The Fed has issued final regs dealing with disclosures in electronic form. From the earliest rulemaking, this exercise took almost 10 years and produced a rule that allows pretty much anything a bank wants to do--provided it first obtains informed consent (via ESIGN.) All of the most objectionable aspects of the 2001 regs are now history.

I see this as I do security requirements. Most banks do the right thing and in a responsible manner. Hopefully the industry will continue on this trend and not push the envelope, prompting new reg requirements.

I'll take a "glass half full" view. Aside from the fact that the 2001 interim rules (the ones that were never made mandatory) overreached by making up requirements not based in law, there is also the possibility that bankers looked at those rules as the "recipe" for e-disclosure compliance. At best, those rules by themselves created only half-baked solutions (if I may beat that metaphor until you can form stiff peaks). [Why am I thinking about lemon meringue pie now?]

Maybe now that the Fed's rules will be rid of all the extra "stuff" heaped on in 2001, bankers will pay more attention to the E-Sign Act's requirements.

Since October 1, 2000, ESIGN has been ignored or misunderstood by a high percentage of e-delivery neophytes--mainly because:
a. there's no implementing regulation, and
b. there have been no reports of penalties or losses as a result of ESIGN-related deficiencies.

This will not change until ESIGN-deficient e-docs are treated as non-events by:
a. the regulators (triggering the usual enforcement actions for "failure to disclose" violations), or
b. the courts (imposing massive civil liability on the first "e-delivery disaster poster child".)

ESIGN's informed consent drill is unique. In no other interaction with our customers do we require them to take a test and get a perfect grade before providing a service.

What is needed here is some plain language guidance on just what is and is not required for a consumer/customer to accept e-delivery. I've looked at various sites and all are different in theire approach. It would make life so much easier if the Feds would be consistent and apply an even approach to B, E, Z & DD to the e-delivery issue and accept the fact that eventually, these types of transactions(online, electronic) will ultimately prevail in the industry.

Richard is right. What will probably have to happen is for a mega-mortgage lender to get caught in a federal non-disclosure lawsuit for failing to use the E-Sign magic potion to make digital disclosures the legal equivalent of written disclosures.

Unfortunately, that's what our banking compliance world has become. A wait and see, who gets the axe! In lieu of these changes, the risks are too great to attempt to comply with e-sign at this stage of the game. Better not to play!!

Unfortunately, that's what our banking compliance world has become. A wait and see, who gets the axe! In lieu of these changes, the risks are too great to attempt to comply with e-sign at this stage of the game. Better not to play!!

Compliance with E-Sign is not mysterious, nor is it difficult, particularly if you have a vendor that understands the law and provides solutions that conform to it. And now that the extra stuff that the Fed tried to hang on the tree back in 2001 is gone, there are fewer hoops to jump through.