08-3

08-3

July 24, 2008

Re: Financial Code Section 3800 –
Core Banking Business/Non-Core Banking Business

Dear Ms. __________:

On June 3, 2008, you requested a legal opinion from the Department of Financial Institutions (the “Department”) on behalf of your client, a foreign (other state) bank (the “Bank”). You state that the Department has licensed the Bank to establish a facility and to operate it as a mortgage loan origination and production office. You further state that the Bank proposes to place Federal Housing Administration approved lenders at the facility to “review, process and render underwriting decisions” on mortgage loan applications. Essentially, you ask whether we consider the approval of mortgage loan applications to be core banking business. If so, the Bank would exceed its license and violate California branching restrictions.

Under federal law and guidance, loan approval is not considered to be core banking business. But California law is less clear on this issue. The Financial Code, the Department’s regulations and legal precedents do not expressly address it.

We conclude that loan approval is a permissible activity for a facility. Our view, however, is not unqualified or without limitation. Two conditions apply. One, the Bank may not disburse the loan proceeds directly to the borrower in person at the facility. And two, the facility must comply with all state and federal law as well as all federal lending guidelines.

Though our conclusion is an adaptation of federal law, we turn first to the Department’s own legal precedent. Thus, our analysis begins with the Department’s previous inquiry into the scope of permissible facility activities. In Legal Precedent 97‑22, we considered whether the execution of loan documents constitutes “making loans” within the meaning of “core banking business.” Both terms are found in the provisions of Financial Code Section 3800. Financial Code Section 3800(c) defines “facility” as an office that is maintained in California by a foreign (other state) bank at which the foreign (other state) bank engages in non-core banking business, but does not engage in core banking business. And Financial Code Section 3800(b) defines “core banking business” as, among other activities, “making loans.”

We looked first to the legislative history of Financial Code Section 3800 to understand its meaning. We concluded that the Legislature intentionally structured the definition of “core banking business” to create a rough equivalence between the core banking activities of national banks and those of foreign (other state) banks. The Legislature’s objective was to achieve parity with national banks:

The legislative history . . . makes clear that in structuring the definition of ‘core banking business’ to parallel the definition of branch activities of a national bank, the Legislature intended to enable foreign (other state) banks to do at a facility in this state those things a national bank may lawfully do at a location which is not a branch of the national bank.

We further concluded that because of this apparent legislative objective, it was appropriate to consider the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s (the “OCC”) interpretations:

Since Chapter 22 of the Banking Law aims at creating a rough equivalence between core banking activities of national banks and core banking activities of foreign (other state) banks, it is appropriate to give due weight to the OCC’s interpretations of 12 USC Section 36 in construing the scope of the core banking activities enumerated in Financial Code Section 3800(b).

Because we are not aware of any intervening reason to abandon the Legislature’s parity objective, we will give due weight to the OCC’s interpretations on this occasion as well.

Specifically, we return to 12 C.F.R. Parts 7.1003, 7.1004, and 7.1005, which govern OCC branching requirements. Respectively, they govern the disbursal of loan proceeds, loan origination, and credit decisions at locations other than branches or main offices. The core principle that underpins these three regulations is that the receipt of funds from the bank, whether on its premises or directly from the bank itself, is the “key portion of a loan transaction.” (61 F.R.4852.) Section 7.1003 codifies the concept that money is lent where the customer physically receives the loan proceeds. And Sections 7.1004 and 7.1005 provide safe harbors for loan origination and loan approval.

Section 7.1003(a) establishes the location of the payment of the loan proceeds to the borrower as the focal point of the loan transaction (with two minor exceptions):

(a) General. For purposes of what constitutes a branch within the meaning of 12 U.S.C. 36(j) and 12 C.F.R. 5.30, ‘money’ is deemed to be ‘lent’ only at the place, if any, where the borrower in-person receives loan proceeds directly from bank funds.

Two lesser aspects of the loan transaction, origination and approval, are addressed in Sections 7.1004 and 7.1005. Section 7.1004(b) sets forth the circumstances under which banks may originate loans at loan production offices without the loan production office being considered a branch:

(b) Approval. An employee or agent of a national bank or of its operating subsidiary may originate a loan at a site other than the main office or a branch office of the bank. This action does not violate 12 U.S.C. 36 and 12 U.S.C. 81 if the loan is approved and made at the main office or a branch office of the bank or at an office of the operating subsidiary located on the premises, or contiguous to, the main office or branch of the bank.

Section 7.1004(b) implies that loans must be approved and made at branches and main offices if they are originated elsewhere. Thus, it also implies that the act of approving a loan is a branching activity. But Section 7.1005 precludes that interpretation because it expressly permits loan approval at non-branch sites:

A national bank and its operating subsidiary may make a credit decision regarding a loan application at a site other than the main office or a branch office of the bank without violating 12 U.S.C. 36 and 12 U.S.C 81, provided that ‘money’ is not deemed to be ‘lent’ at those other sites within the meaning of § 7.1003.

Section 7.1005’s intended purpose is further clarified in the OCC’s comments. Specifically, when the OCC adopted these three regulations in 1996, it explained that Section 7.1005 allows loan approval outside the circumstances described in Section 7.1004:

Proposed Section 7.1005 incorporated OCC interpretations explaining that offices at which loan approvals occur are not, solely by virtue of that activity, considered branches. This interpretation also recognized that a bank may approve loans originated at an LPO [loan production office] at locations other than the bank’s main office or branches without causing the LPO to be considered a branch, even though this process does not fit squarely within the safe harbor set forth in Section 7.1004. (61 FR 4851.) (Emphasis in original.)

The OCC later considered whether a loan production office may approve loan applications without violating federal interstate branching restrictions. In November 2000, the OCC opined that a state regulation that prohibits loan approval by a loan production office is not valid when applied to a national bank. It reasoned that a loan production office may approve or deny loan applications because the location where they are approved is insignificant:

. . . modern technology has made it possible for loan ‘approval’ functions to be performed virtually anywhere. . . . Therefore, the physical location where loan ‘approval’ takes place may have little significance in today’s world. . . . It follows that loan approval may take place at any location, including an LPO without making that location a branch under federal law. (Off. of Comptroller of the Currency, interpretive letter (Nov. 16, 2000) p. 3.)

We agree with those OCC interpretations. Accordingly, we find that under Financial Code Section 3800 the approval or denial of mortgage loan applications does not constitute making loans and therefore is not core banking business. The Bank may therefore establish a loan origination and production office at which it approves or denies mortgage loan applications without exceeding its California facility license. The Bank may not, however, disburse loan proceeds directly to the borrower at the loan production office or at any other California facility. Furthermore, the Bank must comply with all state and federal laws as well as all federal lending guidelines.

We recognize that the view we express today modifies our previously held position on the permissible scope of core branching activities. We also recognize that our newly modified view is based on the OCC’s interpretations on this issue. But we are not bound by future OCC interpretations, and we retain the discretion to shape our interpretations as we deem appropriate.

The Department of Financial Institutions administers, among other laws, the Banking Law (Division 1 (commencing with Section 99)) of the California Financial Code. We express no opinion in this letter as to any other law or regulation, state or federal.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (916) 322-5983.

Very truly yours,

MANUELA RUMSEY
Senior Counsel

MR11:pjp
cc: Craig Carlson
Douglas Kirkpatrick
Scott Cameron
John Ross
Kenneth Sayre-Peterson

June 3, 2008

VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS

Kenneth Sayre-Peterson
Acting General Counsel
State of California
Department of Financial Institutions
1810 13th Street
Sacramento, CA 95811

Re: Permissible Activities of a Facility of a Foreign (Other State) Bank

Dear Mr. Peterson:

We write to request confirmation from the Department of Financial Institutions (the “Department”) that a non-California State-chartered bank that has received permission to establish and operate a “facility” in California as a loan production office may employ lenders in such office to review, and render decisions on, mortgage loan applications, without the facility being deemed a “branch” under the California Financial Code, because such activities would not be considered part of the “core banking activity” of “making loans,” as no funds will be disbursed to any borrower.
The background of, and reasons for, our request are set forth below.
Background
Our client (“the Bank”) is an insured foreign (other state) bank that has received permission from the Department to establish and operate a “facility” as that term is defined in Section 3800(c) of the California Financial Code,’ at a back-office location occupied by a subsidiary of the Bank, which is in a suburban office park that is not open to the public. The facility was approved to act as a mortgage loan origination and production office in California at which applications for mortgages (primarily mortgages guaranteed by the Federal Housing Administration (“FHA”)) could be processed. Under the requirements of the FHA, facilities where FHA loan applications are to be processed must be staffed by FHA-approved lenders. Thus, the Bank proposes to place FHA-approved lenders at the facility to review, process, and render underwriting decisions with respect to applications for mortgage loans (although most loans will be processed through a desktop underwriting application). The location will remain a back-office facility of the Bank. No customers or potential customers will visit the facility. In addition, no loan disbursements will be made from the facility. All loan proceeds will be disbursed from a branch of the Bank located in another State.

Discussion/Request for Confirmation

Under Section 3800(c) of the California Financial Code, a “facility” of a foreign (other state) bank is defined as an “office in this state at which the bank engages in noncore banking business, but at which it does not engage in core banking business.” Section 3800(b) of the Financial Code defines “core banking business” to mean “the business of receiving deposits, paying checks, making loans, and other activities that the commissioner may specify by order or regulation.”

Noncore banking business is defined to mean “all activities permissible for commercial banks, industrial banks or trust companies except for core banking business.” Financial Code Section 3800(d). A foreign (other state) state bank may only conduct activities that constitute “core banking business” at a branch office. Financial Code Section 3820.
Based on our review of California law and interpretation, California does allow facilities to act as loan production offices. However, there does not appear to be any published provision or interpretation under California law that defines what activities can be conducted at loan production offices such that they are not considered to be engaging in the core banking business of “making loans.”
Thus, we looked to federal law and interpretation with respect to what may be considered a permissible loan production office activity. Like California law, federal law defines core banking business which must be conducted only through bank branches to include the receiving of deposits, the paying of checks and the making of loans. The Federal Reserve and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC”), however, have at least since 1996 interpreted the term “making loans” to not include reviewing or deciding loan applications, as long as funds were not disbursed at such location. Thus, under federal law, loan production offices have long been able to review, process and make loan decisions without being considered bank branches, so long as they do not disburse loan proceeds.
For example, in 1995, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Board”) issued an Interpretation for state-chartered banks that are members of the Federal Reserve System that was codified at 12 C.F.R. § 208.123. The Interpretation stated that loans originated by a loan production office of a state member bank may be approved at a back office location, rather than at the main office or a branch of the bank, without the loan production office being considered a branch under federal law, as long as the proceeds of the loans originated by the loan production office were received by the customer at locations other than the loan production office or back office facility. A copy of that interpretation is attached as Exhibit 1 to this letter. Thereafter, the Board revised its definition of the term “branch” to exclude any loan origination facility where the proceeds of loans were not disbursed. Although the Board’s rules do not provide a general definition of the term “loan origination,” Appendix C to Regulation H (“Interagency Guidelines for Real Estate Lending Policies”) provides that it describes “the time of inception of the obligation to extend credit (i.e., when the last event or prerequisite, controllable by the lender, occurs causing the lender to become legally bound to fund an extension of credit).” Thus, state chartered banks that are members of the Federal Reserve System, including California-chartered banks or out of state banks wanting to operate such facilities in California, are able to approve loans at loan production office facilities without such facilities being considered branches under federal law, provided California agreed that such loan approval (without loan disbursal) does not constitute a core banking business.

Similarly, the regulations of the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC”) stipulate that “[a] national bank and its operating subsidiary may make a credit decision regarding a loan application at a site other than the main office or a branch office of the bank … provided that ‘money’ is not deemed to be ‘lent’ at those other sites within the meaning of § 7.1003. 12 CFR § 7.1003, in turn, provides that

`money’ is deemed to be ‘lent’ only at the place, if any, where the borrower in-person receives loan proceeds directly from bank funds:

From the lending bank or its operating subsidiary; or
At a facility that is established by the lending bank or its operating subsidiary.
These federal rules are consistent with long-settled doctrine that a loan is not “made” until the borrower actually receives bank funds.

In this case, the Bank proposes to do no more than accept, process and approve (or disapprove) loan applications at a back-office facility, using FHA-approved lenders, as required by FHA regulations. No funds will be disbursed there, and no facilities will be open to the public. These activities are consistent with the above-described precedents and also, we believe, consistent with the California law concerning facilities. Accepting, processing and acting on loans at a back-office facility should not constitute “lending money,” as long as no funds are disbursed at that location, and thus, should not be considered part of a core banking business. Rather, these activities should be considered non-core banking activities permissible for California facilities. We respectfully request confirmation that our view is correct.

The Bank is in the process of establishing the facility and hiring appropriate staff at this time. Thus, we ask for prompt review of our request. If you have any questions, or need further information, please do not hesitate to call me at the above number.

Sincerely,

Attachment

Westlaw.
60 FR 17436-01
60 FR 17436-01, 1995 WL 146503 (F.R.)
(Cite as: 60 FR 17436)
RULES and REGULATIONS
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
12 CFR Part 208
[Regulation H; Docket No. R-0873]
Membership of State Banking Institutions in the Federal Reserve System
Thursday, April 6, 1995
*17436 AGENCY: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
ACTION: Final rule; interpretation.
SUMMARY: The Board is issuing an interpretation of the provisions of its Regulation H, Membership of State Banking Institutions in the Federal Reserve System, concerning the establishment of loan production offices and “back office” facilities by state member banks. The interpretation provides that a state member bank may establish a back office facility that is not accessible to the public without such a facility being considered to be a branch. The interpretation also provides that loans originated by a loan production office may be approved at a back office location, rather than at the main office or a branch of the bank, without the loan production office being considered to be a branch, if the proceeds of loans originated by the loan production office are received by customers at locations other than a loan production office or back office facility. This interpretation is intended to provide parity between state member banks and national banks with re­spect to the establishment of loan production offices and back office facilities.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 6, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lawranne Stewart, Senior Attorney (202/452­3513), Legal Division. For the hearing impaired only:, Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (“TDD”), Dorothea Thompson (202/452-3544).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In connection with the acquisition of a mortgage com­pany by a state member bank, the Board has been asked to consider two issues with respect to the types of facilities that a state member bank may establish to engage in activities related to lending at locations that are not approved branches: (1) Whether a state member bank may establish a “back office” facility that is not accessible to the public without *17437 such a facility being considered to be a branch of the bank; and (2) whether a loan production office will be considered to be a branch of the bank if it takes loan applications and performs related functions, but the loans are approved at locations other than an approved branch or main office of the bank. Under the Board’s prior interpretation concerning loan production offices, published at 12 CFR 250.141, an office that engaged in loan origination activities was not considered to be a branch when the loans were approved and funds disbursed at the head office or a branch of the bank. “Back office” facilities that are not accessible to the public were not addressed in the prior interpretation.

State member banks are subject to the same limitations on branching as national banks. [FN1] Under the McFadden Act, national banks may establish branches only at locations at which a state bank would be permitted to establish a branch. [FN2] Interpreting the branching restrictions of the McFadden Act, the Supreme Court has stated that the purpose of the McFadden Act was to maintain competitive equality between national and state banks, and that the determination as to whether a facility was a branch must be based on the convenience of the customer, rather than on the technical or legal relationship between the customer and the bank. [FN3] In later cases addressing automated teller machines, the courts generally have rejected arguments that money is lent at the time and place where a loan or line of credit is approved, and instead found that money is lent for the purposes of the McFadden Act when the customer actually receives the funds and interest begins to run on the loan. [FN4]

FN1 Federal Reserve Act, section 9, paragraph 3 (12 U.S.C. 321); Regulation H, §208.9 (12 CFR 208.9).

FN2 12 U.S.C. 36(c). Under the McFadden Act, “branch” is defined to include “any branch bank, branch office, branch agency, additional office, or any branch place of business . . . at which deposits are received, or checks are paid, or money lent.” 12 U.S.C. 36(f).

FN3 First National Bank of Plant City v. Dickinson, 396 U.S. 122 (1969).

FN4 E.g., IBAA v. Smith, 534 F.2d 921 (D.C. Cir. 1976); Colorado ex rel. State Bank Brd. v. First Nat’l Bank, 540 F. 2d 497 (10th Cir. 1976); Illinois v. Con­tinental Illinois NT&SA, 409 F. Supp. 1167 (N.D. Ill. 1975), aff’d in relevant part, 536 F.2d 176 (7th Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 871 (1976). Only one federal district court case stands in which the court concluded that a loan is made at the time that the bank and its customer reach agreement on the terms of the loan, and not at a location where only the proceeds of the loan are disbursed. See Oklahoma ex. rel. State Banking Board v. Utica Nat’l Bank and Trust, 409 F. Supp. 71 (N.D. Okla. 1975). This decision was criticized in each of the appellate court opinions that have addressed this issue.

The Board previously had determined that an office engaged in preliminary or servicing functions, such as soliciting loan applications and assembling credit information, is not lending money and therefore is not a “branch” for the purposes of the McFadden Act if the loans originated by the office are approved and the funds disbursed at the main office or an approved branch of the bank. [FN5] Whether a loan production office should be considered to be a branch if loans originated by the office are approved at locations other than the main office or a branch of the bank therefore depends on whether the location where loan approval takes place enhances the convenience to the customer and therefore provides a com­petitive advantage to the bank.

FN5 12 CFR 250.141

Back office facilities that are not accessible to the public are not visited by customers and do not appear to provide customers of the bank with any greater level of convenience. From the point of view of a customer whose loan has been originated at a loan production office, there does not appear to be any difference in the convenience based on whether the loan is approved at the back office facility or at a branch of a bank, as it is unlikely that the customer will visit either location.

Accordingly, the Board has concluded that, insofar as federal law is concerned, a state member bank may establish a back office facility without such a facility being considered to be a branch. The Board also has determined that loans originated by a loan production office may be approved at a back office location, rather than at the main office or a branch of the bank, without the loan production office being considered to be a branch under federal law, if the proceeds of loans originated by the loan production office are received by the customer at locations other than a loan production office or back office facility. This interpretation supersedes those portions of the Board’s prior interpretation, published at 12 CFR 250.141, that concern loan production offices.

Administrative Procedures and Regulatory Flexibility Acts

The provisions of the Administrative Procedures Act concerning notice and comment are not applicable to interpretative rules. 5 U.S.C. 553(b). Because no notice of proposed rulemaking is required, a statement concerning the effects of the rule on small entities is also not required under the Regulatory Flexibility Act. 5 U.S.C. 604. The Board notes, however, that the interpretation provides greater flexibility to state member banks of all sizes in structuring their activities.

List of Subjects in 12 CFR Part 208

Accounting, Agriculture, Banks, Banking, Confidential business information, Crime, Currency, Federal Reserve System, Mortgages, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 12 CFR part 208 is amended as set forth below:

PART 208–MEMBERSHIP OF STATE BANKING INSTITUTIONS IN THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
(REGULATION H)

The authority citation for part 208 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 12 U.S.C. 36, 248(a), 248(c), 321-338a, 371d, 461, 481-486, 601, 611, 1814, 1823(j), 1828(o), 1831o, 1831p-1, 3105, 3310, 3331-3351, and 3906-3909; 15 U.S.C. 78b, 781(b), 781(g), 781(i), 78o-4(c)(5), 78q, 78q-1, and w; 31 U.S.C. 5318.
12 CFR 208.123

In Subpart E, §208.123 is added in numerical order to read as follows:
12 CFR 208.123
§208.123 Loan production offices and “back office” facilities.
(a) Scope. The Board has considered two issues:

Whether a state member bank may establish a “back office” facility that is not accessible to the public and is not visited by customers without such a facility being considered to be a branch of the bank; and
Whether a loan production office will be considered to be a branch of the bank if it takes loan applications and performs related functions, but the loans are approved at locations other than an approved branch or main office of the bank and funds are not disbursed at the loan production office.
(b) Authority. State member banks are subject to the same limitations on branching as national banks. Federal Reserve Act, section 9, paragraph 3 (12 U.S.C. 321). Under the McFadden Act (44 Stat. 1228), national banks may establish branches within a state only at locations at which a state bank would be permitted to establish a branch. 12 U.S.C. 36(c). For the purposes of the McFadden Act, “branch” is defined to include “any branch bank, branch office, branch agency, additional office, or any branch place of business * * * at which deposits are received, or checks are paid, or money lent.” 12 U.S.C. 36(f). Interpreting the branching restrictions of the McFadden Act, the Supreme Court has stated that the purpose of the McFadden Act was to *17438 maintain competitive equality between national and state banks, and that the determination as to whether a facility was a branch must be based on the convenience of the customer, rather than on the technical or legal relationship between the customer and the bank. In later cases addressing automated teller machines, the courts generally have rejected arguments that money is lent at the time and place where a loan or line of credit is approved, and instead found that money is lent for the purposes of the McFadden Act when the customer actually receives the funds and interest begins to run on the loan. See, e.g., IBAA v. Smith, 534 F.2d 921 (D.C. Cir. 1976).

(c) Interpretation. The Board previously had determined that an office engaged in preliminary or servicing functions is not lending money and therefore is not a “branch” for the purposes of the McFadden Act if the loans originated by the office are approved and the funds disbursed at the main office or an approved branch of the bank. See 12 CFR 250.141. Whether a loan production office should be considered to be a branch if loans originated by the office are approved at locations other than the main office or a branch of the bank depends on whether the location where loan approval takes place enhances the convenience to the customer and therefore provides a competitive advantage to the bank. Back office facilities that are not accessible to the public are not visited by customers and do not appear to provide customers of the bank with any greater level of convenience. From the point of view of a customer whose loan has been originated at a loan production office, there does not appear to be any difference in the convenience based on whether the loan is approved at the back office facility or at a branch of a bank, as it is unlikely that the customer will visit either location. Based on this analysis, the Board has concluded that a state member bank may establish a back office facility without such a facility being considered to be a branch for the purposes of the McFadden Act. The Board also has determined that loans originated by a loan production office may be approved at a back office location, rather than at the main office or a branch of the bank, without the loan production office being considered to be a branch, provided that the proceeds of loans originated by the loan production office are received by the customer at locations other than a loan production office or back office facility. This interpretation supersedes the Board’s prior interpretation, published at 12 CFR 250.141, as it applies to loan production offices.

By order of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, March 31, 1995.

Barbara R. Lowrey,
Associate Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 95-8404 Filed 4-5-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
60 FR 17436-01, 1995 WL 146503 (F.R.)

END OF DOCUMENT

° 2008 Thomson Reuters/West. No Claim to Orig. US Gov. Works.

1 Cal. Fin. Code § 3800(c) (2007).
2 Cal. Fin. Code § 3800(c) (2007).

3 Cal. Fin. Code § 3800(b) (2007).

4 Cal. Fin. Code § 3820 (2007).

5 The instructions for Form 25 (Uniform Application / Notice) appear to indicate that a loan production office would not be deemed a branch, because they provide that an applicant should indicate “whether the application concerns a ‘branch office’ [or] ‘place of business’ other than a branch office such as a ‘loan production office’ … .” Form 25 Application Instructions, Part III. However, the Financial Code and the Department’s rules do not specify what activities may be performed at a loan production office.

6 Federal Deposit Insurance Act § 3(o), 12 U.S.C. § 1813(o); National Bank Act § 36(j), 12 U.S.C. § 36(j).

7 See Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Membership of State Banking Institutions in the Federal Reserve System, 60 FR 17436 (April 6, 1995); Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Interpretive Rulings, 61 FR 4849 (February 9, 1996).

8 Membership of State Banking Institutions in the Federal Reserve System, supra.

9 12 C.F.R. § 208.2(c)(2)(i). Money Lent At Banking Offices Or At Other Than Banking Offices. See Membership of State Banking Institutions in the Federal Reserve System; Miscellaneous Interpretations, 63 FR 37630 (July 13, 1998).

10 12 C.F.R. Part 208, App. C.

11 12 C.F.R. § 7.1005. Credit Decisions At Other Than Banking Offices.

12 C.F.R. § 7.1003. Money Lent At Banking Offices Or At Other Than Banking Offices.

13 See OCC Interpretive Letter 691 (October 1995), 15-1 O.C.C. Q.J. 134 (March 1996), citing Independent Bankers Association of America v. Smith, 534 F.2d 921, at 948, 946 n. 95 (D.C. Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 862 (1976).

Last updated: Jun 27, 2019 @ 3:06 pm