ABA Banking Journal
No Result
View All Result
  • Topics
    • Ag Banking
    • Commercial Lending
    • Community Banking
    • Compliance and Risk
    • Cybersecurity
    • Economy
    • Human Resources
    • Insurance
    • Legal
    • Mortgage
    • Mutual Funds
    • Payments
    • Policy
    • Retail and Marketing
    • Tax and Accounting
    • Technology
    • Wealth Management
  • Newsbytes
  • Podcasts
  • Magazine
    • Subscribe
    • Advertise
    • Magazine Archive
    • Newsletter Archive
    • Podcast Archive
    • Sponsored Content Archive
SUBSCRIBE
ABA Banking Journal
  • Topics
    • Ag Banking
    • Commercial Lending
    • Community Banking
    • Compliance and Risk
    • Cybersecurity
    • Economy
    • Human Resources
    • Insurance
    • Legal
    • Mortgage
    • Mutual Funds
    • Payments
    • Policy
    • Retail and Marketing
    • Tax and Accounting
    • Technology
    • Wealth Management
  • Newsbytes
  • Podcasts
  • Magazine
    • Subscribe
    • Advertise
    • Magazine Archive
    • Newsletter Archive
    • Podcast Archive
    • Sponsored Content Archive
No Result
View All Result
No Result
View All Result
ADVERTISEMENT
Home Community Banking

FDIC: ‘Authorize positive, settle negative’ overdraft fees present risks of unfairness 

April 26, 2023
Reading Time: 3 mins read
FDIC: ‘Authorize positive, settle negative’ overdraft fees present risks of unfairness 

The FDIC yesterday said that overdraft fees resulting from “authorize positive, settle negative” transactions may present risks of possible unfairness violations under unfair or deceptive acts or practices—UDAP—regulations. Under this pattern, a first transaction is authorized on positive funds. Then, a second transaction authorizes and posts, lowering the available balance (or bringing the available balance below $0). When the first transaction posts, it posts against negative funds, and the customer is assessed an overdraft fee.

In its financial institution letter, the FDIC said that APSN overdraft fees present risks of unfairness under the Dodd-Frank Act and Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act because the consumer cannot reasonably avoid receiving these fees due to the “complicated nature of overdraft processing systems” and because “the consumer does not have the ability to effectively control payment systems.” According to the FDIC, the risks of unfairness exist under either “available balance” or “ledger balance” methods of assessing overdraft fees, but may be “more pronounced” when the bank uses available balance methods.

Disclosures may not mitigate UDAP risk, the agency said. Instead, the FDIC directed banks to “ensure customers are not charged overdraft fees for transactions consumers may not anticipate or avoid.” Significantly, the FDIC did not direct banks to provide remediation to customers over a “lookback” period or indicate that any bank has been cited for a UDAP violation for charging APSN overdraft fees.

In March, the CFPB said it has cited institutions for unfairness where the institution charged consumers APSN overdraft fees. The CFPB’s action followed a circular it issued in October saying that overdraft fees assessed by financial institutions on transactions that a consumer “would not reasonably anticipate,” including APSN overdraft fees, are “likely unfair.” Acting Comptroller of the Currency Michael Hsu also has stated that APSN overdraft fees present risks of unfairness. 

OCC Weighs In

In related news, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency yesterday issued a bulletin that also stated that overdraft fees resulting from “authorize positive, settle negative” transactions may present risks of unfairness UDAP violations. The OCC stated that, even when disclosures were accurate, the OCC found APSN overdraft fees were “unfair,” under Section 5 of the FTC Act, because consumers were “unlikely to be able to reasonably avoid injury.”

The OCC also stated that it has found that banks’ assessment of multiple nonsufficient funds fees when a transaction is presented multiple times against insufficient funds in the customer’s account resulted in “findings in some instances that the practice was unfair and deceptive.” Even when banks’ disclosures accurately describe that a represented transaction may result in more than one NSF fee, “a bank’s practice of assessing fees for each representment may also be unfair . . . if consumers cannot reasonably avoid the harm.” The OCC said that consumers “typically have no control over when a returned ACH transaction or check will be presented again and lack knowledge of whether an intervening deposit will be sufficient to cover the transaction and related fees.”

The OCC also stated that high limits or the lack of daily limits on the number of overdraft or NSF fees that can be assessed has “contributed to determinations that banks’ overdraft protection programs as a whole were unfair” under Section 5 of the FTC Act. In addition, charging a continuous overdraft fee has “contributed to findings of unfairness and deception” under Section 5.

ADVERTISEMENT
Tags: FDICOverdraft protectionUDAP
ShareTweetPin

Related Posts

BAFT releases report on best practices, guidance for ISO 20022 migration

ABA offers fixes for small-business lending data collection rule

Commercial Lending
July 18, 2025

In a letter, ABA said it is pleased with the CFPB's proposal to revise its small-business lending data rule and offered several recommendations to reduce the compliance burden for banks.

Retail sales decreased 0.8% in January

ABA DataBank: Retail sales rebounded in June

Economy
July 18, 2025

Despite recent softening and apprehension over price increases, consumer spending was robust over the month.

CFPB claims ‘complex’ pricing drives up cost of financial products

CFPB to keep notification procedures for state enforcement of consumer law

Compliance and Risk
July 18, 2025

The CFPB is reversing course on its earlier decision to eliminate the procedures under which state officials must notify the bureau if those officials plan to enforce the Consumer Financial Protection Act.

Consumer Sentiment declined in April

Consumer sentiment rises in July

Economy
July 18, 2025

The University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment Index increased 1.8% in July compared to the month prior, landing at 61.8, according to preliminary results for the month.

ABA points to role of regulators in discouraging bank engagement in digital assets

ABA, associations urge OCC to postpone crypto firm applications for bank charters

Newsbytes
July 18, 2025

ABA joined four banking and credit union associations in raising concerns about a push by digital asset firms to establish national trust banks, saying there are significant policy and legal questions as to whether the applicants' proposed business...

Housing starts rise in June

Housing starts edge up in June

Economy
July 18, 2025

Privately-owned housing units authorized by building permits in June increased to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1.397 million, according to the U.S. Department of Commerce.

NEWSBYTES

ABA offers fixes for small-business lending data collection rule

July 18, 2025

ABA DataBank: Retail sales rebounded in June

July 18, 2025

CFPB to keep notification procedures for state enforcement of consumer law

July 18, 2025

SPONSORED CONTENT

Navigating Disruption in Ag Lending – Why Tariffs Are Just the Tip of the Iceberg

Navigating Disruption in Ag Lending – Why Tariffs Are Just the Tip of the Iceberg

July 1, 2025
AI Compliance and Regulation: What Financial Institutions Need to Know

Unlocking Deposit Growth: How Financial Institutions Can Activate Data for Precision Cross-Sell

June 1, 2025
Choosing the Right Account Opening Platform: 10 Key Considerations for Long-Term Success

Choosing the Right Account Opening Platform: 10 Key Considerations for Long-Term Success

April 25, 2025
Outsourcing: Getting to Go/No-Go

Outsourcing: Getting to Go/No-Go

April 5, 2025

PODCASTS

The future of careers in risk and compliance

July 17, 2025

Breaking down the bank-related provisions in the big budget bill

July 10, 2025

Podcast: Inside ABA’s new Treasury Check Verification System API

June 25, 2025
ADVERTISEMENT

American Bankers Association
1333 New Hampshire Ave NW
Washington, DC 20036
1-800-BANKERS (800-226-5377)
www.aba.com
About ABA
Privacy Policy
Contact ABA

ABA Banking Journal
About ABA Banking Journal
Media Kit
Advertising
Subscribe

© 2025 American Bankers Association. All rights reserved.

No Result
View All Result
  • Topics
    • Ag Banking
    • Commercial Lending
    • Community Banking
    • Compliance and Risk
    • Cybersecurity
    • Economy
    • Human Resources
    • Insurance
    • Legal
    • Mortgage
    • Mutual Funds
    • Payments
    • Policy
    • Retail and Marketing
    • Tax and Accounting
    • Technology
    • Wealth Management
  • Newsbytes
  • Podcasts
  • Magazine
    • Subscribe
    • Advertise
    • Magazine Archive
    • Newsletter Archive
    • Podcast Archive
    • Sponsored Content Archive

© 2025 American Bankers Association. All rights reserved.