Relative to the new amendment regarding Regulation E and overdraft fees, I was wondering how the new regulation will affect recurring overdraft fees.
As long as our system can support it, are we allowed to offer an opt-in (courtesy pay) on just debit transactions, but not ATM or PIN POS transactions? Our opt-in will be to a courtesy pay program which will allow the member's debit transaction to be authorized for up to $300 above their available limit. Can we set criteria to qualify for the courtesy pay, such as requiring the member to be current on all loans, be eighteen years of age or older, maintain a direct deposit of $100, bring negative balance current within a week, etc? Do we need to have a separate courtesy pay program for ATM/Debit transactions, or can we have one program, which covers all types of transactions, including checks, ACH, ATM, Debit, etc., as long as the member opts in for the courtesy pay for ATM/Debit transactions?
Can we place a hold on an ACH deposit?
We have received conflicting advice on whether we can require customers to opt-in to the Reg E overdraft fees in order to receive a debit card. Can we or can't we?
Many of our commercial clients originate ACH files and some transactions get returned for insufficient funds, etc. When an ACH transaction is returned to us, we charge it back to the client’s account, much like we do for returned checks. We have a couple of clients who have asked for an individual ID to appear on our ACH Return Notices, along with appearing on the transaction itself (though DDA and/or Online Banking history), and appearing on the DDA statement. We have a procedure in place that stops this information from printing on the original ACH transaction for consumer clients. Many of them complained, since this field may contain social security numbers. There is no regulation on what has to appear in this field. It may contain a SS number, but may also contain other information. I have seen a mix of things in this field ranging from a blank field, to a person’s name, to a string of numbers and letters that do not mean anything to me. Basically, we hide this field from consumers due to their complaints. The situation I am asking about is slightly different, but I would still like to confirm with you that there are no regulatory or privacy issues. For the custom we are getting ready to ask for, it will show the information that is in this field, it will show it on the actual return notice, it will print it on the statement, and will also appear through DDA and OLB history. The difference here though is that the client who sees this information on his return notice and on hus statement is the same client who populated that field, so I do not think it will be an issue, since it is information that the client provided to us originally, and that he already has access to it, but I wanted to double check before we get too far down this road.
Will the new NACHA stop payment rule have any effect on Reg E?
Regarding Reg E and overdraft charges, currently our bank has a five day continuous overdraft charge. If someone is overdrawn five consecutive days, then we charge $15. If a one time debit or ATM charge causes the customer to be overdrawn, and he has chosen to opt-out, can we still charge the five day overdraft charge?
All of the discussions about Reg E and charging overdraft fees after 7/1/10 refer to paying an account into an overdrawn status. If we simply return the check, refuse the one-time POS or ATM transaction, can we charge a return item fee, typically the same amount as an overdraft fee?
We are a small community bank and do not have an overdraft protection program. Do we treat all our customers as opt-out come July 2010?
In Regulation E, it says that the consumer is only liable for $50 if he notifies the bank within two days. Does this apply to a transaction on which it was determined that there was no error (verified by Visa)? Is the bank liable for everything other than the $50?