800-809-2307
Four Letters. Infinite Potential.

Disparate Impact Studies Especially Tough on Dynamic Matrix Systems

By Richard Miller

Executive Vice President

 

As regulations on financial products and services continue to rank among the top concerns for banks and credit unions, many are re-evaluating the viability of the products they offer to their account holders.

 

Overdraft matrix systems are complicated algorithms that have come under increased scrutiny insofar as their effect on protected classes. These programs are not transparent and are based on an abstract set of parameters or a complex matrix of eligibility requirements that are suspected of having a disparate impact on certain account holder segments.

 

When program eligibility favors one group of potential users over others, or restricts access to the service based upon abstract or subjective factors, compliance violations as well as damage to account holder relationships may occur.

 

Avoid risk of disparate impact with consistent overdraft program eligibility criteria

When it comes to on-going regulatory review of overdraft solutions, banks and credit unions can rest easy if their program is fully disclosed and provides specific eligibility requirements for all customers. For example, the use of unbiased criteria that pertain to everyone reduces the likelihood of criticism or negative consumer impact.

 

Also, consider that programs based on ad hoc decisions were common in the days when a bank officer or branch manager would review account overdrafts early every morning and decide whose check to pay and whose to deny, often based on subjective criteria. Today that practice could be equated to having a disparate impact on account holders who were denied the service.

 

With the availability of fully transparent overdraft solutions, you can avoid inconsistent decisions when it comes to overdraft program eligibility requirements. The key is to select a program provider that uses criteria that are objective and based on conditions that are common to all account holders. This will help to alleviate any compliance concerns regarding discrimination or disparate impact against any particular customer or member segment.

 

For best results, look for a compliance-tested, regulator-approved program

Financial institutions and outside vendors that have created their own eligibility criteria – based on an abstract set of parameters or a complex matrix of eligibility requirements – run the risk of negative examiner reaction and the possibility of adverse action by a class of consumers.

 

Did your bank or credit union turn off your overdraft program as a result of increased regulatory scrutiny? Or, could your current eligibility requirements put the institution at risk of being cited for discrimination and disparate impact by examiners?

 

In either case, your overdraft program should provide you with regulatory peace of mind and an easy-to-manage, reliable source of non-interest income. Likewise, more of your account holders will have the opportunity to access a compliant service that helps them maintain a healthy bottom line, as well. If you have any concerns about the program you have in place, consider a review of your program to ensure it is the best solution for your bank or credit union as well as the market you serve. 

 

Published on CB Insight  and CU Insight

 

View more related articles

Get a free assessment of your program

Learn more about JMFA OVERDRAFT PRIVILEGE®

 

2020 40 years Academy account holder account holder retention account holder strategies account holder strategies; growth strategies; account holders Advice Agreement analysis Analytics announcement Assistance ATMs Attendees attracting talent Automation B2B Balance Bank Bank of Pacific Banking banking services banks banks and credit unions batching Benefit best practices board governance board member board of directors bottom line branch equipment branch profitability branding Bryan Hanks budget bundling business business culture business environment business practices business processes business strategies career advice case studies Case Study CEO onboarding CFPB change Charles Shanley Cher Cheryl Lawson Choose Chris Karstens Classroom clients Cloud Cohron commitment Communication communications Competitive Complaint Compliance compliance examinations compliance risks compliant Consistency Consistent consultant consulting Consumer Consumer FInancial Protection Bureau consumer protection Consumers Contingency Contract Contract Analysis Contract Negotiation contract negotiations Contract Optimizer Contract Renegotiations contract review contract staffing Contracts Convenience core processor contracts Cornerstone Credit Union League corporate culture corporate governance CPE credits credit card contracts credit cards Credit Union credit unions Crissandra Fry CSS culture customer service cyber security Damian Darin Byrd Data database Deal debit card contracts Debt Decisions Dick Miller digital directors Disclosed discounts Discussion Dynamic economy Education efficiency studies election Emergency employee employee retention employees EMV migration evaluation Evolve executive search Expectations Expense expense management expense reduction expense studies expenses Experience Expert expert negotiations Experts Facilitators FastTrack Federal Reserve Board Feedback fees Financial Financial Institution financial institutions financial services financial stability FinTech Floyd's Forum Free Analysis full disclosure Fully Generating Income generating leads generation governance government Halloween Hammond hiring HKW Holiday Holidays HR HR Consulting HR policies Hubur human capital human resources Implementation improved efficiencies improved results Inc. income income enhancement Innovate Innovative interview strategies interview tips IT contracts Jai James Jan Southern Jennifer Peoples Jim Griffis JMFA JMFA Academy JMFA clients JMFA News JMFA Next Generation Overdraft Privilege job search John M. Floyd John M. Floyd & Associates Keith Hughey Kelly Flynn Kennedy Kim Kreps Lawyer