Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Fed Cracks Down on Utah Bank for Alleged Compliance Failures with $44 Million Fine

By A.J. Dhaliwal, Mehul Madia & Maxwell Earp-Thomas on July 26, 2024
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Consumer-Finance-and-Fintech-Blog-Image-Bank-660x283

On a July 19, the Federal Reserve Board announced it has issued a consent order against a Utah-based bank and its parent company for engaging in unfair and deceptive acts and practices in violation of Section 5(a)(1) of the FTC Act, as well as for having a faulty consumer compliance risk management program. In addition to the consent order, the Federal Reserve imposed a $44 million fine.

The consent order covers the bank’s activities over a five-year period, from 2017 through December 2022. Specifically, the Federal Reserve pinpointed the following alleged violations by the bank:

  • Failing to Properly Disclose Tax Preparation Fees. According to the Federal Reserve, the parent company’s subsidiary entered into an agreement with a tax preparer to provide tax preparation payment services to customers. The Fed alleges that this subsidiary participated in deceptive acts and practices by not disclosing the cost of a tax refund processing fee to the tax preparer’s customers. This fee was only revealed after a consumer clicked on a hyperlink and navigated through small-print disclosures.
  • Assessing Fees on Closed Accounts. According to the Fed, the bank engaged in a deceptive act or practice by misleading consumers into believing that their prepaid debit cards would be closed after consumers spent their account balances down to zero. In fact, these accounts remained open and consumers continued to incur fees.
  • No Telephonic Registration of Prepaid Debit Card Accounts. The Federal Reserve alleged that the bank engaged in deceptive acts and practices by falsely informing consumers that they could register their prepaid debit cards over the telephone as well as online, when, in reality, online registration was the sole option available. The agency contends this practice disadvantaged consumers without internet access.
  • Blocked Access Without Appropriate Remedies. According to the Fed, the bank engaged in unfair acts or practices by blocking certain customers’ access to their state unemployment insurance benefits without offering a method to unblock their accounts.
  • Extended Authorization Holds. The Fed alleged that the bank engaged in unfair acts or practices by failing to timely release extended authorization holds on certain prepaid debit card transactions, thereby denying consumers access to their funds.
  • On top of the hefty fine, the bank is mandated to implement several new compliance measures subject to approval by regulators. These include developing a written plan to enhance oversight of the bank’s board of directors, creating a program designed to ensure the identification and reporting of all known or suspected violations of law or suspicious transactions, and revising the bank’s existing BSA/AML compliance program, among other initiatives.

Putting it into Practice: This enforcement action marks the latest in a series of measures taken by the Federal Reserve this year against banks for compliance deficiencies (previously discussed here and here). This case is particularly significant due to the Fed’s invocation of various UDAAP claims under Section 5 of the FTC Act, mirroring similar actions undertaken by the CFPB. Both banks and fintech companies should thoroughly review their compliance procedures and consider necessary updates to ensure adherence to regulatory standards.

Photo of A.J. Dhaliwal A.J. Dhaliwal

A.J. is a partner in the Finance and Bankruptcy Practice Group in the firm’s Washington, D.C. office.

Read more about A.J. DhaliwalEmail
Photo of Mehul Madia Mehul Madia

Mehul Madia, special counsel in the firm’s Washington, D.C. office, provides deep consumer finance and fintech expertise to clients, leveraging more than 15 years’ of public and private sector experience.

Read more about Mehul MadiaEmail
Photo of Maxwell Earp-Thomas Maxwell Earp-Thomas

Max is an associate in the Finance & Bankruptcy Practice Group in the firm’s Orange County office.

Read more about Maxwell Earp-ThomasEmail
  • Posted in:
    Banking, Finance and Securities
  • Blog:
    Consumer Finance and Fintech Blog
  • Organization:
    Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo