XML 34 R22.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.7.0.1
REGULATORY MATTERS AND SETTLEMENT OF OTS ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
9 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2017
Banking and Thrift [Abstract]  
REGULATORY MATTERS AND SETTLEMENT OF OTS ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
REGULATORY MATTERS AND SETTLEMENT OF OTS ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS

On January 5, 2015, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) published industry guidance in the form of Frequently Asked Questions (“FAQs”) with respect to the categorization of deposit liabilities as “brokered” deposits. On November 13, 2015, the FDIC issued for comment updated and annotated FAQs, and on June 30, 2016, the FDIC finalized the FAQs. The Company believes that the final FAQs do not materially impact the processes that it uses to identify, accept and report brokered deposits. On April 26, 2016, the FDIC issued a final rule to amend how small banks (less than $10 billion in assets that have been FDIC insured for at least five years) are assessed for deposit insurance (the "Final Rule"). The Final Rule imposes higher assessments for banks that the FDIC believes present higher risk profiles. The Final Rule became effective with the Bank's December 2016 assessment invoice, which the Company received in March 2017.

Due to the Bank’s status as a "well-capitalized" institution under the FDIC's prompt corrective action regulations, and further with respect to the Bank’s financial condition in general, the Company does not at this time anticipate that either the FAQs or the Final Rule will have a material adverse impact on the Company’s business operations.  However, should the Bank ever fail to be well-capitalized in the future, as a result of failing to meet the well-capitalized requirements, or the imposition of an individual minimum capital requirement or similar formal requirements, then, notwithstanding that the Bank has capital in excess of the well-capitalized minimum requirements, the Bank would be prohibited, absent waiver from the FDIC, from utilizing brokered deposits (i.e., may not accept, renew or rollover brokered deposits), which could produce serious adverse effects on the Company’s liquidity, and financial condition and results of operations.  Similarly, should the Bank’s financial condition in general deteriorate, future FDIC assessments could have a material adverse effect on the Company.
On July 10, 2017, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) issued its final rule with respect to the use of class action waivers in consumer arbitration agreements (“Rule”). As a result, the Rule will require that the Bank (i) no longer include a class action waiver provision in most of its contracts for consumer financial products and services offered by the Bank, including its prepaid card agreements and unsecured consumer loan agreements, and (ii) insert specific language into its arbitration provision that discloses to the consumer that the arbitration provision cannot be used to block or impede their participation in a class action. Additionally, to the extent that the Bank participates in individual arbitrations with consumers after the effective date of the Rule, it will be required to submit most data related to such arbitration to the CFPB for its review and analysis within 60 days of such data’s submission to an arbitrator or a court.

The Rule will apply to consumer product agreements (including consumer loan and prepaid agreements) 241 days after publication of the Rule in the Federal Register. However, as of the date of this filing, it is possible that the Rule will be blocked by legislative or other action. Regardless of this possibility, the Bank has begun to review the products and services to which the Rule will apply and has begun to identify the processes and procedures needed to implement the Rule across the Bank’s affected product portfolio.