Thursday, August 25, 2011

Common Bond and Equal Credit Opportunity Act

The Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), which became law on March 23, 1976, says that it is illegal to discriminate in any credit transaction on the the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, marital status, or age.

Congress was very specific that it viewed race, color, national origin, religion, sex, marital status, or age as protected classes in our society.

So, this raises an interesting policy question -- should credit union regulators charter a credit union with field of membership which is based solely upon a protected class, such as religion or national origin?

Posted by at
Labels: ,

4 comments:

  1. AnonymousAugust 25, 2011 at 3:55 PM

    The act of "chartering" is not a "credit transaction".

    Have one of your ABA attorneys explain it to you.

    Perhaps the same ABA attorneys who in 2005 filed a lawsuit to block credit union service to additional underserved communities.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Keith LeggettAugust 25, 2011 at 4:03 PM

    Dear Anonymous:

    I know that chartering is different from a credit transaction. But that begs the point -- Why charter a credit union if it is not going to extend credit?

    ReplyDelete
  3. AnonymousAugust 25, 2011 at 4:44 PM

    Credit unions extend credit, that's what they do. Additionally, there is no evidence of discriminatory credit transactions against protected classes within their fields of membership.

    But this begs the counterpoint -- Why did the ABA file a November 2005 lawsuit to prevent credit unions' service (extending credit) to additional underserved communities?

    The ABA materials online make it look like you were personally part of the work-up on that legal action. This begs an additional question -- what is your personal stand on social and economic justice, denial of service to underserved groups, or this post which seemingly suggests that credit unions formed specifically to serve individual groups of protected classes be shut down, presumably based on the logic they don't solve the credit needs of ALL protected classes.

    Bias and prejudice, even when disguised as logical inquiry, is a sad embarrassment to the American banking industry.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Keith LeggettAugust 26, 2011 at 7:20 AM

    The Federal Credit Union Act plainly states that only multiple common bond credit unions could add underserved areas.

    NCUA broke the law.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
 

The content is provided for educational purposes only, with the understanding that neither the authors, contributors, nor the publishers of this site are engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other expert or professional services. If legal or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional should be sought.

Comments appearing in response to articles appearing on this site do not necessarily reflect the views of the ABA. ABA makes no representations regarding the truth or accuracy of commentary or opinions that may be posted in response to the articles that appear on this website.

The inclusion herein of any link to a website, either in the text of an article or in a comment, does not denote any approval, sponsorship, or endorsement by the ABA, and ABA is not responsible for the content or opinions expressed on those linked websites or related commentary. This content is not licensed to third parties sites and is not affiliated with any third party site. Any reference to the author or this content on any third party site on the Internet is not authorized by the ABA.

It is the policy of the American Bankers Association to comply fully with all antitrust laws. Certain discussions should be considered off-limits, including those that contain competitively sensitive data such as price and cost information, or statements that could be construed as reflecting an attempt or desire to control or influence a particular market or markets. Future pricing or other prospective competitive information should never be shared.