Strunk Overdraft Program Bulletin

/in , , , , , , /by

On April 23, 2023, the OCC issued guidance on debit card transactions that are authorized positive, settled negative (APSN) and on re-presented NSF items. On the same date, the FDIC also issued guidance on APSN. Previously, on August 18, 2022, the FDIC had issued guidance on re-presented NSF items. The OCC and FDIC indicate that institutions following either of these practices risk violating Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices and Section 1036 of the Dodd Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 which prohibits unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices. The purpose of this bulletin is to summarize that guidance.

OCC Guidance

In terms of guidance related to APSN, the OCC has found that misleading disclosures contribute to findings that the APSN practice was unfair for purposes of Section 5. However, even when disclosures describe the circumstances under which consumers may incur overdraft fees, the OCC has found that overdraft fees charged for APSN transactions are unfair for purposes of Section 5 because consumers are still unlikely to be able to reasonably avoid injury.

With respect to re-presentment of NSF items, the OCC has found that disclosures may be deceptive, for purposes of Section 5, if they do not clearly explain that multiple or additional fees may result from multiple presentments of the same transaction. And again, even when disclosures explain that a single check or ACH transaction may result in more than one fee, a bank’s practice of assessing fees on each re-presentment may also be deemed to be unfair, for purposes of Section 5, if consumers cannot reasonably avoid the harm and the other factors for establishing unfairness under Section 5 are met (there is a representation, omission, act, or practice that is likely to mislead, the act would be deceptive from the perspective of a reasonable consumer, and the representation, omission, act, or practice is material). Their finding is that consumers typically have no control over when a returned ACH transaction or check will be presented again and lack knowledge of whether an intervening deposit will be sufficient to cover the transaction and related fees.

FDIC Guidance

The FDIC guidance is essentially the same as the OCC guidance, they just issued their guidance on re-presented items separately last August. In the April 23rd guidance on APSN the FDIC indicated that failure to take steps to avoid assessing overdraft related fees when transactions are authorized on positive balances but settle on negative balances results in ‘heightened risks” of violations of Section 1036 of the Dodd Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010. An act or practice is unfair when it (1) causes or is likely to cause substantial injury to consumers, (2) cannot be reasonably avoided by consumers, and (3) is not outweighed by countervailing benefits to consumers or to competition.

In their August 18, 2022, guidance they said violations of law occur when financial institutions charge multiple NSF fees for the re-presentment of unpaid transactions if disclosures do not fully or clearly describe the financial institution’s re-presentment practice, including not explaining that the same unpaid transaction might result in multiple NSF fees if an item was presented more than once. Practices involving the charging of multiple NSF fees arising from the same unpaid transaction results in heightened risks of violations of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices (UDAP). Therefore, if a financial institution assesses multiple NSF fees arising from the same transaction, but disclosures do not adequately advise customers of this practice, the misrepresentation and omission of this information from the institution’s disclosures is material and therefore deceptive. Also, a risk of unfairness may be present if multiple NSF fees are assessed for the same transaction in a short period of time without sufficient notice or opportunity for customers to bring their account to a positive balance to avoid the assessment of additional NSF fees. As a result, while revising disclosures may address the risk of deception, doing so may not fully address the unfairness risk.

In addition to the regulatory compliance risk, the FDIC also found that multiple NSF fee practices may result in heightened litigation risk. Numerous financial institutions, including some FDIC supervised institutions, have faced class action lawsuits alleging breach of contract and other claims because of the failure to adequately disclose re-presentment NSF fee practices.

If you would like more information on Strunk’s program, please contact us at info@strunkaccess.com or call 800-728-3116.

Accessing and Filtering ODP Manager Account Data

/in , , , , /by

The hosted ODP Manager software is an effective tool for managing an institution’s overdraft program. In addition to the daily tasks, ODP Manager can help users view and filter the account information that is imported from the daily extract file. If there is a specific population of accounts with certain criteria that users would like to monitor, these filtering options may facilitate the process.

Depending on the specific area of interest, users may want to limit results to a smaller population of accounts. There are three main areas in ODP Manager which will allow users this flexibility: account-level Reports, Account Inquiry, and Custom Query.

Reports show a standardized list of accounts that meet certain standard criteria. Individual column filters can be applied to incorporate additional criteria and limit the results displayed. These filtered results can be viewed on screen or exported to PDF or Excel. If users enter the same filter criteria frequently, it may be more efficient to create a new query group specific to your institution. This will allow users to display only the desired results just by selecting the group in a dropdown.

If users need more flexibility in selecting the accounts or data fields included, Account Inquiry provides additional options to select from all accounts in ODP Manager. Three different column views and all available data columns mapped from the daily extract file allow users to access additional data that may not be visible in Strunk’s standard reports. The filtered results can be viewed in the browser or exported to Excel.

Custom Query is used when an institution has a specific need to specify not only the account criteria to be used for the report but also the data columns displayed. Each day, users will download an Excel file with the updated list of accounts.

Please contact Strunk Support at support@strunkaccess.com with any questions or to find out more details about using the advanced ODP Manager filters.

High Performing Banks Look Outside the Box

/in , , , , , /by

As interest rates rise and the cost of doing business increases, bankers are challenged to figure out where we go from here. Many community banks face a huge loss in their bond portfolio due to the substantial increase in rates on US Treasury securities. Liquidity can be a problem as we have seen in some mid-sized banks. Community banks haven’t seen a run on deposits although there is pressure to compete for deposits from non-bank competitors.

Service charge and fee income has increased some since the 2020 pandemic but still are near historical lows. As banking regulators continue to scrutinize “junk” fees including overdraft fees, what alternatives does a bank have? Large banks have a multitude of ways to create service charge or fee income but smaller community banks aren’t so lucky. Banks with assets over $10B have to report NSF/OD income on their quarterly call report. Any bank with a concentration of income from this source is being criticized by the CFPB. Now community banks in some states are being asked the same question. More, not less regulation is coming.

What can you do? Strunk was the pioneer for the Overdraft Privilege program beginning in 1993 and it was the best fee income idea in the history of our industry. We have several other fee income programs that many financial institutions have implemented. High performing bankers are always thinking outside the box.

Contact Strunk at 800.728.3116 or email at info@strunkaccess.com to learn more about fee income programs offered by Strunk. You will be glad you did.

 

Charge Off and Recovery Tracking and Reporting

/in , , , , , , /by

After an overdrawn account has been charged off, financial institutions may still need to track and report on the charge-off balances and recoveries related to the overdrawn accounts. ODP Manager includes a manual tracking process that may allow your users to manage the charge-off and recovery process after the deposit account had been closed.

Once the account has charged off, users can create a Charge-off Item with the date, charge-off principal, charge-off fees, charge-off reason, and item status. Users can also include notes at the time the item is created and throughout the recovery process. Updates and changes are logged as well. As recoveries are made, they should be entered in ODP Manager and they will reduce the overall charge-off balance tracked.

All Charge-off Items for the last year are displayed on the C/O Items and Recoveries summary page. If a longer or shorter reporting timeframe is desired, a different default timeframe can be requested by the financial institution. Also, users can change the start and end dates at any time to change the charge offs displayed. The summary displays basic account and charge-off information. When the summary information is exported as a PDF it will overall totals and adds additional totals by branch.

Please contact Strunk Support at support@strunkaccess.com with any questions or to find out more details about using the Charge-off Items and Recoveries feature.

Does Your Bank Need More Fee Income?

/in , , , , , /by

Community bankers across the country are holding their breath hoping they won’t have to pay increased FDIC insurance premiums to pay for the recent $23B drain on the fund by the two large failed banks. A FDIC special assessment is coming but whether all banks will have to pay their proportionate share is still up in the air. Certainly it is not fair for community banks who are not “too big to fail” to share the responsibility of maintaining the FDIC Insurance fund at regulatory levels. Regardless, expenses at community banks are not going down.

Another concern that should be on community bankers’ minds is the percentage of service charge income they derive from non sufficient fund and overdraft fees. Since 2015, the CFPB has required banks with over $10B in assets to report their income from NSF/OD fees on their quarterly call report. Now, several states are asking smaller community banks for the same data. Banks that obtain over 50% of their fee income from NSF/OD fees are being criticized by the regulators. Some bankers are keenly aware of what is going on…others have not caught on to what they can do to mitigate this from happening. Bottom line is all bankers need to diversify their sources of fee income.

Strunk’s value added checking program will generate significant amounts of fee income while keeping free checking for those customers who want it. Since 2011, over 1,200 banks have offered the benefits added checking account to their offerings. You can expect fee income to go up by at least $40 per checking account per year. The program is easy to implement and easy to manage.

Contact us at 800.728.3116 or email at info@strunkaccess.com to learn more about fee income programs offered by Strunk. You will be glad you did.

Communicating Alternatives to Overdraft Privilege

/in , , , , , /by

Financial institutions are expected to monitor excessive consumer Overdraft Privilege activity in order to advise customers of alternative options to cover overdrafts.

FDIC regulated institutions are expected to give customers who overdraw their accounts on more than six occasions where a fee is charged in a rolling twelve-month period a reasonable opportunity to choose a less costly alternative and decide whether to continue with fee-based overdraft coverage. Strunk also recommends that institutions not regulated by the FDIC also communicate available alternatives to ODP on an annual basis to accounts with insufficient funds items.

The hosted ODP Manager software includes a letter template which can be used to notify customers of the available alternatives to Overdraft Privilege. The alternatives, overdraft protection credit lines and/or overdraft protection transfers from a linked account, are both described in the letter including information about associated charges or fees and whether an application or request is needed to initiate coverage.

This Excessive Use Notification letter can be generated in ODP Manager based on criteria included in the daily extract file or as needed as an Ad Hoc letter. If the file imported daily into ODP Manager includes data from the core that indicates when an account has qualified for the letter by exceeding the threshold, the hosted software can automatically show when a letter is due. If the data is not available in the extract file, letters can be generated for each account identified using an existing core report or other method.

Whether the letter is generated based on criteria or as an Ad Hoc letter, the letter will be tracked for each account and retained within the hosted ODP Manager software.

Please contact Strunk Support at support@strunkaccess.com with any questions or to find out more details about ODP Manager’s Excessive Use Notification Letter.

Strunk Response to Recent Overdraft Headlines

/in , , , , , , , /by

It is no secret that overdrafts and overdraft fees are making the news quite frequently these days. This increased attention often puts pressure on community financial institutions specifically, as the articles and reports are often unclear. Questions like, ‘is there something our FI is required to do?’ or more simply, ‘should we be doing something?’ arise.

Most recently, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) has released a report stating that banks’ overdraft/NSF fee revenue has declined significantly compared to pre-pandemic levels. The CFPB stated that “Bank overdraft/NSF fee revenue was lower in 2020 and early 2021 than before the pandemic, which was likely largely due to pandemic-related stimulus checks pushing up average checking account balances. In the second half of 2021, as the pandemic stimulus wound down, overdraft/NSF fee revenue rebounded somewhat, but began decreasing again through the third quarter of 2022 – likely due to changes in bank policies.”

The CFPB states in their report that they ‘have not observed correlating increases in other listed checking account fees, which suggests that banks are not replacing overdraft/NSF fee revenue with other fees on checking accounts.’  The report identifies the largest banks in the United States, and while those banks can afford these changes, the report fails to review how this will affect community financial institutions.

It is important to understand that the comments in the report are a function of two primary things:

  1. Consumers have changed their behavior regarding overdrafts because of the pandemic.
  2. Mega banks chose on their own to drastically cut NSF and OD fees. Those banks have many revenue sources and can afford to be magnanimous, while community financial institutions do not have that opportunity.

Quite possibly the most critical message here is, there is no new regulation and nothing for the community FI to do, for now. Strunk will alert clients if any new rule making is introduced by the CFPB, and thus changes become necessary. Strunk’s overdraft program remains complaint by offering clear and appropriate disclosures, easily accessible reports and ongoing employee training.

Community FIs might still feel the strain of lost revenue and should explore new fee income strategies and profit improvement opportunities with Strunk to get out in front of this challenge. It has never been more important to shift focus and to diversify the ways fee income is produced for the community FI.

Banks see a Significant Drop in Fee Income

/in , , , , , /by

Banks across the country saw a steep decline in fee income derived from overdrafts in 2020 likely due to pandemic related stimulus checks that pushed up consumer’s checking account balances. It bounced back somewhat in 2021 but there was another sharp decline in 2022.

Service charges that banks derive from overdrafts hit an all time high in the late 2000’s when the industry collected over $30B annually. In 2022 that number is less than $8B according to a recent report from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, a 75% drop in fee income. What happened and what can our industry do?

Consumer spending habits have changed and they are less likely to overdraw their account. Also, debit card regulations changed in 2010 which made banks get confirmation that a consumer wants their debit card paid at point of sale, even though they may not have enough money in their account. This was a great regulation and it gives the consumer a choice on how they want their account handled in the case of an overdraft. It also alleviated the problem for banks when they have to decide what to do in that situation. A win-win situation for consumers and banks.

Bankers for decades have been afraid to charge fees for services received by their customers. An example would be charging a fee for a checking account. Strunk’s Value Checking program has been around since 2011 and over 1,300 financial institutions have implemented it. Very simply, add benefits to all checking accounts and charge a small monthly fee on the account. ID theft protection, roadside assistance, and cell phone coverage are some examples of valuable benefits consumers are paying for elsewhere.

Contact Strunk at info@strunkaccess.com to learn more about Strunk’s Value Checking strategy. It is very simple to implement and consumers will like the service.

Key Event History in ODP Manager

/in , , , , , , /by

Each day, an extract file is imported into ODP Manager to update each account with the most current data from the core. After the import, the letters due and the reports will reflect the up-to-date information – but what if a user needs to review the past information for a customer’s account?

Key account events are tracked within the software with each import and letter generated. After the file import completes, each account has been updated to note if the account is now closed, if it is now overdrawn, or if it has now moved into good standing. If overdraft limits were assigned or removed, or an account has opted in or opted out for Reg E, the account is also documented. When letters are generated, the hosted software updates the account’s history with the type of letter, the letter template, and the date. A PDF of the letter is also retained and linked to the event history.

In addition to these software-generated events, ODP Manager users can create their own events in the form of comments, reminders, repayment plans, and charge-off items. These items can be viewed and updated by all ODP Manager users.

Both comments and reminders are used to note additional information about an account and can include attachments. The main difference between the two is that a reminder will allow a user to specify the due date for follow-up action. Overdue and upcoming events display under the Events section of ODP Manager. Repayment plans create reminders for overdue fresh start payments. Charge-off items track the amounts charged off by account and can also track any recoveries received.

Please contact Strunk Support at support@strunkaccess.com with any questions or to find out more details about ODP Manager’s account event tracking.

Overdraft Privilege Provides a Much Needed Service

/in , , , , , , /by

Before the early 1990’s, banks typically returned all items that would cause an overdraft on a consumer checking account. When overdraft privilege programs started consumers were thrilled that their overdrawn items wouldn’t automatically be returned to the merchant. Thirty years later, Strunk, the pioneer of overdraft programs, is still helping banks provide efficient, compliant overdraft services to community banks across the country.

Overdraft programs have come under scrutiny since 2005 when the FFIEC published best practices for paying items into overdraft status. All of the guidance set forth by the regulators were meant to disclose the bank’s policies and to ensure those policies were followed…just like any product or service a bank offers.

In 2010 banks couldn’t automatically pay and charge for a debit card caused overdraft without consumer consent. Another great regulation! Then in 2011, the FDIC asked banks to provide notice to excessive users of overdrafts by notifying consumers each time that had six overdrafts in a twelve month period. Perfect solution to reminding customers of their bad habits!

More recently the FDIC has been concerned about disclosing second presentment fees on the same check. This occurs when an insufficient item comes through, the bank returns it to the merchant, and the merchant sends it back so they can get paid for the purchase the consumer made. Notifying consumers that a fee may be levied against the second presentment is a tremendous idea. There is also a concern that debit card transactions may be approved with a positive balance and when the item actually hits the account it is negative and an overdraft fee is charged.

Lastly, the CFPB is concerned about “junk fees” where someone makes a deposit then the check they deposited comes back insufficient. Some banks levy a charge for the insufficient deposited item even though the depositor wouldn’t have known that the check would be returned.

Contact Strunk at info@strunkaccess.com to learn more about how to run an Overdraft Privilege program in a compliant and profitable way that benefits consumers.

An independent certified public accountant has examined Strunk’s operations and found them to be in compliance with the AICPA’s Trust Service Principles. It was determined that Strunk meets the Security, Availability, Processing Integrity, Confidentiality, and Privacy criteria for SOC 2 established by the AICPA.