Skip to content
BOL Conferences
Learn More - Click Here!

Thread Options
#42149 - 11/11/02 07:02 PM 2001 CA AB 1068
Anonymous
Unregistered

How is everyone handling the disclosure requirement that a creditor is to provide written notice to a consumer identified as a victim of identity theft of his or her rights? Is anyone willing to share their format?

Return to Top
#42150 - 11/13/02 03:20 PM Re: 2001 CA AB 1068
Elaine K. Sheehan Offline
100 Club
Elaine  K. Sheehan
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 157
Grand Rapids, MI
I'm curious about this too, anyone from California have a response to this question?

Return to Top
#42151 - 11/19/02 08:11 PM Re: 2001 CA AB 1068
Tina A Sweet Offline
Diamond Poster
Tina A Sweet
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,033
Marysville, Ca.
I am trying to configure this myself, have you implemented anything at this point? I notice the bill was signed into effect 9/28/02 due to the fact that it is an "urgency bill".
_________________________
Tina A Sweet-Williams
AVP Special Assets
mailto:tsweet@goldcountrynb.com

Return to Top
#42152 - 11/26/02 09:10 PM Re: 2001 CA AB 1068
Tina A Sweet Offline
Diamond Poster
Tina A Sweet
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,033
Marysville, Ca.
Yes, I actually received some assistance from another poster Cheryel. She is placing the contact information on the credit report itself. In this case if the CR goes to another file verification is not required and lets the loan officer or processor know that the verification has been completed. The AB1068 was modified to be completed only where credit was extended to the applicant. Look at AB655.
_________________________
Tina A Sweet-Williams
AVP Special Assets
mailto:tsweet@goldcountrynb.com

Return to Top
#42153 - 12/03/02 12:51 AM Re: 2001 CA AB 1068
SJB Offline
Diamond Poster
SJB
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,210
California
I looked at AB 1068 and AB 655 and note the change in the language to include the phrase "in connection with approval of credit . . ." It seems to me that notifying the consumer after the credit is extended is a bit late.
Was this amendment intended to clarify that the requirement to verify the consumer's address exists only at the time of initial application (rather than post loan funding quality control verifications) or am I missing something?

Thanks!
_________________________
My opinions are not legal advice and are worth what you paid for them.

Return to Top
#42154 - 12/03/02 12:57 AM Re: 2001 CA AB 1068
Tina A Sweet Offline
Diamond Poster
Tina A Sweet
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,033
Marysville, Ca.
The way it has been interpreted is that you will only need to verify and document if you have decided to extend credit to the individual. I would document such fact prior to funding, of coarse.
_________________________
Tina A Sweet-Williams
AVP Special Assets
mailto:tsweet@goldcountrynb.com

Return to Top
#42155 - 12/03/02 07:07 PM 2001 CA AB 1068
Miss Kitty Offline
Platinum Poster
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 721
California
For us, all new applications go to a centralized department (which is a tremendous help), they pull all credit bureau reports. If the address on the credit report differs from the application it is verified and documented on the actual credit report prior to funding. With our centralized underwriting, we will know if the loan will be approved or declined. If we decline the credit, we do not verify - only if we're moving towards approval of the credit request.

Return to Top
#42156 - 12/04/02 09:45 PM Re: 2001 CA AB 1068
D2Xs Offline
Power Poster
D2Xs
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,706
I'm lost can someone point me to the website location for this.

Thanks
_________________________
Beauty is only skin deep...but ugly goes all the way to the bone!

Return to Top
#42157 - 12/05/02 09:43 PM Re: 2001 CA AB 1068
SJB Offline
Diamond Poster
SJB
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,210
California
See if this works:

AB 1068
_________________________
My opinions are not legal advice and are worth what you paid for them.

Return to Top