Does anyone have a clear definition of what "6 occasions in a rolling twelve month cycle" mean in the new overdraft regulations? Does "6 occasions" mean six different days of overdrafts or six overdrafts, which could be in one day?

Any help would be greatly appreciated...we are trying to figure out how we are going to monitor this as we have "overdraft protection".

I know that the FDIC hasn't issued any formal interpretation of that phrase, and that the ABA has asked for clarification. I can only say that "occasions" suggests a time element rather than an item count.

...totally lacking any desire for disagreement, my observation would be that the thing that hurts the consumer is the fee, not the time element; i.e. the imposition of the fee is the "occasion."

My point in responding is to simply say that Mrs. Reynard's 6th grade class could have done a better job in writing this. Your question is legitimate.

The most conservative approach would be each item that clears and triggers use of the overdraft service and a fee is charged would be an "occasion". Basically use the same interpretation as REG D rules for excess transactions. However we will need to wait and see how the FDIC interprets their meaning of the word "occasion".

Occasions does seem to suggest a time element, but Ken said it well "the thing that hurts the consumer is the fee, not the time element; i.e. the imposition of the fee is the "occasion.". I dont think that the last post is overly conservative given the introductory statements that frame up the spirit of the guidance...hopefully the FAQs will help...

We received info from our core processor about discussions they had with the FDIC. FDIC told them that an occassion is any time a fee is assessed. Supposedly the FDIC is going to be issuing some kind of written guidance about the matter prior to July 1.

The conversation is good, but I just want to insert that I wasn't claiming to be right, only pointing out that it's a good question, one too open to individual interpretation. If the FDIC decides that it means "per day" I would not debate the point, I'd just repeat the observation that the whole thing is sloppily written.

LOL, still "lacking any desire for disagreement"...surely the FAQ's will save us if they get here in time...

If the "final" guidance was supposed to clarify the original guidance and still comes up so miserably short, how can you even hope that the next utterance from the agency will elucidate things?

LOL - I dont - The Sarcasm didn’t come through, I should have used the sarcasm smiley.