/03/17 11:31 PM Re: Reg D and Staff Opinion Curious Banker
Mel in WA Offline
Diamond Poster
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,149
I just came across this topic. Streamlining our process for Reg D monitoring will change lives at my financial institution. smile Why is re-disclosure not required when the account is changed? Our TISA disclosure is very general in regards to excessive transactions, so are you disclosing more at account opening? Doesn't the customer need to know they now have a checking account?

Return to Top
Operations Compliance
#2129093 - 05/04/17 12:56 AM Re: Reg D and Staff Opinion Curious Banker
rlcarey Online
10K Club
rlcarey
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 78,573
Galveston, TX
Because giving them unlimited transaction ability does not adversely affect the consumer.

1030.5 Subsequent disclosures.

(a) Change in terms. (1) Advance notice required. A depository institution shall give advance notice to affected consumers of any change in a term required to be disclosed under Sec. 1030.4(b) of this part if the change may reduce the annual percentage yield or adversely affect the consumer. The notice shall include the effective date of the change. The notice shall be mailed or delivered at least 30 calendar days before the effective date of the change.

And:

(b)(5) Transaction limitations.

1. General rule. Examples of limitations on the number or dollar amount of deposits or withdrawals that institutions must disclose are:

iii. Institutions need not disclose reservations of right to require notices for withdrawals from accounts required by federal or state law.
_________________________
The opinions expressed here should not be construed to be those of my employer: PPDocs.com

Return to Top
#2129458 - 05/05/17 06:51 PM Re: Reg D and Staff Opinion Curious Banker
John Burnett Offline
10K Club
John Burnett
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 39,544
Cape Cod
Contrast that with what you have to do if you open a new transaction account and move the MMDA or savings funds into it:

Reg. DD, ยง1030.4, comment (a)(1)-1.iii (on delivery of account disclosures upon account opening):

Quote:
1. New accounts. New account disclosures must be provided when:
....
iii. An institution transfers funds from an account to open a new account not at the consumer's request, unless the institution previously gave account disclosures and any change-in-term notices for the new account.
....
_________________________
John S. Burnett
BankersOnline.com
Fighting for Compliance since 1976
Bankers' Threads User #8

Return to Top
#2135450 - 06/22/17 07:05 PM Re: Reg D and Staff Opinion Curious Banker
ahkcompliance Offline
Diamond Poster
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,470
Midwest
We finally have worked with our core and found a way to make this happen.

We will create a new savings product that is identical to our current account. The only different is the product will not be subject to Reg D and will be reported as a transaction account.

This is going to save time in our monitoring.

Return to Top
#2135467 - 06/22/17 08:41 PM Re: Reg D and Staff Opinion Curious Banker
rlcarey Online
10K Club
rlcarey
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 78,573
Galveston, TX
We will create a new savings product that is identical to our current account.

Then it is not a savings product.
_________________________
The opinions expressed here should not be construed to be those of my employer: PPDocs.com

Return to Top
#2135472 - 06/22/17 08:50 PM Re: Reg D and Staff Opinion Curious Banker
John Burnett Offline
10K Club
John Burnett
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 39,544
Cape Cod
I really think you risk misleading customers if you continue labeling this hybrid "thing" a savings product. You also risk confusion in-house, I think. What prompts such a move? Are there really so many customers who are straying from the savings transaction limits that you need to take such action? Why not transfer them to the right account, or close them out, or take away their transfer capabilities?
_________________________
John S. Burnett
BankersOnline.com
Fighting for Compliance since 1976
Bankers' Threads User #8

Return to Top
#2135487 - 06/22/17 09:20 PM Re: Reg D and Staff Opinion rlcarey
ahkcompliance Offline
Diamond Poster
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,470
Midwest
Originally Posted By rlcarey
We will create a new savings product that is identical to our current account.

Then it is not a savings product.


We will just build it on that side but it will be reported as a transaction account.

Return to Top
#2135511 - 06/23/17 01:02 PM Re: Reg D and Staff Opinion Curious Banker
ahkcompliance Offline
Diamond Poster
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,470
Midwest
We can build the same account on the DDA side of our core. It will be the same exact terms they have in the account now. If we build on the DDA side, do we have to send a change in terms on how we are classifying the account?

Return to Top
#2135544 - 06/23/17 02:20 PM Re: Reg D and Staff Opinion ahkcompliance
CalifDreamin Offline
Diamond Poster
CalifDreamin
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,213
Far from Calif
From rlcarey earlier in the discussion:
Quote:
I have one bank that just internally classifies the accounts as an interest bearing DDA after the second occurrence and leave the rest of the terms and conditions on the account the same. No letters - no nothing.


My understanding is that ahkcompliance's bank is now doing just as rlcarey suggested above - thereby creating efficiencies in no longer having so much time spent on letters/monitoring.
_________________________
The opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of my employer
_._._._._._.
A.S.A.P.
Always
Say
A
Prayer
<><

Return to Top
#2135668 - 06/23/17 07:20 PM Re: Reg D and Staff Opinion CalifDreamin
ahkcompliance Offline
Diamond Poster
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,470
Midwest
Originally Posted By CalifDreamin
From rlcarey earlier in the discussion:
Quote:
I have one bank that just internally classifies the accounts as an interest bearing DDA after the second occurrence and leave the rest of the terms and conditions on the account the same. No letters - no nothing.


My understanding is that ahkcompliance's bank is now doing just as rlcarey suggested above - thereby creating efficiencies in no longer having so much time spent on letters/monitoring.


Yes! We need to build a new product type that is exact identical to the current but remove the Reg D spec. The new internal code will identify the account as transaction and our CFO will know to account for it accordingly.

Return to Top
#2166487 - 03/02/18 04:13 PM Re: Reg D and Staff Opinion ahkcompliance
KPAP Offline
Member
Joined: Dec 2014
Posts: 59
Midwest
Do you mind if I PM you about how you made the switch, AHKCompliance? Very interested in making the change and going this route as well.
Last edited by KPAP; 03/02/18 04:15 PM.
Return to Top
#2166489 - 03/02/18 04:28 PM Re: Reg D and Staff Opinion KPAP
Elwood P. Dowd Offline
10K Club
Elwood P. Dowd
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 21,939
Next to Harvey
Here, silence sort of gives consent, particularly on a string that's several months old. If you click on ahk's avatar and "send a PM" functions, assume you have permission.
_________________________
In this world you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant.

Return to Top
Page 2 of 2 1 2

Moderator:  Andy_Z, John Burnett