Advertisement

May 23, 2013

Implementation of Risk-Based Privacy Notice: Will Your Company Have An Olympic-Sized Burden Beginning in 2011?

Troutman Sanders

If your company extends credit based on risk-based pricing policies, you may be subject to a new administrative burden beginning January 1, 2011.  On January 15, 2010, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Trade Commission issued the Fair Credit Reporting Risk-Based Pricing Regulations – Final Rule.  Risk-based pricing is the practice of setting or adjusting the price and terms of credit offered to a particular consumer to reflect the risk of non-payment by that particular consumer.  The Final Rule, which implements Section 311 of the FACT Act, will become effective on January 1, 2011, giving companies a year to get the appropriate processes in place. 

As one of the nation’s most widely recognized laws regulating the collection, dissemination, and usage of personal information, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, as amended by the FACT Act, broadly regulates companies that use consumer reports for vital decision making purposes.  The Final Rule extends the fair information principles of notice and openness to those companies that:

(i)   use a consumer report in connection with the application for, or a grant, extension, or other provision of credit that is primarily for personal, family, or household purposes;
and

(ii)  grant, extend, or otherwise provide credit to consumers on material terms that are materially less favorable than the most favorable terms available to a substantial proportion of other consumers from or through that person based in whole or in part on the consumer report. 

The scope of the term “credit” extends the Final Rule’s potential reach beyond banks and card issuers to other types of service providers who allow customers to defer paying for goods or services until after they are delivered, such as utilities and mobile service providers.

Under the Final Rule, a consumer who receives material terms from a company that are materially less favorable than the most favorable terms available to a substantial portion of the company’s other customers must receive a clear and conspicuous notice.  This notice must notify the consumer that the terms he or she received may be less favorable than those offered to other customers with better credit histories.  The Final Rule provides form notices that may be used. 

One of the more difficult aspects of the Final Rule to apply will be determining which consumers must receive a risk-based pricing notice by differentiating which terms are “materially less favorable.” For instance, something as simple as requiring a deposit for some customers but not for others, based on credit-worthiness, may implicate the requirement for notice.  Companies will need to carefully consider their current internal processes to apply the most appropriate of the three methods permitted under the Final Rule: (i) the direct comparison method, (ii) the credit score proxy method, or (iii) the tiered pricing method. 

There are also several possible exceptions that may exempt a company from the reach of the Final Rule.  However, companies should begin reviewing the Final Rule to determine its applicability to their credit granting operations.  Those companies who are not exempted from the Final Rule should begin to develop concise risk-based pricing notices and clear standards for determining which consumers should receive such notices.  By adopting compliant policies and procedures early on, companies can reduce the risks of non-compliance – including, any subsequent second-guessing by the plaintiff’s bar.

©Troutman Sanders LLP

About the Author

Courtney Harris Chacos focuses her practice on all aspects of project development and finance. Her project development and finance work with utilities has included assisting in the drafting of power purchase agreements as well as engineering, procurement and construction agreements in connection with the development, sale and financing of power generating units. Her work on renewable energy projects has included the drafting of energy and steam sales agreements. In addition, Courtney advises clients on renewable energy requirements under recent legislation.

404-885-2612

Privacy and Information Security Compliance

Worked as lead outside counsel with publicly-traded company to develop policies and procedures related to information security and privacy compliance programs. Advises clients on various privacy compliance issues, including compliance with the CAN-SPAM Act, the federal Telephone Sales Rules, Fair Credit Reporting Act, and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.

Alcoholic Beverage Licenses

Represents clients at all steps of the alcoholic beverage licensing process. Represents clients at public hearings before City...

404-885-3044

Contributors

John represents businesses in various types of commercial disputes and transactions, with particular focus on information technology, intellectual property and privacy and data security. He leads the firm’s Internet, E-Commerce & Information Technology Practice Team as well as the firm’s Privacy & Data Security Practice Team. John regularly handles a variety of commercial disputes, but has substantial expertise in cases involving computer hardware and software development projects, government procurement, protection of trade secrets and proprietary business information...

404-885-3460

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. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or 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 other Professional Credentials.