Advertisement

April 23, 2014

American Bankers Association (ABA) Endorses Bill to Mandate Examination Fairness

American Bankers Association President and CEO Frank Keating expressed bankers’ strong support for the House and Senate exam fairness bills—H.R. 1553 and S. 727–that were reintroduced on April 15.

In a letter to the Senate, Mr. Keating stated as follows:

Our members are concerned that bank regulators are making decisions during the examination process that have effectively and unnecessarily reduced the amount of capital available for lending – particularly to small businesses. These decisions hinder banks’ ability to help local businesses grow and create jobs. S. 727 would address this critical issue by establishing clear examination standards and creating an independent Examination Ombudsman to ensure the consistency of all examinations. It also would ensure that financial institutions receive timely examination reports that include full documentation of the information the regulators used to make their determinations, and would create an expedited process for banks to appeal examination decisions without fear of reprisals.

Mr. Keating’s letter is available here.

©2014 Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP

About the Author

Jeffrey M. Werthan, Mergers Acquisitions Attorney, Katten Muchin law firm
Partner

Jeffrey M. Werthan is head of the firm’s Banking practice. He has extensive experience representing clients in connection with bank formations, both public and private capital raises, mergers and acquisitions of financial institutions, compensation for financial institution executives and bank regulatory and enforcement issues.

202-625-3569

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be  a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or