CFPB Moves To Bar Financial Firms From 'Hoarding' a Consumer's Data (politico.com) 9
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Politico: The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau on Thursday released a landmark proposal restricting how financial institutions handle consumer data. [...] The proposed rule -- which faces months of feedback and lobbying from industry and consumer groups before it's approved -- would bar financial firms from "hoarding" a consumer's data, the agency said. It would require companies to share information, at a customer's request, with other businesses offering competing products and prevent them from charging for it.
Banks would be required to make personal financial data available to consumers free of charge, and companies that access a person's data would not be able to use it for targeted advertising. Access to a person's data would have to be reauthorized annually, and consumers would have the right to revoke access at any time. The proposal, which implements Section 1033 of the 2010 Dodd-Frank law, also "seeks to move the market away from risky data collection practices" such as screen scraping, the CFPB said. "It is often really daunting for a consumer to switch banks, in part because it's difficult to take their financial transaction history data to a new bank," White House National Economic Council Director Lael Brainard said on a call with reporters. "Today's rule will help ensure financial companies compete based on service quality and pricing."
Banks would be required to make personal financial data available to consumers free of charge, and companies that access a person's data would not be able to use it for targeted advertising. Access to a person's data would have to be reauthorized annually, and consumers would have the right to revoke access at any time. The proposal, which implements Section 1033 of the 2010 Dodd-Frank law, also "seeks to move the market away from risky data collection practices" such as screen scraping, the CFPB said. "It is often really daunting for a consumer to switch banks, in part because it's difficult to take their financial transaction history data to a new bank," White House National Economic Council Director Lael Brainard said on a call with reporters. "Today's rule will help ensure financial companies compete based on service quality and pricing."
Anyone else get this? You log into your bank... (Score:2)
"It's time you updated your financial data"
Yeah, naw. Wait until you find out that companies can poll huge databases of all your past salaries effectively showing your hand at the negotiating table and, if you choose to "seal it", they can also legally demand you unseal it in order to proceed with an offer.
They call it a "background check" which in itself... don't get me started. They can do this with any tax return you have and can legally not hire you if you say "no". (You can, however, omit the numbers--
Wow (Score:3)
Uhh, What? (Score:2)
It is often really daunting for a consumer to switch banks, in part because it's difficult to take their financial transaction history data to a new bank
I am a pretty big fan of the CFPB but WTF is this nonsense? It is not your bank's job to maintain your transaction history for you. That's your job. In the old days that meant a check register. Today it means a spreadsheet or some sort of Personal Finance Manager application, of which there are dozens, from full fledged accounting suites (GnuCash) to simple phone apps for the masses.
I have transaction history going back 20+ years. No bank is going to maintain that for me. Six to twelve months, if you
Re: (Score:2)
"It is not your bank's job to maintain your transaction history for you."
So, if I dispute a transaction as fraudulent, incorrect, or otherwise improper, my financial institution need not keep a record of the transaction?
Hell, does your assertion do away with statementing? I propose that It's your bank's job to, among other things, KEEP a record of your transactions.
PS - the IRS etc. are hell-bent on having all of your financial data made available to them, even proactively, to do what they want to do. Read
Re: (Score:2)
So, if I dispute a transaction as fraudulent, incorrect, or otherwise improper, my financial institution need not keep a record of the transaction?
Not indefinitely. Generally speaking -- the exact timeline varies based on type of transaction -- you have 60 days from the end date of the statement containing the transaction(s) in question to file a dispute. So if the transaction was 9/15 and your statement end date was 9/30, you have until 11/30 to file a dispute.
Most banks do keep a few months at least worth of transaction history, and generally, at least a year worth of statements. My only point is they're under no obligation to keep an indefinite
Re: Uhh, What? (Score:2)
And then there's deposits, withdrawals, etc with different rules. Credit cards are different, debit and DDA can vary. I've never encountered a bank that didn't keep at least a year for you, but then I've never dealt with Wells Fargo... For example...
Re: (Score:2)
It depends on how you define a 'year'.
My 'daily driver' credit union, i.e., the institution that has the accounts where my payroll deposits go, they keep approximately six months of transaction history. By this, I mean, transactions I can browse, download as CSV/QIF, click on to get check images, file disputes against, etc. If I flip over to the eStatement page, they've got every statement ever generated on my accounts for as long as I've been a member.
When thinking of 'transaction history', I'm thinkin
political campaign begging to be exempt (Score:2)