Has anyone else heard of this FDIC Fair Lending issue? I tried a search and did not come up with anything.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation recently put banks on notice of a potential Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) violation that they are now referring to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for possible action. The violation involves situations where banks might charge married applicants for one single, merged credit report, but charge un-married joint applicants for two separate reports.

The FDIC believes that this is a marital status discrimination violation. It can be corrected by ensuring that the bank’s credit report vendor provide merged reports for unmarried joint applicants and charge them the same fee as those for married couples. According to the FDIC, if the bank’s current vendor is unable or unwilling to take this action, the institution must find a provider who will comply with this requirement.

The fix is easy -

It makes sense to me. It makes the cost of credit more for joint applicants based solely on marital status.

You would think the FDIC has bigger issues than why a borrower is being charged $5 more on a credit report.

Also, excuse me but aren't there IRS regs that grant married couples benefits that two non married persons will not get?

Seems like a liberal agenda at work!

"Also, excuse me but aren't there IRS regs that grant married couples benefits that two non married persons will not get? "

We all know that anything that the IRS does is less than fair

I'm surprised they also didn't bring out the fact that many bank require non-married joint applicants to fill out separate credit applications - which also makes the application process more onerous.

I follow the line of reasoning, but I haven't seen or heard where the FDIC has "put banks on notice."

Do you have a cite to an Advisory Opinion, FIL or other guidance that could be reviewed?

The rest of the message I got. . .
At a recent MBA Compliance Academy presentation, FDIC fair lending specialist Joe Chaloux provided an example of a bank that had asked their provider to do this in advance of an examination. The vendor gave the bank a written statement that they couldn't provide a merged credit report if the applicants did not have a common address and the bank in good faith relied on this representation. When the exam occurred, the FDIC said that while the bank attempted to remedy the problem and they would not be cited for a violation, the institution must now find a vendor that will accommodate this request or the bank will be cited during the next exam and referred to DOJ for action. FDIC discussions with the three major credit bureaus have determined that they can/will provide merged reports on unmarried joint applicants.

I recieved an email about this-as OSB stated, the FDIC examiner felt this was discrimination. However, the bulletin I recieved went on to describe joint and merged reports.

It stated that if 2 non married applicants currently or recently lived together AND they have joint credit, a merged report could be ordered. If not, then seperate reports are needed. It also went on to say the credit reports are a source of verifying identity, addresses, public records, etc so if you had a "joint report" for those not meeting the criteria, important information may be missed, which the lender could be held responsible for.