Reg CC Audit Violation or Finding

Does the follow scenerio contain violation(s) to Reg CC or technical findings in completion of the notice?

Case-by-Case Hold notice is provided to the customer on a non-local check. The notice states the "#" of business days, as well as the "Date" when funds will be available. The "#" of days is listed as "2", however the "Date" listed is actually the 3rd business day. The ITI hold is placed per the "#" of days so that funds are available on the 2nd business day.

Also on this same notice, the "amount of hold" is for the full amount of the check, however, the ITI hold amount is placed for $100.00 less . . .meeting the next day availability.

I appreciate your comments.

Sounds as though you may have an issue with the personnel completing the hold notices. Was it just one or was this found numerous times during the review of your sample? It may have been an isolated incident...1 in the sample reviewed. Unfortunately, your customer would have gotten the incorrect notice and it is out there for your examiner to see. If it is an isolated incident, I think you only have a technical finding in the notice completion. If it is more systemic there could be a noncompliance issue with Reg CC and unfortunately I forget what the penalties are.

We have had this situation come up before and at the next teller training session it was stressed to only complete the number of days after the day of deposit and not the date when the funds would become available. I agree with Sgt. that the finding seems more technical in nature if the instance seems isolated. But if it is more global, like everytime there is a date on a notice the date is incorrect and does not correspond to the number of days stated (even though the actual number of days may be right), then you could have a problem in calculating the actual days the funds are held. I think a simple refresher training session could fix that.

We had this type of finding during our last exam. The auditors looked at the copies of the holds-they saw the errors, and never even got to the point of verifying what the system did- as they stated it didn't matter, the notice handed to the customer was wrong. We launched a bank wide Reg CC trainng - which included Operations, branches and the system experts.
Things have become much better as a result.

KBT: So did the examiners cite a violation or technical finding???

Thank you.