Banking Blog

Finance Blogs » Banking Blog » CFPB to crack down on overdrafts?

CFPB to crack down on overdrafts?

By Claes Bell ·
Tuesday, June 11, 2013
Posted: 5 am ET

Few things can ruin your day quite like seeing that your checking account balance is a couple hundred dollars in the red thanks to a cascade of overdraft fees. But should federal regulators step in to prevent it?

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau seems to be considering that question as it releases a new report on the impact of "courtesy overdraft protection" on consumers, which includes data from a selected group of large banks regulated by the CFPB during 2010 and 2011

For the just more than a quarter of checking accounts hit by an overdraft in 2011, that impact was overwhelmingly negative, according to the report. Those account holders paid an average of $225 in overdraft fees over the course of the year, although that number varied greatly depending on where they banked, with overdrafters at some banks averaging as much as $298 in fees.

A rule put in place by the Federal Reserve making overdraft protection an "opt in" for account holders also has had mixed results in reducing the impact of overdraft charges on consumers, according to the report. While a majority of consumers who'd had problems with overdrafting refused to opt in, they still opted in at a substantially higher rate than the average account holder.

That's a big deal because, consistent with past research done by the Fed, a small group of checking account holders is responsible for the vast majority of overdraft charges. If those account holders are opting in in large numbers, that's going to undermine the effectiveness of the "opt-in" approach in limiting the financial damage to consumers from overdrafts.

Account holders who opted in were also 2.5 times more likely to be hit with an involuntary closure, which is what banks call it when they close a checking account because of a negative balance. That's a serious issue because an involuntary closure can result in being reported to a consumer reporting agency  such as ChexSystems, which can prevent consumers from being able to open a checking account for up to five years.

So what's the CFPB going to do about all this?

Not much, at least for the moment. A senior CFPB official says the bureau plans to study the issue more broadly and collect more data before planning any specific actions to curtail overdraft charges.

But remarks by CFPB Director Richard Cordray seemed to point in the direction of simplifying disclosures about how and when overdraft charges would be applied, and giving consumers more information about when different charges would clear an account to help them avoid overdrafts in the first place.

"Financial institutions have very different policies, procedures, and practices that can be highly complex and difficult for consumers to understand, yet greatly affect whether and how often they will incur overdraft fees," Cordray said in prepared remarks during a teleconference.

Cordray also expressed concern about how the financial impact of overdrafts on consumers varied from bank to bank, including the amount of total overdraft fees paid and the number of involuntary closures.

It seems unlikely, though, that the CFPB will ever ban overdraft protection altogether.

"Nothing in this report implies that banks and credit unions should be precluded from offering overdraft coverage," Cordray said.

And even if the CFPB wanted to, it couldn't do much about overdraft fees at small banks since it only has authority over banks with more than $10 billion in assets.

What do you think? Should the CFPB crack down on courtesy overdraft? Have you ever been hit hard by an overdraft?

Follow me on Twitter: @ClaesBell.

Bankrate wants to hear from you and encourages comments. We ask that you stay on topic, respect other people's opinions, and avoid profanity, offensive statements, and illegal content. Please keep in mind that we reserve the right to (but are not obligated to) edit or delete your comments. Please avoid posting private or confidential information, and also keep in mind that anything you post may be disclosed, published, transmitted or reused.

By submitting a post, you agree to be bound by Bankrate's terms of use. Please refer to Bankrate's privacy policy for more information regarding Bankrate's privacy practices.
September 22, 2013 at 2:33 pm

It really is time the Feds limited banks on OD fees. The banks are robber barons stealing from the poor. Most of these banks major profit comes from this type of daylight robbery.

game crack
July 04, 2013 at 11:39 am

Normally I do not read article on blogs, however I would like to say that this write-up very pressured me to try and do it! Your writing taste has been amazed me. Thanks, very great article.

Claes Bell
June 14, 2013 at 11:46 am

Hey Kent,
These are all good points. I try to hit all the details on these posts but I inevitably leave stuff out. You're right, this CFPB report is more about big banks than small ones. Ultimately I agree with you that it's incumbent upon accountholders to track their balance and prevent overdrafts. I do think that a cascade of overdraft charges over maybe $20 in overdrafts is an extreme "punishment" for failing to do so, and I think banks' insistence on continuing is short-sighted from a business perspective, in that I think it's contributed to a lot of the alienation people feel toward banks generally.

Kent Franzen
June 13, 2013 at 7:27 pm

To Claes Bell,
After Reading this article I would like to point out a few things.
CFPB Rules do apply to banks of ALL sizes. The CFPB is only chartered to directly examine large banks. The FDIC and the OCC will enforce the CFPB Rules in the smaller banks.
The account holder is the one that has the greatest control over any overdraft charge by simply not spending more than they have in their account. I know this sounds old fashioned and requires self-control but I guarantee it works.
The "Opt In" rules you mentioned applies only to overdraft items initiated by the consumer with a debit card. It does not apply to checks or other debits. Overdrafts through this payment method could be significantly reduced if VISA required a full and complete authorization for small transactions instead of the abbreviated one they do now for transactions under $50.00 at least in the Midwest. This would avoid the $45.00 latte that I have seen others complaining about elsewhere because the transaction would be denied due to lack of funds. Of course it would also stop the sale and slow down the lines but there is a cost to everything one way or the other.
Thank You