SAN JOSE, Calif.-The $1.6-billion Technology Credit Union is hailing a ruling by a California superior court judge that it does not have to reveal membership information.
The same group of members who helped lead a vote opposing Tech CU's conversion to a mutual savings bank had asked for full access to TCU's membership list. But Judge Patricia M. Lucas cited California Corporations Code Section 8330(b)(1), which provides that a corporation may deny a demand for membership information if it provides a "reasonable alternative method."
Rather than open the member list, Tech CU offered to forward e-mails to the 57,620 members for which it has addresses at a cost of $1,050. Judge Lucas said Section 8330(c) provides that an alternative method is "reasonable" if it "reasonably and timely" accomplishes the purpose. "The evidence shows that TCU has presented an alternative reasonable within the meaning of the statute, and therefore the petition is granted," she said in the ruling.
In response to a request for comment from Credit Union Journal, Tech CU issued a written statement that said in part, "On Oct. 2 Tech CU won a protective order against a few members who demanded copies of our members' private personal information-including names, home addresses, phone numbers, and e-mails. This very small group believed that anyone, simply by being a member of Tech CU, should have free access to our members' private personal information.
"We would like to stress that we take our obligation to protect the privacy rights and personal information of each of our members very seriously. In order to preserve the safety and soundness of our institution, and to protect our members from potential identity theft, we had no intention of giving the private personal information of our members to anyone for any reason."
'Reasonable Alternatives'
"Yes, we did offer to forward e-mails to our 57,620 members for whom we have e-mail addresses, at a total cost of $1,050 (Tech CU's actual cost) via our approved, third-party e-mail system," the credit union went on to say. "This same option was, in fact, used by one of our members during the voting process. And, in our recent court case, the judge ruled that this was appropriate."
Tech CU management took issue with a quote from Paul Popescu, a Tech CU member who opposed the charter change and whose name was on the court case. In the Oct. 3 Credit Union Journal Daily Briefing Popescu was quoted as saying, "Of course I am very disappointed by the judgment, which seems to show the judge sides with the few, those who took over Technology Credit Union, and against the many, the rightful owners."
In response, Tech CU said, "We would like to stress that the judge sided with Tech CU as an organization, including its 70,000 members, and not with a supposed 'few' individuals who were seeking to obtain the personal private information of our 70,000 members."
Tech CU added, "We believe our track record speaks for itself. With the current Board and executive team in place, the performance of the credit union has improved significantly compared to three years ago-and in the face of massive economic uncertainty."
