I am pleased to send you another quality edition of the Banking Law Committee Journal that will be posted on our Committee website. I commend these and the now extensive set of prior articles on our website to you, both in terms of the relevance of the topics covered and the quality of the articles. These articles provide examples of the blending of legal expertise and practical experience that make the Committee very useful for lawyers who represent financial institutions, trade associations, and government regulatory agencies.

Hopefully, this Journal will be the initial step you take in your use of the Committee as well as be helpful in acquiring practical insights in how to understand and address the legal, policy and compliance issues with which you are dealing. The editors are available to discuss their articles in more detail as well as to provide you with the benefit of their extensive experience in the banking industry. They are augmented by others on the Committee who can provide more insights at our meetings. Come to our August meeting in San Francisco or our November meeting in Washington DC at which you can see the benefit of discussing these issues in the company of 200 of your colleagues.

Please also feel free to contribute to the dialogue, including by providing your opinion or analysis on current topical issues. Write a short article for the next edition and send it to any of the editors listed here. You will be speaking to the 1600 members of the Committee. Also, feel free to contact Chris Bellini at cbellini@ gibsondunn.com or at our meetings if you want to discuss a proposed article or have other material suitable to be posted on our website for our members.

Jim Scott
Chair, Committee on Banking Law
scottj@citigroup.com

back to top ↑

On June 4, 2007, the United States Supreme Court (the Court) ruled on a case the results of which creditors and all companies that must comply with the requirements of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) awaited anxiously. From a compliance perspective the case provides clarification regarding some aspects of the adverse action notice requirements of the FCRA. However, the ruling may cause increased confusion about when such notices are required. The possible confusion notwithstanding, given the lack of guidance in this area, the ruling provides useful direction. While the decision addresses the actions of insurance companies, banks and other creditors are required to deliver adverse actions notices and comply with the requirements of the FCRA and the lessons of the case can be applied to the issue of when banks are required to give adverse actions notices. The Court also addressed the standard of willfulness for alleged violations of the FCRA.


More...

Recent Congressional attention to the problems of predatory mortgage lending has led for calls for the Federal Reserve Board to use its authority under the Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act of 1994 ("HOPEA" or the "Act") to provide addition protection for consumers with respect to mortgage loans. This article will review the legislative history and provisions of HOPEA, and explain the scope of the authority of the Federal Reserve Board (the "Federal Reserve" or the "Board") under that statute.


More...

The recent decline in the subprime mortgage market undoubtedly will have ripple effects throughout the economy. As the market declined, the perception that subprime loans are akin to predatory loans has grown. While this perception is not necessarily accurate, until recently there has been little comprehensive guidance or standards in the subprime lending market to ensure integrity in the origination process. This article will examine the decline of the subprime lending market and the resulting increased call for suitability standards in the subprime mortgage industry.


More...

Unlike prior M&A binges, the 2007 acquisition market is marked not by companies buying companies, but by private equity and hedge fund acquisitions of companies. This trend is increasingly bumping up against federal and potentially state banking laws as acquisitions are attempted of companies that directly or indirectly control or want to control regulated financial institutions (i.e., commercial banks, thrift institutions, CEBA banks, trust banks, credit card banks and industrial loan companies ("ILCs")), often because they really want to control the companies that control those institutions.


More...

back to top ↑