The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
June 9, 2010 Phil Angelides Via Email and First Class Mail Mr. John C. Dugan Comptroller of the Currency 250 E Street SW Washington, DC 20219 Ann. taylor(aJ,occ. treas. gov Cllili rlllall Re: Hon. Bill Thomas Follow-Up to the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission Hearing on AprilS, 2010 Vice '!airmall Dear Comptroller Dugan: Brooksley Born Comm issioller Byron S. Georgiou COlli III issioller Senator Bob Graham On April IS, 2010, Chairman Angelides and Vice Chairman Thomas sent you a letter thanking you for testifying at the April 8, 2010 hearing and informing you that the staff of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission ("FCIC") would be contacting you or your office to follow-up on certain areas of your testimony and to submit written questions and requests for information related to your testimony, which are listed below. Please provide your answers and any additional information by June 23, 20 I O. I COlt/Ill issioller 1. What were the annual default rates for subprime and Alt-A loans, in absolute terms and relative terms, for national banks as compared to the industry average from January I, 2004 to December 31, 2009? 2. Please provide detailed information (who, when, and how) and a timeline regarding the following: Keith Hennessey Commissioller Douglas Holtz-Eakin COllllllissioner Heather H . Murren, CFA Colt/lIlissioner John W. Thompson (a) Any and all instances in which the oce 2 requested from state law enforcement officials and consumer groups information or referrals related to incidents of deceptive conduct, unfair lending, predatory Commlssioller Peter J. Wallison COlllmissioner I The answers you provide to the questions in this letter are a continuation of your testimony and under the same oath you took before testifying on April 8,20 I O. Further, please be advised that according to section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code, "Whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States knowingly and willfull y falsifies, conceals or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations, or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both ." 2 "OCC" refers to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and any of its members, divisions, and offices, including its national, regional or local offices and all other persons acting or purporting to act on its behalf. 1717 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 800 • Washington, DC 20006-4614 Wendy Edelberg Executive Director 202.292.2799 • 202.632.1604 Fax .-0- * Comptroller Dugan June 9, 2010 Page 2 of2 lending, mortgage fraud, boiler room-type conduct, or aggressive lending on the part of national banks; (b) Any related responses received from any such authorities or consumer groups; and (c) Any further actions taken by the information or referrals. acc in response to any such related The FCIC appreciates your cooperation in providing the information requested. Please do not hesitate to contact Jeff Smith at (202) 292-1398 or jsmith@fcic.gov if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Wendy Edelberg Executive Director Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission cc: Phil Angelides, Chairman, Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission Bill Thomas, Vice Chairman, Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission Jeff Smith, Investigative Counsel, Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission 4843-5647-5398 . v. I C) Comptroller of the Currency Administrator of National Banks Washington, DC 20219 HAND DELIVERED July 8, 2010 Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission 1717 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20006-4616 Attention: Jeff Smith, Investigative Counsel Subject: OCC Response to June 9. 2010. Follow-Up Request for Information Related to Comptroller Dugan's testimony on April 8. 201 0 Dear Mr. Smith: Pursuant to the June 9, 2010, follow-up request of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission ("FCIC") to Comptroller John C. Dugan related to his testimony before the FCIC on April 8, 2010 ("Request"), the OCC hereby responds as follows: Item One On June 21,2010, you verbally agreed to accept Appendix B and the chart on page 9 of the Appendix attached to the Comptroller's April 8, 2010, testimony in response to question #1 regarding annual default rates for subprime and Alt-A loans for national banks, as compared to the industry average, from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2009. The verbal agreement was confirmed via email on June 21,2010. On July 6,2010, you emailed the OCC seeking additional information regarding question #1. The OCC is working to respond to this request. Item Two Please see the enclosed timeline and attached supporting documentation, bates numbered OCC14-00300838 - OCCI4-00300852, describing OCC communication with state law enforcement officials and consumer groups regarding information sharing, complaint referrals and responsive OCC action related to deceptive conduct, unfair or predatory lending, mortgage fraud, boiler room-type conduct, or aggressive lending on the part of national banks. The timeline covers a period of approximately 2003 through Spring 2010. The enclosed timeline and supporting documents provide the information requested in your July 6,2010, email regarding then-Comptroller of the Currency, John D. Hawke's meeting with certain State Attorneys General. Pursuant to an Agreement Regarding Confidentiality of Non-Public Information signed January 8,201 0, and January 11, 2010, by the FCIC and OCC, respectively ("Agreement"), the OCC I •• Jeff Smith Investigative Counsel July 8,2010 Page 2 hereby designates the produced material as "non-public OCC information" protected by the terms of the Agreement. All of the documents provided to you contain confidential, non-public OCC information subject to the Agreement. In addition, and pursuant to 12 U.S.C. § 1821(t), disclosure of the enclosed documents and information to the FCIC does not waive any associated privileges. Should you have any questions, please call Linda Bridgman, Erica On sager, or Alissa Sagri at (202) 874-4800. Sincerely, Richard C. Steams Director Enforcement and Compliance Enclosures (2) cc: Daniel P. Stipano OCC Deputy Chief Counsel Linda Bridgman Assistant Director of Enforcement and Compliance Michael Gordon Counselor to the General Counsel U.S. Department of the Treasury -2- OCC Timeline in Response to June 9, 2010 Request, Number 2 Page 1 of9 BACKGROUND Communication with Consumer Organizations: The Comptroller, First Senior Deputy Comptroller/Chief Counsel, and Deputy Comptroller for Community Affairs periodically meet with the following consumer organizations to keep abreast of consumer protection concerns with national banks: California Reinvestment Coalition Center for Responsible Lending Chicago CRA Coalition Consumer Action Consumer Federation of America Consumer's Union CRA Coalition of North Carolina Greenlining Institute National Association of Consumer Advocates National Community Reinvestment Coalition National Consumer Law Center National Consumers League National People's Action Neighborhood Economic Development Advocacy Project (NEDAP) US Public Interest Research Group Woodstock Institute The following timeline refers to communications with the foregoing consumer groups that resulted from the periodic meetings. Complaint Processing Function: The OCC's Customer Assistance Group ("CAG"), with the assistance of other relevant OCC units, processes complaints and inquiries from customers of national banks. In 2009, CAG received over 90,000 inquiries and over 72,000 complaints. Reimbursements to customers achieved through the complaint process totaled $9,240,043 in 2009. The OCC routinely communicates with state officials as part of its complaint processing function. As described below, from 2006 to the present, forty-four states and Puerto Rico have entered into Memoranda of Understanding ("MOUs") with the OCC to facilitate information sharing regarding consumer complaints. For thirty-six states, complaints are transferred electronically to the OCC from state agencies. CAG periodically provides information to the referring state agencies regarding disposition of complaints. On occasion, attorneys in the OCC's Law Department communicate with state officials directly regarding issues that arise regarding individual complaints that have been filed with CAG. acc Timeline in Response to June 9,2010 Request, Number 2 Page 2 of9 During April 1998 to May 31, 2010, the acc received over 63,000 complaints forwarded from state officials. When the acc receives a complaint, CAG analysts record information in CAG's database about the type of financial product and claim that are at issue. During 2000 to May 31,2010, state officials referred 470 complaints that CAG coded as involving claims of predatory lending or unfair or deceptive acts or practices. Cases involving allegations of predatory lending or unfair or deceptive practices generally are reviewed by CAG personnel in close consultation with the Law Department. Licensing Function: The acc is charged under various federal statutes with considering applications involving the chartering, structure, activities, and operations of national banks. Some types of applications require that the applicant give public notice of the application, inform the public that comments may be submitted to the acc concerning the application, and provide the closing date of the public comment period. For a variety of applications, the acc considers the convenience and needs of the community served. Additionally, for many types of applications the acc considers the applicants' record of performance under the Community Reinvestment Act. See 12 C.F.R. Part 5; 12 U.S.C. §§ 2903(a)(2), 2902«3); 12 C.F.R. § 25.29. In the course of processing corporate applications, the acc routinely receives communications from members of the public, including community groups, expressing concerns about proposed transactions. Additionally, the Federal Reserve Board routinely forwards letters from members of the public on holding company applications that are related to applications pending before the acc. an a number of occasions, the concerns expressed in these letters have involved allegations of predatory, unfair, or deceptive conduct by the applicants or their affiliates. These letters are carefully evaluated in determining the appropriate action on pending applications and are addressed in acc decisions. TIMELINE The following timeline summarizes communications with state officials and community groups involving allegations of deceptive conduct, unfair lending, predatory lending, or mortgage fraud on the part of national banks, from January 1,2003, to the present. ~ an March 5, 2003, then-Comptroller of the Currency, John D. Hawke, Jr., sent a letter to Tom Miller, Attorney General of Iowa, following an in-person meeting the previous week in Washington, D.C of the acc and States Attorneys General for Iowa, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Vermont, and Washington. The letter reiterated Hawke's position at the meeting that the acc and state authorities should explore how to partner to enhance effective and efficient protections for customers of national banks. Copies of the letter were sent to the other Attorneys OCC Timeline in Response to June 9, 2010 Request, Number 2 Page 3 of9 General who attended the meeting. See OCCII-00211138 and OCCll00211141. ~ In March 2003, the OCC district counsel staff held discussions with Arizona Attorney General's Office ("AG's Office") staff regarding whether the AG's Office would coordinate with the OCC in settling a matter with Household Bank (SB), N.A., regarding the bank's financing of door-to-door sales of heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems. The AG's Office declined to join in the OCC's Formal Agreement, which was entered on March 25,2003. Formal Agreement By and Between Household Bank (SB), N.A., and OCC, No. 200317. See http://www.occ.treas.govIFTP/EAs/ea2003-17.pdf. ~ In June 2003, ACORN contacted the OCC to express concerns that Wells Fargo was allegedly engaged in predatory lending. ACORN transmitted factual information about a number of individual consumers who allegedly had been harmed by the subprime lending operations of WFHM, a national bank subsidiary, and Wells Fargo Financial, a non-bank holding company subsidiary. In August 2003, the OCC's First Senior Deputy Comptroller and Chief Counsel met with ACORN staff members to discuss the complaints and ACORN's concerns. A follow up teleconference was held with ACORN staff members and OCC Law Department, Community Affairs, and CAG staff. In response to ACORN's concerns, the OCC facilitated the filing of complaints regarding individual consumers with CAG. Information regarding the complaints was transmitted to the OCC's Large Bank Supervision staff for review and follow-up. The OCC included Wells Fargo's commitments regarding policies and procedures to address customer referral practices, subprime lending operations, and relationships with mortgage brokers as conditions in a November 6, 2003 decision to approve a corporate application. See http://www.occ.treas.gov/interp/dec03/cradI18.pdf. ~ . In June 2003, the OCC met with National People's Action to discuss concerns regarding predatory mortgage lending matters. On February 2,2005, the OCC issued mortgage lending guidelines addressing many concerns about mortgage practices. See http://l1'WW.occ. treas.gov/tooikit/newsreiease.aspx?Doc=ERNFCQX9.xml. ~ On July 25,2003, then-Comptroller of the Currency, John D. Hawke, Jr., sent a letter to Tom Miller, Attorney General of Iowa, reiterating the invitation of his March 5th letter to Attorney General Miller for the OCC and state authorities to partner to address consumer protection issues. Attached was a proposed MOV for the purpose of sharing consumer complaints and other information regarding alleged violations oflaws applicable to national banks and their subsidiaries. The letter was cc'd to Sarah Reznek at the National Association of Attorneys General (''NAAG'') and State Attorneys General. See OCCII-00211141. OCC Timeline in Response to June 9, 2010 Request, Number 2 Page 4 of9 ~ On August 13,2003, then-Comptroller of the Currency, John D. Hawke, Jr., sent a letter identical in all substantive respects to his July 25, 2003, letter to Neil Milner, President and CEO of the Conference of State Bank Supervisors, with the expectation that it would be provided to state bank supervisors. Comptroller Hawke expressly requested that if state bank supervisors become aware of any illegal, predatory, unfair, or deceptive practices at national banks that they bring those practices to the OCC's attention so appropriate action could be taken. See Attached OCC14-00300838. ~ On October 7,2003, Attorney General Miller sent a response letter to thenComptroller Hawke rejecting the proposed MOU as being "one-sided". See OCC11-00284324. ~ On October 16,2003, then-Comptroller of the Currency, John D. Hawke, Jr., sent another letter in response to Attorney General Miller's October 7, 2003, letter. Comptroller Hawke extended to Miller and his States Attorney General colleagues a second invitation to enter into discussions on drafting a MOU satisfactory to all parties. See AttachedOCC14-00300842. ~ On October 29,2003, then-Comptroller of the Currency, John D. Hawke, Jr., sent a letter to Roy Cooper, Attorney General of North Carolina. Comptroller Hawke reiterated his request in his July 25, 2003, letter to bring all complaints about national banks to the OCC's attention; and stated that the OCC was open to discussions about drafting a MOU satisfactory to all parties. See OCC1100196004. ~ In December 2003, the OCC notified the Illinois and Missouri States Attorneys General of the findings of an investigation the OCC had conducted concerning certain student loans provided by a national bank to students and prospective students of a vocational school. The investigation had been prompted by letters that the OCC received in November 2002 from those Attorneys General offices. The OCC opened an investigation into the matter; carefully reviewed all of the information; and ultimately determined that the bank had not engaged in any unfair or deceptive practices in violation of federal or state law in connection with these loans. Notwithstanding this, the OCC did raise supervisory concerns about the bank's oversight of the program and, in response to those concerns, the bank agreed to take several steps to avoid, minimize, and mitigate the risks to the bank and its customers relating to its vocational school student lending activities. ~ On various occasions during early to mid-2004, the OCC had communications with community groups about concerns with bank credit card disclosures of practices such as universal default. The OCC issued an industry advisory letter on credit card practices and undertook a comprehensive review of disclosures OCC Timeline in Response to June 9,2010 Request, Number 2 Page 5 of9 provided by large national bank credit card issuers, which resulted in revised and improved disclosures. See http://wv..W.occ.treas.gov/f.tp/advisory/2004-1 O. txt ~ In February 2004, the OCC received a communication from Consumer's Union following up on a previous meeting to discuss payroll cards. Consumer's Union identified questions and concerns regarding the product. In May 2004, the OCC issued Advisory Letter 2004-6 on regulatory expectations concerning operation of payroll card programs which addressed many of these issues. See http://v,rww.Dcc.treas.gov/ftp/advis01y/2004-6. txt ~ On February 26,2004, the OCC issued an industry advisory letter providing guidance to national banks regarding how to respond to complaints from state officials and on appropriate complaint resolution processes. Additionally, in the advisory letter, the OCC encouraged state officials to bring to its attention any complaints that allege that national banks are engaging in any illegal, predatory, unfair or deceptive practices. The OCC requested that state officials forward individual customer complaints involving such allegations to CAG, while national bank practices affecting multiple customers be brought to the attention ofthe OCC's Office of Chief Counsel. See htlp:llwww.occ.treas.gov/Advlst04.htm. ~ On February 27,2004, then-Ombudsman Samuel P. Golden sent letters to Randall S. James, the Texas Commissioner of Banking, and Roy Cooper, North Carolina Attorney General, inviting discussion of ways to improve the process for responding to consumer complaints among state and federal agencies. See Attached OCC14-00300843-00300846. ~ On March 26, 2004, Senior Deputy Attorney General of North Carolina, Josh Stein, replied to the OCC's February 27,2004, letter on behalf of Attorney General Cooper noting the Attorney General's objection to the OCC's position on preemption but agreeing to discuss how best to communicate to consumers how various government agencies can assist them. See Attached OCC 1400300847. ~ On April 2, 2004, then-Ombudsman Samuel P. Golden and North Carolina Senior Deputy Attorney General Josh Stein, had a telephone conversation discussing how to best share CAG complaints. ~ On April 9, 2004, then-Ombudsman Samuel P. Golden sent a letter to North Carolina Senior Deputy Attorney General Josh Stein, thanking him for the April 2,2004, telephone discussion, and inviting a dialogue (1) to improve the process of referrals of consumer complaints among state and federal agencies, (2) to clarify and improve consumers' awareness of where and how to file complaints against banks, (3) to identify steps the states may take if they become aware of an unsafe or unsound, unfair, or deceptive practice by a national bank or its OCC Timeline in Response to June 9, 2010 Request, Number 2 Page 6 of9 subsidiaries, and (4) to enhance communication between the OCC and the states on consumer protection more broadly. OCC14-00300849. ~ During winter and spring of 2004, the MOUs were revised to address concerns voiced by state AGs. ~ During the late summer of 2004, copies of the revised MOUs were provided to the Conference of State Bank Supervisors, the New York State Banking Superintendent, and the North Carolina Commissioner of Banks. ~ On October 27,2004, then-Ombudsman Samuel P. Golden sent a letter to Roy Cooper, North Carolina Attorney General, following the OCC's letters and subsequent telephone discussions with North Carolina Senior Deputy Attorney General Josh Stein. The letter requested an in-person meeting to an open dialogue regarding, inter alia, consumer complaint referrals. See Attached OCC 14-00300848. ~ On November 18, 2004, the OCC provided a copy of a revised MOU to the Consumer Protection Division of the North Carolina Department of Justice. At that time, the North Carolina Attorney General was the Chair of the National Association of Attorneys General Consumer Protection Committee. No response was ever received. See Attached OCC14-00300851. ~ In 2006, the OCC met with a number of consumer groups to discuss an interagency Non-Traditional Mortgage Lending Guidance under consideration by federal banking agencies. See http://www.occ.treas.gov/fr/fedregisterI70fr77249.pdf. Those groups had recommended that the non-traditional mortgage lending guidance be expanded to include 2/28 and 3/27 adjustable rate mortgages. Guidance including the requested products was issued in June 2007. See http://www .occ. treas. gov/fr/fedregister172fr3 7569. pdf ~ In July 2006, Comptroller Dugan met with a number of community groups to discuss continuing concerns with credit card lending practices and disclosures. The OCC continued to review credit card solicitations and disclosures for compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and guidance. Additionally, OCC officials voiced their support on a number of occasions for the Federal Reserve Board's rulemaking to review and revise the Regulation Z provisions relating to credit cards. See, e.g., Testimony of John C. Dugan before the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit, H.R. Committee on Financial Services (June 7, 2007), http://www.occ.treas.gov/fip/releaseI2007-54b.pdf ~ In July 2006, the OCC received correspondence from US Public Interest Research Group following up on a meeting with Comptroller Dugan. The US Public Interest Research Group identified a problem one of their constituents was OCC Timeline in Response to June 9, 2010 Request, Number 2 Page 7 of9 having with a Citibank credit card. CAG was able to resolve the matter to the satisfaction ofthe customer. ~ On November 20, 2006, the OCC announced an agreement on procedures for the exchange of consumer complaint information between state banking departments and the OCC. See http://www.occ.treas.gov/toolkitinewsrelease.aspx?JNR=l&Doc=D39TFJ65.xml ~ Starting on November 30, 2006, the OCC entered into MOUs with the following states: New York 11130/06 12/04/06 North Dakota 12115106 Arizona Mississippi 12/31/06 Georgia 02/02/07 Missouri 02/08/07 Wyoming 02/08/07 North Carolina 02/20107 Colorado 02/28/07 03/02/07 Kentucky 03129107 Louisiana New Hampshire 04/09/07 Nebraska 04/17/07 04126107 Florida South Dakota 05/01/07 05110107 Utah 05114/07 Maine Wisconsin 05/18/07 Pennsylvania 05/30107 Puerto Rico 06/29/07 07118107 Alaska Vermont 07/20107 07/23/07 Ohio 07/30107 Illinois 08/06/07 Indiana 08120107 Washington Montana 08/28/07 10102/07 Texas 10105/07 Delaware 10/31/07 Alabama 10/31/07 California Arkansas 11127/07 12118/07 Rhode Island ·' OCC Timeline in Response to June 9, 2010 Request, Number 2 Page 8 of9 Iowa Massachusetts Minnesota Connecticut Idaho New Jersey West Virginia Oregon Oklahoma Michigan Tennessee Kansas ~ 12/21/07 01118108 02114/08 03/31/08 04128108 06/01/08 06/04/08 06/05/08 07/01/08 08/01/08 08/01/08 10107/08 On April 17, 2007, the Deputy Attorney General of California, Howard Wayne, made a referral to CAG on behalf of two former students of MicroSkills, a failed computer training school, who had borrowed student loans from a national bank. The OCC contacted Wayne by phone on May 3,2007, to inform him that the OCC was looking into the matter and to seek any additional information his office had in connection with the bank and MicroSkills. In response, Wayne submitted materials identifying twelve additional students who claimed to have borrowed from the bank to finance their attendance at MicroSkills. Wayne complained that the bank was refusing to honor the holder in due course provision in the loan contracts. After the OCC contacted the bank, it reversed its earlier position and agreed to honor the holder in due course clause in all of the disputed contracts, if contacted by the studentlborrowers. The OCC disagreed with the bank's approach and on June 15,2007, the OCC informed the bank of its expectation that it should reach out to all potentially affected MicroSkills students to alert them that they might have a claim and to solicit facts to determine the amount, if any, of such claim. The bank did so by letters dated June 21,2007, to all affected borrowers. The OCC periodically monitored the bank's follow-up on the affected borrowers and ultimately the bank satisfactorily addressed all the issues raised by the complaint. ~ Following Capital One's conversion to a national bank charter on March 1,2008, the OCC reached out to State Attorneys General in California and West Virginia concerning matters that were under investigation by those offices. The OCC made various requests during the summer of 2008 to the offices of the California and West Virginia Attorneys General for information pertaining to consumer complaints against Capital One. The California Attorney General produced approximately three boxes of documents, including consumer complaints filed with Capital One, meritorious consumer complaints filed with the California Attorney General's Office, and documents produced by Capital One in response to the California Attorney General's requests. The West Virginia Attorney • I OCC Timeline in Response to June 9,2010 Request, Number 2 Page 9 of9 General's Office produced 356 consumer complaints filed with their office, almost all of which the OCC determined, following careful review, were not actionable. In addition, based upon the information obtained from the California and West Virginia Attorney Generals, the OCC performed a targeted review of credit card practices focused on their areas of concern. After finalizing examination conclusions, the OCC imposed a Formal Agreement against Capital One on February 18,2010, requiring the bank to pay $750,000 to affected customers. The OCC continues to investigate certain additional allegations made by the West Virginia Attorney General's Office in a January 1, 2010, complaint filed against the bank in the Circuit Court of Mason County, West Virginia. ~ In September 2009, the OCC received a communication from Consumer Federation of America concerning allegedly abusive overdraft protection program practices at Old National Bank. The OCC reviewed Old National Bank's practices and the bank to adjust its practices to conform to the 2005 Interagency Guidance on Overdraft Protection programs. ~ In 2009 and early 2010, consumer groups communicated concerns with national banks' refund anticipation loan programs. The OCC issued Bulletin 2010-7 on February 18,2010, addressing supervisory expectations regarding the operation of Refund Anticipation Programs offered by national banks. See http://www.occ.treas.govlftplbulletin/2010-7a.pdf. In February 2010, the OCC also issued a consumer advisory on ways consumers can receive their tax refunds, along with a public service announcement. See http://rvww.occ.treas.gov/ftpIADVISORYI2010-1.html. ~ In December 2009, the OCC Law Department staff held a telephone discussion with staff attorneys at the California Department of Justice to obtain information on civil litigation brought by the state against a tax preparer that offered refund anticipation loans extended by a national bank. The California attorneys provided the OCC staff background information on the litigation. In January 2010, the state attorneys also forwarded state court pleadings. The national bank in question is no longer involved in refund anticipation loan lending. ~ In the spring of 201 0, OCC received communications from consumer groups identifying concerns with the way a national bank was planning to operate its overdraft program under the new Federal Reserve Board overdraft protection regulations. Some of these issues had been the subject of earlier press accounts. In April 2010, OCC issued Bulletin 2010-15 addressing the concern by clarifying regulatory expectations as to how banks should be implementing the Federal Reserve Board's regulatory changes on overdraft protection programs. See http://occ.gov/ftplbulletinl2010-15.html. _. ,.,- .- ---.or- - : - - ..-.... --- ...... __ . , , " ." Comptroller of the Currency Administrator of National Banks Washington, DC 20219 August 13, 2903 ~. ~eil~ilner President & CEO Confer~nce of State Bank Supervisors 1155 Connecticut Avenue, ~:W. Washington, D.C. 20036 Subject: ." Handling of Consumer Complaints, Dear~eiI: I am writing to n;take you and your CSBS colleagues aware of new arrangements that the acc has put in place to improve communication 'and coordination in connection with referrals 'of customer complaints regarding national banks or their subsidiaries made by State agencies to the acc. I know we all share the goal of providing effective and efficient protection for customers of national banks, and I firmly believe that the States and the aCC can partner in this effort, entirely within the parameters set out in federal law fo'r supervision and regulation of national banks by the acc. I wanted to make,you aware of the specifics are what we are doing in this regard. We also have been in touch with the State Attorneys General to convey similar information about our new arrangements. ' By way of brief background, as you know, our supervisory processes are tailored to each bank's size -large, mid-~ize, and community - and to the bank's particular business operations, when these operations affect the risk profile of the bank (such as credit card banks). In our largest , national banks, this process entails continuous supervision by a staff of OCC examiners onsite at the bank. Examinations for compliance with consumer protection laws is an important component of our supervisory responsibilities, 'and, as with safety and soundness examinations, we try to tailor our consumer compliance exams and other supervisory activities to the risk profile of a particular bank or type of banks. Customer complaint information, including information that we may receive from State agencies 'or departments, can play an important role in that regard. The acc's Customer Assistance Group (CAG), based in Houston, Texas, has an important role in processing and resolving individual customer complaints and analyzing and channeling complaint infonnation to our bank examiners to enable exaininers to intensify their supervisory Confidential & Non-public acc Information aCC14-00300838 . . activities for particular problematic institutions. The CAG is comprised of teams of consumer complaint specialists, analysts, and bank examiners, and is overse~n by the OCC's Ombudsman. .In addition to handling a large volume of questions and general comments about national banks or banking laws and regulations, CAG teams process thousands of individual customer complaints each year. Complaints range from alleged violations oflaw or regulation to contractual disputes and customer service issues. The CAG receives these complaints via telephones to its toll-free number, electronic mail through 24-hour access to the CAG website, as well as written correspondence.! With respect to all' of the written and Email complaints, and roughly half of the telephone · complaints that cannot be resolved dUring the course of the initial call, the complaint will be sent to a special processing unit for research and bank contact. ~ certain instances, the CAG specialist will consult, as appropriate, with acc legal staff for guidance. The CAG will respond to the consumer after it concludes its research into the ~atter and has evaluated the information it has obtained from the consumer and the b~ (or subsidiary) that is the subject of the complaint. · This complaint resolution and informal mediation process enables the CAG not only to assist consumers, but also to develop a large and flexible base of consumer complaint information that can be analyzed by bank, by product, and by subject matter of the complaint. The CAG uses this database to prepare internal reports for bank supervision staff on complaint volumes and trends. Bank examiners also may access the CAG database directly to assist them in identifying risk management issues, potential violations oflaw ands appropriate supervisory strategies for · individual banks. We take pride in the fact that the CAG has been - deservedly -- recognized as supervision of the national banking system. a unique and valuable component of the qcc's I lmow you and I agree that Federal and State hank supervisors share a common goal of ensuring that consumers are protected from illegal, predatory, unfair, or deceptive practices. 2 In our For your information, the contact information is as follows: 1) Letter - Comptroller of the Currency, Customer Assistance Group, 1301 Mc~ey Street, Suite 3450, Houston, Texas 77010; 2) 2) Telephone - 1-800-613-6743; and 3) . 3) Email- customer.assistan!=e@occ.treas.gov. . . 2 I have made clear on a number of occasions that predatory and abusive practices have absolutely no place in the national banking system. I also ~ust note that in my meetings with consumers who have been the victims of predatory lending practices, I have been told, consistently, that the lender at issue was a finance company or a loan .broker, not an insured bank or its subsidiary. Notably, nearly two dozen State Attorneys General filed a brief in litigation earlier this year that reaches the same conclusion. The case, National Home Equity Mortgage Association · v. Office o/Thrift Supervision, No. 1:02CV02506 (D.D.C. 2003), involves a revised regulation issued by the Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) to implement the Alternative Mortgage Transaction Parity Act (AMPTA). The revised regulation seeks to distinguish between federally-supervised thrift institutions and non-bank mortgage lenders and makes non-bank mortgage lenders subject to state laws restrictions on prepayment penalties and late fees: In supporting the OTS's decision to distinguish between Supervised depository institutions and unsupervised housing creditors and to retain preemption ofstate laws with respect to.the former, but not for the latter, the brief for the State Attomeys General stated: I Based on consumer complaints received, as well as investigations and enforcement actions undertaken by the Attorneys General, predatory lending abuses are largely confined to the subprime mortgage lending -2- Confidential & Non-public OCC Information OCC14-00300839 -. 1 supervision of the nationali>anking system, we have an extensive array oftools with which to address unsafe or unsound or unfair and deceptive practices or violations of law by national banks. We have the ability to issue administrative cease and desist orders, safety and soundness directives, require restitution, remove officers and directors and impose civil money penalties. TIlrough our supervisory processes, we also have immediate access to bank information and bank personnel, without the need for issuance of subpoenas. All these tools enable us to respond with speed and focus and achieve appropriate compliance and remedial measures from the national banks we supervise. While the CSBS has raised some question about the scope of our exclusive visitorial powers with respect to national banks and their subsidi;¢es, I believe our authority in this regard i~ quite clearcut, as provided under Federal law, 12 U.S.C. § 484. Moreover, I think it is quite clear that our authority extends not only to safety and so~dness matters, but to consumer protection and other matters as well. Putting our difference on this legal issue aside, however, I think there a way to proceed, that we will agree is constructive, as·follows.: ,.. If State bank supervisors become aware of complaints that allege that national banks or their subsidiaries are engaged in any illegal, predatory, unfair or deceptive practices, I strongly urge State supervisors to bring those to our attention so that we may take appropriate action. To the extent that the matter involves an individual customer grievance, the complaint would appropri"ately be sent to the CAG. Where the issue is broader, such as the applicability of a particular State law to national banks generally, or ifthere is infonnatioD, that a specific national bank is engaged in a particular practice affecting multiple customers that is predatory, unfair or deceptive, this information should be communicated to the OCC's Office of Chief Counsel for coordination. . . We have established special procedures to handle both types of referrals. With respect to referrals to the CAG, infonnation should be directed as follows and will be flagged and specia.J.iy. tracked: Comptroller of the Currency .Customer Assistance Group Attention: Craig D. Stone, Deputy Ombudsman/State Referral 1301 McKinney Street, Suite 3450 Houston, Texas 77010 Mr. Stone may also be ~eached at 713-336-4350 and at Craig.Storie@occ.treas.gov. market and to non-depository institutions. Almost all a/the leading subplime lenders are mortgage companies andfinance companies, not banks or direct bank subsidiaries. (emphasis added) -3.- Confidential & Non-public acc Information aCC14-00300840 ..... Information and issues of the type- appropriate for referral to the OCC's Law Department should be directed as follows, and will also be specially tracked: Comptroller of the Currency . . Chief Counsel's Office Attention: James F. E. Gillespie, Jr., Assistant ChiefCounsellState Referral . 250 E Street, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20219 Mr. Gillespie may also be reached at 202-874-5200 and at James.Gillespie@occ.treas.gov. \ . We also recognize your interest in how these matters are resolved, and we have prepared, and I enclose herewith: a draft of a model Memorandum of Understanding between the -aCC and a State department or agency. Execution of such an agreement will greatly facilitate our ability to provide information to apprise State officials of status and resolution of matters that have been referred to the OCC. We would welcome this opportunity to work together with you and your CSBS colleagues, to . promote fair treatm~t of customers. Sincerely, D. Hawke, Jr. omptroller of the Currency -4- Confidential & Non-public acc Information aCC14-00300841 " .... ...' ." ..;' " . ' Comptroller of the Currency . Administrator of National Banks Washington, DC 20219 October 16, 2003 Mr. Thomas J. Miller Attorney General State ofIowa Department of Justice Hoover Building Des Moines, Iowa 50319 Dear Tom: I'm sorry that you are unhappy with my remarks to the Women in Housing and Finance, but when one of your number publicly denounces this office by charging that we are engaged in "unrelenting efforts ... to undermine the states' ability to protect their citizens from fraudulent and deceptive corporate practices" -- a highly.political and inflanunatory'charge 'that is~ in my view, sheer nonsense - I believe it calls for a strong response. I recognize that you cannot control the public utterances of all State Attorneys General, but I have,heard,.nothing in the way of a repudiation oftllls. kind of extreme rhetoric from more moderate and better. informed voices. . . , As to the.proper interpretation of our visitoricl powers,'I don't think: the issue is even close. .You and your colleagues are asserting,an'authority that is categorically denied to you by federal law.. I'm afraid we will have to agree to disagree on this question, at least until it is settled by some other authority. ' " ., , " , Finally, it puzzles me that you are so' emphatic in r,ejecting an MOU that has 'neither been drafted nor discussed. We extended an invitation to you and your colleagues many months ago to enter, into discussions as,to how we might define a cooperative arrangement, and to date we have not heard any constructive suggestions from you'. I don't know whether it will in fact be possible to reach such an agreement, given your insistence on asserting a desire to be able to take.direct ~nforcement actions against national banks, but I continue to believe that a shared interest in ,protecting consumers should, at least, lead us to pursue some discussion ofthe matter. We remain ready and willing to have such discussions. . " Confidential & Non-public OCC Information OCC14-00300842 c) Comptroller of the Currency Administrator of National Banks ,Office of the Ombudsman 1301 McKinney Street Suite 3400 Hquston, TX 77010 , February 27, 2004 Mr. Randall S. James Commissioner of Banking , Th~ State of Texas 2601 North Lamar Blvd. Aus~ TX 78705-4294 , , lid/! ,Dear~ As you may know, in my capacity as 'the Ombudsman for the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC)~ I am responsible for supervision of the agency's Customer ' Assistance Group. As also you may be aware, the Customer Assistance Group provides direct assistance to cU$tomers of national banks and their subsidiaries, and also analyzes complaint data and provides that analysis to oce examiners to assist them in their examinations of national banks and,their subsidiaries. In the latter capacity, the Group's activities supplement our examinatio~ compliance and enforcement staff. (We have nearly 1700 examiners in the field; a significant number are compliance specialists, and , over 300 of our examiners are resident, full-time at our largest'national banks, conducting . qontinuous supervision. The examination staff also is supplementetl by dozens of attorneys who handle enforcement and compliance matters.) , The purpose of this letter is twofold; first, my Deputy Ombudsman, Craig D. Stone, and I are very interested 'in exploring whether there is a group of state banking commissioners with which it would be appropriate to discuss' improving the process for referrals of consumer complaints among state and federal agencies. Currently, many state agencies refer to us complaints that they have received that pertain to national banks and their subsidiaries. In tUm, the OCC gets literally thousands of cU$tomer complaints that pertain to entities that we do not regulate, and we endeavor to refer those to the appropriate federal or state supervisor of the entity. We would be interested in dis~ussing how this process is working, thoughts QD how to improve it. It may also be useful to discuss if there is any uniform information that could be made available to consumers via agencies' websites th.!tt would explain where to file complaints and what agency to contact with and Confidential & Non-public OCC Information OCC14-00300843 .' j .; respect to particular entities. We would be happy to pursue these issues' in any forum that would be appropriate. :Additionally, we would like to eXtend an invitation to you andlor others that may be .appropriate, to visit our offices in Houston, Texas. We welcome the opportunity to provide you with a comprehensive overview of our operations, a presentation of our .consumer complaint managemen~ system and associated supervisory tools, as well as a tour of our facility. ' . Lastly, I extend a personal invitation for you to visit our offices during your attendance at the 2004 Texas Bankers Association (TBA) convention in late April. The Hilton , Americas Hotel and:the George Brown Convention Center, .the rnA convention site, are lo~ted just a couple of blocks from our office. " r look forward to hearing from you soon. (office) or.{281) 433-4181 (cell). . Please feel free to contact me at 713-336-4350 ' Sincerely, S Confidential & Non-public OCC Information OCC 14-00300844 II. ----- ._-I . : .. :" J • I ~.1' • . .... . r () Comptroller of the Currency Administrator of National Banks . ,I ' Office of the Ombudsman 1301 McKinney Street Suite 3400 Houston, TX n010 February 27, 2004 The Honorable Roy Cooper Attorney General North C/Il"Olina Department 9f Justice . P.O,Box629 Raleigh, NC 27602·0629 Dear Attorney General Cooper: '. I am writing to you in your capacity as. Chair of the National Association of Attorneys General Consumer protection Committee. I am the Ombudsman for the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and have supervision of the agency's Customer . Assistance Group. As you may be aware, the Customer Assistance Group provides direct assistance to cuStomers of national banks and their subsidiaries, and also analyzes . complaint data and provides that analysis to OCC examiners to assist them in their examinations of national banks and their'subsidiaries. In the latter capacity, the Group··s activ.ities $UPplement our examination, compliance and enforcement staff. (We·have nearly 1700 examiners in the :qeld; a significant number are compliance specialists, and over 300 of our examiners are resident, full·time at our largest national banks, col)ducting continuous supervision. 'The examination staff also is supplemented by dozens of attorneys. who handle enforcement and co~pliance matters.) .. ~'. ' ',' .:. ." the purpo~e of this letter is twofold; first, my Deputy Ombudsman, Craig D. stone, and I ,are very interested in opening a dialogue with the Committee, (or whatever group would be appropriate) to discuss improving the process for referrals of consumer complaints among state and federal agencies. Currently, many state agencies refer to us complaints that they have received that pertain to national banks and their subsidiaries. In tum, the OCC gets literally thousands of customer complaints that pertain to entities that we do not regulate, and we endeavor to refer those to the appropriate federal or state supervisor of . the entity. We would be interested in discussing how this process is working, and thoughts on how to improve it It may also be useful to discuss if there is any uniform information.that could be made available to consumers via agencies' websites or otherwise that would explain where to file co~pla.ints and what agency to contact with Confidential & Non-public OCC Information OCC14-00300845 respect to particular regulated entities. We would be happy to pursue these issues in any forum that would be appropriate. Additionally, we would like to extend an invitation to you andlor others that may be appropriate, to visit our offices in Houston, Texas. We welcome the opportunity to provide you with a comprehensive overview of our operations, a presentation of our consumer complaint management system and as!!ociated supervisory tools, as well as a tour of our facility. ' . If you need.any information Or have questions, please feel free to contact me at 713-3364350. I will give you a call in the near future to explore how we canjointIy pursue thes~ initiatives. Confidential & Non-public OCC Information OCC14-00300846 · ;:- ' t : - - - -.---.---...__ .-.........-_ ......... -.. ....... ...:-........-.................. ...-_.-... ----·-.. .·· .... ~Ei:-·~~ · ........... _:...-:-- ~\011d{ "Q'~I State of North Carolina ROY COOPER Deparlmenl of Justice ATTORNEY GENERAL P. O. Box 629 RALEIGH 27602-0629 CONSL'r.tER PROTECTIOS 1919) 716-6000 Fax: '1919\ 716-6050 March 26, 2004 Samuel P. GoJden, Ombudsman Office of the Ombudsman . Office of the Gomptrqller of the Currency . ·1301 McKinney Street . .Suite 3400 Houston, TX 77010 Dear Mr. Golden: Attorney General Cooper forwarded your Jetter to me and asked that I, as his Consumer . Protection ch lef, reply on his behalf. Protecting consumers is one 'of the Attorney General's top priorities. Accordingly, .he agrees that consumers should experience as little confusion as possible when filing'complaints with, or seeking assistance from, government agencies. He has asked me, therefore, to discuss with you how the OCC refers complaints to state agencies and how state agencies can effectively. refer complaints to the OCC. If consumers are contacting your Consumer Assistance Group (CAG) with problems beyond your authority, it makes a great deal of sense for·the CAG to know to which agency the problem should be referred. It may also be ai:::lvisable to qiscuss ho.w be~t to communicate to consume~ r.~w various ..gov~r:n!l1~~t agencies can assist them with their problems. . ........ .. ' :. '. As you know, Attorney General Cooper opposes the OCC's efforts to preempt state consumer protection laws and to restrict state enforcement of those laws because he believes those efforts will diminish the protections afforded to consumers. When It comes to clear1y communicating to consumers about how their state and federal governments can serve them, however, our agenCies can set our policy and legal disagreements aside. Please feel free to call me at (919) 716-6006 to identifY. a mutually convenieFlt time to talk about these issues. At that p.oint. I can gauge the availability and Interest of my colleagues In other states to Join us in . .... '. this dis.c~ssion. . We app~e~iate your interest in cooperating on this matter. .,I I Sincerely, /J~ Yos~ Stein Senior peputy Attorney Gell~ral . '"'''' .' .... . . . . .. .. :';:: :: "':';>.':.:;:.. ::':..: " ': ~!:':' :' : '.<::' '.:'::.' .:.' :.::. :. .:,>,,:,>~ ': <. ;:~:/.~ : :;': ~:::'.:'\.".: :.'( .~:,.'. : ':':~ : :.:;': .~~:,;.: :"::': : ::: ". ::./.:~': ' ; ~ .~. !'.,:",~ ,: :'." ..... ;.:::.:.:, :',~~' , ' r' :. '.':"", : ~ .' : ::: roo, '~ " :', ' , 0 ',' : ' , ': : : ' .: .: '_ : • ' : ' : '" ' " , :" ~ ·! · . ·. '· .r ~.:: .:;.~.~ .:. ~/;.' ~ ~'!: .; . '. ', :: . ': ,,:'0, ', ',.', : .. :, :-. . . .... : . :. ::' : " 'oj:_ , ',. : : . .;:::: "', '. ,.' .: .. I Confidential & Non-public OCC Information . , : ::-... ! ...::',~ . ~ I ': " • : < ::,\ :. : •..'- .... : : : :~. '.. • ; ',;' . I. ... .. . . . . ,~. .. .. .. .. . ' .. ~ '. : , . :',:'~ ur~ .;:,,~ :,:>' . .~':' . .,.) : .. ~ '. . '.. ' .. .~ !, ' . " ':: '" .,' ! ' , '; ! l' , ', =-- ':. : #' ' , ' :, . ~.: ..: . .. : .. , ~. .. .. '.. , .. OCC14-00300847 .....- ... _.... _._ .. __ ....-......._-_._------_. __ .... _.... _.. .- -- - ._-.. _._-_ ........ _-----_._---- ._.... : ') C) Comptroller of the Currency Administrator of National Banks Office of the Ombudsman 1301 McKinney Street Suite 3400 Houston, TX 77010 October 27, 2004 Mr. Roy Cooper .Attorney Ganera1 North Carolina Department of Justice· P. O. Box 629 Raleigh, NC 27602-0629 Dear Mr. Cooper: I wanted to follow-up on our previous correspondence nnd telephone conversations with Senior Deputy Attomey General Stein. Craig Stone and I will be in Charlotte on November 15th and 16th attending scheduled meetings at one of the large nationol banp. We wanted to mend an invitation to yan and yourstafi'to set-up a time to discuss theOCC's coJ1S1lIDClcomplaintprocess. Wehaveopantimeonfor a breakfast meeting in the morning of November 15th. or could mange our schedule to have a meeting in the early afternoon that same day. Should your schedule permit travel to Owlotte, we can mange a meeting in one of our local offices. Ai; previously discussed, we are very interested in opening a dialogue with your office to discuss several topics, including methods to improve the process of refenals of consumer complaints among state and federa1 agencies. We also want to focus on improvements to clarify and improve conSUDlClB' awareness of where and how to file complaints against a national bank or a subsidiary of a national bank. I look forward to hearing from you soon and if you need any information, please feel free to call me at 713-336-4350. s/~ ~~~en Ombudsman cc: Josh Stein Confidential & Non-public OCC Information OCC 14-00300848 -_. -.-.-~ .. - ..... -.-.-.--- ... _._ .... __.-.. _.. -- .. - ... -. ----_ ..._._.. __ ._ .. _-_._. __ ... __.. _---_ ... -- . -_.•... '" C) Comptroller of the Currency Administrator of National Banks Office of the Ombudsman 1301 McKinney Street Suite 3400 Houston, TX 77010 April 9, 2004 Mr. Josh Stein Senior Deputy Attorney General North Carolina Department of Justice P. O. Box 629 Raleigh, NC 27602-0629 Dear Mr. Stein: It was a pleasure visiting with you via telephone last Friday, and I appreciate your March 26, 2004 letter on behalf of Attorney General Roy Cooper. As you are aware, I am the Ombudsman for the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), and have responsibility for the agency's Customer Assistance Group. The Customer Assistance Group provides direct assistance to customers of national banks and their subsidiaries, and also analyzes complaint data and provides that analysis to OCC examiners to assist them in their examinations of national banks and their subsidiaries. ° Currently, many state agencies routinely refer consumer complaints that they receive against National Banks and their subsidiaries to the OCC. Similarly, the OCC recoeives thousands of customer complaints that pertain to entities that we do not regulate, and we endeavor to refer those to the appropriate federal or state supervisor of the entity. As I mentioned in my initial letter to Attorney General Cooper, Deputy Ombudsman, Craig D. Stone, and I are very interested in opening a dialogue with your office to discuss several topics including: (1) (2) Methods to improve the process of referrals of consumer complaints among state and federal agencies. Improvements to clarify and improve consumers' awareness of where and how to file complaints against banks. Confidential & Non-public OCC Information OCC 14-00300849 :--- -' Alternatives that the states could take should they become aware of an unsafe and unsound, unfair or deceptive, or any other banking practice by a national bank or one of its subsidiaries that spawns concern. Enhanced communication between the states and the OCC on consumer protection related issues including regular interaction by the OCC with state agencies (Attorney Generals and Banking Commissioners) through attendance at regularly scheduled meetings. (3) (4) Additionally, we would like to extend an invitation to you, and others that may be appropriate, to visit our offices in Houston, Texas. We welcome the opportunity to provide you with a comprehensive overview of our operations, a presentation of our consumer complaint management system and associated supervisory tools, as well as a tour of our facility. I look forward to visiting with you during our call scheduled next Wednesday, April 14, 2004 at 10:30 a.m., EDT. Please do not hesitate to contact me whenever I can be of assistance at 713-336-4350 or via email at Samue1.Golden@occ.treas.gov. Sincerely, Samuel P. Golden Ombudsman Confidential & Non-public acc Information aCC14-00300850 r----- ·_:; ..........) I) C) Comptroller of the Currency Administrator of National Banks Office of the Ombudsman 1301 McKinney St. Suite 3400 Houston, TX 77010 November 18, 2004 Mr. Philip Lebman Assistant Attorney General Consumer Protection Division North Carolina Department of Justice P. a. Box 629 Raleigh, NC 27602-0629 .. 1// 1 ~~ Thank you for taking the time to meet with us on Tuesd~y morning. I believe that we have identified several areas .of common interest and I look forward to future meetings. ·As a follow-up to our meeting, we would welcome any reactions, comments, or suggestions you might wish to provide on the revised model MOV on Infonnation Exchanges Regarding Consumer Complaints. Ns we noted, the new version is intended to avoid any concession by one party to jurisdictional views of the other party. Instead, the referring agency remains free to make referrals based upon its views of the jurisdiction of the receiving agency. We hope that this approach will be acceptable to you and other Attorneys General. We would also welcome any suggestions you might have on how acc might improve its consumer assistance process based on your experience in North Carolina. Please feel free to contact Craig directly if you have any questions, comments or suggestions related to the processing of consumer complaints. Finally, we would welcome the opportunity for additional meetings with your office or a·broader group of Attorneys General. We think there are a range of issues· that we might usefully explore including: 1) Methods to improve the process o/referrals o/routine consumer complaints among state and federal agencies. For example, acc would like to discuss the OCC's referral of complaints to state agencies and, specifically, when we should refer complaints to Attorneys General as opposed to the State Banking Depl!11Il1ents. Confidential & Non-public OCC Information OCC14-00300851 '. 2) Methods to improve co,nsumer awareness ofhow to file complaints against national banks. For example, we would like to discuss the information available to consumers on government web sites. As we noted during our discussion, the North Carolina web site is a: model in terms of . providing on its web site specific information on how consumers with complaints against national banks can contact the OCC CAG. Vnfortunately, not all states do this and we. would like to explore whether we can establish model language and practices. Likewise, the oce site does not presently provide contact information for state agencies even though some consumers with complaints about state banks or entities come to the OCC site; we would like to discuss what type of information we should post on our web site to help ~ose consumers. 3) Use o/technology to enhance efficiency in our cross referral of complaints. For example, we would like to discuss whether we might be able to adopt systems that would allow our agencies to USe secure e-mail to send each other referred complaints and supporting documents. 4) Establishment 0/ regular meetings between aee and State Attorneys General to address issues ofcommon concern and general trends. For example, these periodic meetings might: • • • • • Share information about patterns of abuses, including emerging trends and ongoing problems at financial institutions. Discuss how participating agencies might better coordinate enforcement actions on different types of institutions to ensure effective remedies. Review how consumer complaints are handl~ inclurung how the process works currently and suggestions on how to improve the process. Collect and distribute information about best practices used by financial institutions to avoid abusive,practices. Support public education efforts to help consumers recognize and avoid abusive practices in financial services. . Again, I appreciate you meeting with us so early in the moming, and look forward to followingup on these areas of common interest. Please give my best regards to Roy and Josh and have a . wonderful Thanksgiving holiday and weekend. xc:· Roy Cooper Attorney General Josh Stein Deputy Attorney General -2- Confidential & Non-public acc Information . aCC14-00300852