Anyone else out there from a "non-sharing" bank (i.e. Section & 14 & 15 exemptions only) that is getting SICK AND TIRED of customers who are upset because we haven't given them an opt-out form?

I've received some very virulent letters from customers who have received our Privacy Notice DEMANDING that we acknowledge their letter and that we NEVER share any information with ANYONE. (Hello? Do you WANT to be able to use the ATM? Do you WANT to stop writing checks? Do you WANT to never receive your account statement?)

And here, in my naivete, I thought our Privacy Policy was one that consumers would like.

Just goes to show you, no good deed goes unpunished.

Bonnie - No, you are not alone, in fact one such individual passed a sticky note to a teller instructing us who not to disclose to.We don't share!!!!! You can write a disclosure but you can't make everyone understand it. Thats why we have Reg Z and RESPA and now Privacy. Our solution so far is to send a polite note with a new copy of the notice highlighting the non-sharing but that is labor intensive. For a small bank in some cases that may be the way to handle it.

Good luck - hope you feel better knowing you have company.

------------------
Allan D. Virr, CRCM

How frustrating! I have read a whole pile of articles about G-L-B from sources ranging from the local newspaper to national magazines and one common thread is that many of the writers get it wrong. They misinterpret what the law requires and how it works. They fail to recognize that Congress and the regulators built in three categories of common-sense exceptions to the opt out requirements and if an institution confines its sharing practices to the narrow bounds of those exceptions, the customer is amply protected and has no need (or right) to opt out.

There's a lot of fearmongering going on. While I am vitally concerned about privacy matters on a personal level, I believe some of these writers are doing a grave disservice to the public by causing them to doubt the safety and security of information financial institutions have done an admirable job of safeguarding for generations.

What I want to know is, if this is the kind of reaction nonsharing banks are getting, what kind of response are sharing banks getting to their privacy notices?

We are a “sharing” bank and mailed out over 140,000 Privacy Notices in early May. Less than 700 customers have chosen to opt out and the majority chose only to restrict sharing with our affiliates. I think we had just one phone call and a couple of letters from customers upset with our policy. We made a conscious decision to offer the opt out to give our customers a way to express their concern for privacy. Our guess is that our customers were pleased to have a choice, even if they didn’t exercise it.

I was home last week and got to see a lot of the television coverage on this subject. On ABC's "The View", Meredith Vierra went on and on about how if you don't send your opt-out back by July 1, your bank could share all your information with anyone they wanted and told all her viewers to call their banks and tell them how unhappy they were with this!!!!!!She should have told them to write to Senators Gramm, Leach and Bliley if they didn't like the new privacy legislation!!!There is so much misinformation out there that it is really hard to explain it correctly when an upset customer calls and wants to opt-out when we do not offer an opt-out. Ms. Vierra also said that she asked her broker about the privacy reg and he told her he didn't know anything about it. I think she needs to get a new broker!!!!!!

I laughed while reading this thread because we have had some of the same type problems. We are also a bank who does not share. Yesterday, the Human Resource Department contacted me for assistance with a job applicant. The potential employee demanded that he be given the form to sign for opt-out of sharing his employment application information! I wonder if he thinks his behavior will "help" secure the job he was applying for? It is just another example of the public's perception of this Regulation.

Our bank has always had a privacy policy available to the public, the only call that I have had to answer was from one client concered that they would not be receiving material from us anymore! I assured her that nothing would change and that we would continue to send her bank material (we don't share). I fully agree that people such as Ralph Nader and this Lady from the "View" are confusing this issue. If Identity Theft is what they are concered about, they should address that directly through encouraging stricter enforcement of existing Identity Theft laws, and leave legitimate business alone.

We are an affiliate only sharing bank. I've had one customer call with the same misinformation and one letter asking for a copy of the law that allows us to share ANYTHING with our affiliates. Once again we have a paper producing labor intensive law about a really important subject, but come on, the joint marketing exception? O' Senators, where art thou?

We are also sending ANOTHER copy of the Privacy Disclosure along with a short cover letter that says our bank does not share information in this manner, there is no need for the customer to “Opt-Out.”

Yes - and we sent that additional mailing to the customer who admonished us that he does not need any more junk mail so please remove his name from any mailing lists. Yep - another piece of mail went out to him.

The really frustrating part of all this is that we do not consider ourselves to be a "retail" bank - we focus on the small and mid-level commercial relationships. Consumer accounts are ancillary to our core business - but take up so much more time and attention!

Bonnie, YOU DA MA'AM!! Give 'em "what fer."
Seriously, though, we are non-sharing, also. What few inquiries we've had were due to the fact that the inquiring person got their info from some great mind on TV (i.e. "The View") rather from our plainly worded notice.
We've tried to defuse this non-issue by deflecting a bit. We explain that there is nothing for them to opt out of. Then, we ask if they would like to take measures to end junk mail, phone solicitations, etc. Everyone replies in the affirmative. So, we give them the DMA info found in the "Direct Marketers" section of the Federal Trade Commission booklet about identity theft. It can be found online at www.ftc.gov. Then, search their publications. The misinformed customer seems very glad to get this info, and we've performed a public service.

I have a question maybe you can answer, we are a non-sharing bank, however our marketing department wants to insert folders from one of our customers about there service in our statements. Does this violate the GLBA.?

------------------

As far as I know, as long as you do not give that company any information about your customers, you are free to include whatever material you would like in your statements.

To me, that is the ultimate "Opt-IN" - i.e. "Here is a company that has a product you might be interested in. If you are interested, please contact the company and here is their information."

Just be carefull that your statements don't become another annoyance to your customer. I detest paying bills when I have to go through an almost "Publisher Clearing House" type of routine just to find the darn bill! I throw out all those little flyers tempting me to buy the handy-dandy all-purpose alarm-clock/CD Player / coffee-maker that can be mine for only 5 payments of 49.99, the commerative coin-set, the 500 address label offer - not to mention that tear-off that I must do before I can mail back my payment.

Balance - people - we need balance! I appreciate SOME offers, but don't bury me with 'em!

Nothing stops you from inserting information in your statements and other mailings. It is then up to the consumer to pursue or not to pursue the offered product.

Howeve, as for misinformation, you'd think that the folks who put on the pressure for this law would be out there making sure the public gets accurate information. In my work, with mostly small, non-sharing banks, I train staff on how to respond to the customer who asks for the opt-out. It happens all the time.

And then there are the customers who get all upset about normal and legal banking practices. It's going to be a long, hot summer.

Lucy, how are you training the non-sharing banks to respond to those requests to opt out? We are getting letters from customers wanting to opt out. We have re-sent the privacy notice out as well. Our CIF system has an opt out at social security number level or account level. If we panic because of media pressure that results in letters and go and maintenance this information for this purpose what will examiners say? Are you sharing or not sharing? Your policy says you're not sharing, but your CIF infers that you are because you have all these opt outs! Help please! Thanks.

There are some individuals out there that actually DO understand the regulations and our notices (like other compliance officers).

We too are a non-sharing bank, however, we have disclosed joint marketing arrangments. When we receive a letter from a customer that states they do not want their information shared with ANYONE, I take this to mean that they do not want us to share with our joint marketing partners.

I believe it is in our best interests to honor these requests for customer service reasons. Consider sending a polite letter acknowledging their request and state that you will honor their decision. Then code their account to make sure that you do not share their information with joint marketing partners. You will have a happy customer.

Dolly Nugent
Vice President
Compliance Officer
Citizens Business Bank

What I want to know is - Where is all the Media Fury about the practices of most Credit Unions? Everyone that I know that has received a Privacy Disclosure from a Credit Union has stated the disclosure indicates the Credit Union will share information with affiliated and non-affiliated third parties unless the customer selects the Opt-Out?

I see all the Bank-bashing going on (it's almost as fun a sport as California-bashing), but c'mon - why kid gloves for Credit Unions?

(Actually I know why - I'm just pointing out the obvious!)

I have read each and everyone of these responses, and found that the common thread was "we mailed our Privacy Disclosure and customers were still confused". Like many of you, we are a non-sharing bank and also mailed our dislcosure (as required), however, we turned this regulation into a marketing opportunity. Rather than leaving it up to the customer, who would be bombarded with notices, we placed a very prominant ad in the local papers tell customers that we do not share. We also told them in the ad to read the dislcosure from their current financial institution, and if they don't like what they read "OPT IN TO TRI CITY NATIONAL BANK". We got a lot of repsonses from our customers who looked favorably on the add, but never mentioned the letter we sent them.

As compliance professionals, I think we need to look outside the box from our normal duties of providing basic disclosures and turn negatives into positives.

------------------
The opinions expressed are mine and do not reflect those of my employer.

Jeffrey, I'm glad it worked out for your bank, but I work for a business-oriented bank in a large metropolitan area. Consumer accounts are not our niche and we have zero dollars budgeted to advertise any consumer type of product. As it is, we advertise in business trade publications and not in general circulation newspapers.

As I stated above, consumer accounts are ancillary to our primary focus of serving the small to medium sized commercial relationships. Our business customers are not the ones who have become upset.

I'm still curious as to why the Credit Unions have remain unscathed when they do more sharing than most of the smaller banks.

Good for you, Jeffery. That is what Privacy should have been for the majority of us who do not share data.

However, your ad and notice would not have reached the customer I spoke with yesterday. He wanted to "opt-out" of information-sharing with "anyone, for any reason." When I explained that we do not share information about his accounts, except as permitted by law, and tried to explain what those exceptions meant, he he called me a liar and said he did not trust me (or financial institutions in general).

Then, he asked for a letter stating that we would not share his information. I explained that we we sent him a privacy notice that explains how we use his data. He replied that he threw those away because they were "just junk." Since we were not going to allow him to exercise his non-existent (in this case) "right to opt out," he finally hung up on me.

I have a hard time understanding how a letter from us explaining our information sharing practices would have been any better than the notice we sent. The public has been misled and misinformed as to the nature of their rights by the media and consumer groups in the interest of selling advertising and memberships. As a result, people try to exercise their nonexistent "rights," without giving any thought to what that might actually mean to them.

Then, the customer gets mad at us for refusing to acknowledge their "rights," when those rights don't actually exist. If they bothered to read the information we sent them, and take a few moments to think about what that means, and then call us to ask questions, they might actually learn something that would be useful to them.

Until then, I guess I'll keep handling customers tryig to exercise their "rights."

Let's not forget there are individuals and groups with a political agenda who will exploit the confusion created by the media to push for even tougher privacy laws patterned on the EU model, i.e. "opt-in" rather than opt-out. They'll feed on the fear that existing privacy laws are not working and that more are necessary.

BTW, the Basle accord on privacy, agreed to by a prior administration, commits the US to adoption of the EU model over a period of time. I've always said that the GLB privacy provisions were never meant to be a destination, but rather a start toward that ultimate political goal.

While our affiliates are third-party non-sharing (except sec. 14 & 15) and we have offered opt-out for FCRA affiliate sharing, we (like many of you) addressed potential customer questions in training.

Our first response is to tell the questioning customer that we do not sell their information. We think we have avoided long and drawn-out discussions by using the word sell instead of share.

This is simply one approach to this ‘information’ problem.

------------------
Comments are mine and not those of my employer.

Sorry for the delay in responding. I've been at the Consumer Advisory Council meeting where, for the first time in a long, long while, privacy was not the lead topic.

As for communicating with customers, some very good suggestions have been put up while I was at the meeting. I especially like the ad. Lobby signs with similar messages are also an option.

When training bank staff, this is one of the most important topics to cover. For banks that are not sharing, coach all bank staff to say that up front to the customer or caller. It may also be useful to say something like "we share your concern ... and that's why we don't share your information."

I have developed a Privacy Q & A for non-sharing banks (other than 14 & 15 exemptions) that I would be happy to share with anyone.

bprinker - perhaps you should have told the gentleman if he wanted to stop all sharing than he would have to:
1. Stop writing checks
2. Never use an ATM or Debit Card
3. Never receive his account statement
4. Sell all real property he owns
5. Sell any automobile he owns
6. Refuse any medical treatment
7. Take all his money and bury it somewhere

If you think about it, if you achieve the ultimate goal of "privacy", you will be homeless in the street begging for hand-outs!

Actually, Bonnie, isn't that what Abraham Lincoln's father did? I seem to remember that he was noted for moving farther west whenever he could see smoke from a nieghbor's chimney. Talk about privacy!

Bonnie M. You have no e-mail address on your profile so there may soon be a bunch of "send me a copy too" requests. So let me be the first. I love free stuff, especially if I don't have to fill out a census form full of NPI to get it.

------------------
Andy Zavoina
Opinions stated are not necessarily that of my employer.