It's about time banks stop whining about increased regulation and do something to get ahead of it.
Complaining about regulation is nothing new in banking. But in the wake of Dodd-Frank and the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the crankiness has reached an all-time high.
Exhibit A: An op-ed in last week's Wall Street Journal by bank analyst Meredith Whitney blaming regulatory reform for reducing access to essential banking services and increasing the ranks of the unbanked.
Whitney takes aim at the CARD Act and overdraft protection reforms, and she warns lawmakers to "subject to heightened scrutiny anything forthcoming from the newly established Consumer Financial Protection Bureau."
The fact is, millions of Americans were less than fully embraced by the banking system long before the financial crisis and resulting re-regulation.
Free checking, for instance, may have opened the door to the banking system for underserved consumers, but at a steep price. They paid more than their share in overdrafts, essentially subsidizing the system for everyone else.
Financial access is critical for household stability and economic prosperity, but only if it opens the door to high-quality products and services.
The new UDAAP standard was built on this idea. Products and practices that have gotten a pass from the regulators for decades are now being scrutinized through a fairness lens.
Regulators appear to be in the process of defining fairness one product and one exam at a time. The lack of a regulatory bright line and the uncertainty that creates is certainly challenging for financial institutions.
What should banks do about it? They can continue to whine and complain publicly about regulation, further alienating themselves from their customers and reinforcing the impression that they have learned nothing from the financial crisis. In fact, the less trust the public has in banks, the more pressure there will be to regulate further, creating a self-reinforcing cycle that ultimately can stifle positive financial innovation.
Another option for the industry is try to get ahead of the uncertainty by working to define fairness and demonstrating a commitment to consumer-friendly practices. Meaningful self-regulation can be a powerful way for industry to remind the public what it stands for and to inspire trust among customers, especially after a negative incident.
Consider the 2007 fiasco when JetBlue Airways left passengers stranded on the runway for 11 hours during an ice storm at New York's JFK airport. The incident dominated the media and caused outrage among both consumers and policymakers, who began calling for added regulation. Less than a week later, JetBlue created its own Customer Bill of Rights, a policy "dedicated to bringing humanity back to air travel."
Seeing few if any similar self-regulation efforts by banks in the wake of the financial crisis, my organization decided to kick-start the process. Our manifesto, the Compass Principles, encourages the U.S. financial services industry to commit to positive practices that actively contribute to improving people's lives and deliver sustainable value to both consumers and providers. The principles define good practice and are meant to guide the design and delivery of the financial products consumers use to transact, save and borrow:
Embrace inclusion: Responsibly expand access.
Build trust: Develop mutually-beneficial products that deliver clear and consistent value.
Promote success: Drive positive consumer behavior through smart design and communication.
























































Great article....and AMEN.....I was always taught to "Adapt, Improvise and Overcome"
since our bank was formed we have made it a cornerstone to be as transparent and fair with our customers as possible. no bank wins in the long term by "tricking customers" and we have seen the chickens come home to roost lately for many that have not been transparent and clear. Community banks , across this country and have built good will by being friendly and fair and promoting access. community banks have made small dollar loans , provided checking accounts and low cost accounts to those that may not qualify at larger institutions, that is our legacy. However, the regulations coming out of Washington are making this more and more difficult. These regulations are hurting our ablity to help those who need the help the most. Its easy to bank the folks who "fit the box" . these new regulations are forcing banks to operate in a manner that takes discretion and flexiblity away. the safest way to run a bank today is automation , centralizaton and less flexibilty to customers.
i know what we have been doing for our customers is the right thing. I am convinced that what Washington is making us do with our banks, is the wrong thing for our customers and frankly , i think that is worth whining about.
blake Chatelain
red river bank
Is there over-reach and over-reaction in the current media, political and regulatory environments, yes, surely; but any more so than the over-reaching by the financial sector, in the main, of the past couple of decades?
Any reversion to the mean is painful and the more so, the messier.
In the United States, according to Business magazine, an estimated 15 million functionally illiterate adults held jobs at the beginning of the 21st century. The American Council of Life Insurers reported that 75% of the Fortune 500 companies provide some level of remedial training for their workers. All over the U.S.A. 30 million (14% of adults) are unable to perform simple and everyday literacy activities.[5]
The National Center for Education Statistics provides more detail. Literacy is broken down into three parameters: prose, document, and quantitative literacy. Each parameter has four levels: below basic, basic, intermediate, and proficient. For prose literacy, for example, a below basic level of literacy means that a person can look at a short piece of text to get a small piece of uncomplicated information, while a person who is below basic in quantitative literacy would be able to do simple addition. In the US, 14% of the adult population is at the "below basic" level for prose literacy; 12% are at the "below basic" level for document literacy; and 22% are at that level for quantitative literacy. Only 13% of the population is proficient in these three areas--able to compare viewpoints in two editorials; interpret a table about blood pressure, age, and physical activity; or compute and compare the cost per ounce of food items.
J. McVay