Meier Talks Lawsuits and Regulations Credit Unions Must Watch!

Every year it seems we’re saying there are more regulations and compliance expenses than ever. Legislation gets rammed through or log-jammed in Washington. Lawsuits galore! 2024 is no different.

Sarah Snell Cooke sat down with Henry C. Meier, Esq., a veteran credit union attorney, to discuss the hot issues and top court cases that credit unions most need to keep an eye on. He also discussed the increasing reliance on technology and its impact on regulations credit unions may see put in place and much more.

Give it a watch!

Or, read the full transcript:

Disclosure: Transcript is automatically generated

Sarah Cooke 00:08
Welcome, everybody to The Credit Union Connection. I'm here today with Henry Meier. Welcome.

Henry Meier 00:17 Hello Sarah.

Sarah Cooke 00:19
it's great to have our Legal Correspondent here with us today. Henry, want to tell us a little bit of your background?

Henry Meier 00:25

Well, my background I go about, I spent a little more than decade and a half with the New York Credit Union Association, where I eventually became the General Counsel and Senior Vice President. In that capacity, not only did I get to meet a bunch of wonderful and work with a bunch of wonderful venues, but I also was involved with a wide variety of legal work, as well as advocacy, when legal work would often take, they take the form of a contract with users. So if we're helping out small credit unions with an issue they're having, and the advocacy was the type of bread-and-butter advocacy that we do on the state, and federal level, the the important just, the importance is not only did I do legislative, lobbying, but a lot of regulatory lobbying, as well. So that gave me a well rounded background and then about a little bit a little, I guess, almost two years ago now. I went out on my own. So now I am a solo practice. Yep.

Sarah Cooke 01:36

And sounds like the New York Association kept you busy, a wide variety of different things to keep you busy. So with that point of view then, what do you what do you see as the top things coming down the pike for credit unions right now?

Henry Meier 01:51

Well, because I because I do have a broad range of experience, I think you have to look holistically to look at what the key issues are. So so if you look at the one issue, for instance, everyone's talking about overdrafts. So that has a... that has a regulatory component to it, obviously, which is, what is the CFPB going going to be doing? It also has and there's also some talk about some actions being taken on the state level, there's been a lot of emphasis [on] California, at the state level about what they might be doing to put pressure on overdraft as well as in New York State there's a, there's legislation that was passed, that's going to allow them to cap stakeholders. So you have a legislative component to that. You also have a legal component of that, because even without the CFPB, you have a never ending supply and generation of lawsuits, to zeroing in on overdrafting whether they've been properly disclosed. And even if they had been properly disclosed, it can still be argued that they are unfair and deceptive practices. So that's one of the key issues. Another key issue, which is also going to require a holistic approach is going to be with regard to vendor management and oversight. Remember that Sherman Hopper has always made a big point of the fact that it's UAE is the only financial regulator that doesn't have direct oversight over vendors that work with credit unions. His argument frankly was boosted by the fact that we had several credit unions of more than 50 apparently that was subject to a ransomware attack and, a ransomware attack which throws them out of their own, out of their own quote processing systems. And that underscores the importance of not only working, contracting with your direct vendor as but knowing who your vendor is working with as well. So that's going to be a big area because that's going to inform not only guidance from NCUA embedded oversight by examiners, but also it's going to put more and more emphasis on contract, on contract use and what is being done to ensure that you can, what efforts are you making to oversee the actions not only of your vendor, but your vendor's vendor. It's gonna be, it's gonna be a key issue. And then a third issue which is more more generally, generally going to be an issue that has a real practical effect on credit unions going forward is a, believe it or not, we're all getting older. It's depressing, but the, the baby boomers are getting older. And as that happens, you have a tremendous amount of money, more than ever, ever in history like being placed in banks and credit unions for retirement. And you have this happening precisely at the moment where it is easier is more than easy. It is easier than ever before, for that money to be stolen in a matter of seconds. So one of the key issues is going to be who is ultimately going to be responsible for unauthorized transfer of funds. It's not going to be as clear cut as it used to be, it's not going to be as simple as, okay, they, you didn't give them the right to use your debit card, therefore, you get the money back. Now, this is going to be much more detailed, much more nuanced. And that's going to be one of the key issues were as well. So if I had to list my big three, that would be it. That would be it. And then beyond that we have issues such as, I still think one that's fading, kind of in the background right now, because of a lack of federal action. But I still think on the state level, you're going to see increasing issues around cannabis banking. That's going to that's going to be key one key one as well. It's also going to be interesting to see if we don't get movement in the area of data protection and data portability, if you have movement on that at the state level in the absence of federal action. So those are going to be the key issues. And they've got the, all the issues that are having a direct impact, though, on what credit unions should be doing to protect themselves. You've

Sarah Cooke 06:44

written about this for us before in The Credit Union Connection. In particular, you focus in on arbitration, and at account opening. And those contracts. How? Walk us through a little bit of the basics of that. And your feelings on that. Because obviously, there are people, there are lawsuits in that area, too, is like how credit unions can use arbitration and how can they change if they need to change those contracts, things like that?

Henry Meier 07:16

Well, one of the big changes that I've seen, over the time I've been in the industry is it used to be extremely difficult to find class actions brought against credit unions until the extent they were brought against credit unions, they tended to be the much larger ones, the biggest ones, the ones that we expect, such as Navy, for instance. Okay. Now, what you're seeing is fast action attorneys are getting more and more sophisticated, I guess you would call it. They are, they are finding it more cost effective than ever, more and more cost effective to go after even smaller credit unions. So now you see one, all credit unions have to protect themselves against class action lawsuits. I firmly believe that the most effective way, or one of the most important steps that credit unions, that all credit unions consider taking, if they feel that they are big enough to face the potential of class action lawsuits is adoption of arbitration clauses. Because what arbitration is allowing you to do is prempte the potential of class action lawsuits. But at the same time, also ensure that there is a mechanism for that individual member to get redress against after the fact the credit union made a mistake. Yes, the members should get back what what that mistake was done, what the credit unions shouldn't have to do is give millions out to transaction impunities, while the members see only a fraction of that. So arbitration clauses are a key thing that all credit unions consider it now not surprisingly, as arbitration has become more and more common. You see a lot of pushback against that, that against arbitration. And the key point for keeping to keep people keep in mind is we have a pretty good idea of what language needs to be in the arbitration clause themselves. But what is under attack and when it's going to be scrutinized is the process that was used to put new members on notice and to demonstrate to members, in fact, that lead to the arbitration was, so you're seeing a lot of litigation over seemingly esoteric issues. That could have a huge impact on whether or not that arbitration clause going to be effective. It comes it comes down to though, Did you provide adequate notice, to remember that the arbitration clause was going be replaced? And depending on the state you live in, and the type of wages you've had in previous agreements, was the member given an adequate opportunity to opt out of that of that arbitration clause?

Sarah Cooke 10:12
Now, certainly a important piece of the contract between the member in the credit union to keep track of certainly, you know, being member owned institutions don't want to do things that aren't. Exactly. The members interests. But yeah, so also, you alluded to this, when you were speaking a moment ago about other contracts contract review for between credit unions and their vendors as well. NCUA has been looking for oversight on this for years. Why is this becoming so important right now?

Henry Meier 10:53

it's always been important to NCUA. But I think, given the increasing technology, given the last 10 years, and not the last seat vendors, but the need to use vendors for so much more technology in banking as a service, or anything, technology is becoming such an integral part of the banking process. And because credit unions, by and large, don't have the resources to individually, to independently develop the technology or the platforms, it makes us that much more dependent as institutions on third party vendors. So you have this increased need for third party vendor contracts precisely when the need to oversee vendors is increasing. So in the absence of NCUA's ability to directly oversee vendors, my prediction is, and they've said as much, they are going to be doing more does scrutinize what is put in contracts to ensure to the fullest extent possible the, when credit unions enter into these agreements, they do have the ability to properly monitor and least understand what other entities are playing a role in the process. For instance, demand, do they understand that yes, the contract may be with Company A, but it's Company B that actually oversees let's say, the cloud, the cloud service that's in, that really is a key issue. It certainly is viewed, obviously, we're talking about NCUA. But this is a huge issue for institutions, there's actually going, um, if you have had trouble sleeping one night, you can take a look at a report that was done by the Treasury Department. And they put that, they've had a report, holding some of the largest banks in the country, saying that we don't have enough oversight over some of the biggest cloud players. So really, right now, it's a contractual issue. It is one of those things that I think you might see addressed at some point in federal legislation. And what I like to see is baseline vendor standards that we don't have to negotiate for. And then that could apply not only to medium sized vendors, but frankly, all vendors in, believe it or not, Amazon Web Services, Amazon Cloud Services is a huge vendor for us, we're all dependent on. So, in the short term, contracts, in the long term is something that I think should be and hopefully will be addressed in legislation.

Sarah Cooke 13:44

And so speaking of technical, technological evolution, you also were speaking, a minute ago, I guess we were speaking before we started recording about Navy Federal, and their situation with the elderly and financial fraud case, the use of electronic funds transfer to shift money into fraudulent accounts. And then now, you know, the electronic transfer Transfer Act, you were saying, you know, was passed in the 90s, or excuse me, 70s. And, you know, it takes forever for legislation to get through and catch up to the technology. So that's kind of affected as well. Can you talk a little bit about that?

Henry Meier 14:32

Yeah, it goes back to the whole issue of more generally, I think you're gonna see the issue rise up, particularly with elderly because their stories are so I'm saying when you hear someone risking and losing their license, I get that, okay. You're also seeing the Attorney General of New York State take an interest in these type of cases as well. And the basic idea is the Electronic Fund Transfer Act when you think about when it was created, you had this system where, okay, I'm gonna give him a debit card. And you're going to be able to walk into, to this kiosk and take money out. And basically, I have the ability to cap the amount of money, you can take take out at the credit union. Now, we have a system where members have access to fund transfer and online banking, and to services that would have been core internal banking services that now are open to the public. And as a result, what you're seeing is the ability of members to sit by a computer and transfer 10s of 1000s, hundreds of 1,000s of dollars and businesses to do it. The Electronic Fund Transfer Act, its strict liability provisions were designed for a world in which first of all, there wasn't that much of a scope of liability. It wasn't that way. Second of all, it was understood that the only means of accessing those funds with that card, so it's really easy to say, well, he stole my card or she stole my card, and somehow got my password. Okay, now, there are a multitude of ways that you can engage in electronic fund transfers. Okay. So how do we draw that line? And at what point are we going to pose strict liability as opposed to traditional liability where we say, no, no, no, I'm afraid this happened to your member, but they'll remember you did not keep up your end of the bargain. And that is good, is what you're seeing in all this litigation. I really think that our practical level following the law, as you get more and more sympathetic client, excuse me, plaintiffs as you get that grandma, grandmother who's lost life savings, it's going to be that much more difficult for courts to say, you know, I understand what what it it bad that it happened to you. But it's not the credit union's responsibility, I mean, bad things happen to good people. That's going to be an issue, though, that you're going to see more and more of it. And in the absence of any update of the of these laws by Congress, it's going to get more and more tricky, from a legal standpoint, to figure out, Where is the credit union's responsibilities with regard to these type of transactions. Another great example that has to do with that, with Venmo. And those types of services, okay, think about that. Someone is willingly giving them, giving a third party the debit card, or credit card for the purpose of facilitating transactions. This is not what was intended, or thought of, conceived of when The Electronic Fund Transfer Act was was created. Nevertheless, when these we have this whole litigation taking place. And fortunately, so far, it's been painful for credit unions and banks. But the litigation is she, someone used my Venmo account, and then they're taking more money than I would have anticipated or that I should have taken. So I should be you should to be on the hook for that, because that's an electronic fund transfer? Well, the question is, yes, but you gave that third party access to your debit card. So I'm... They are highly now in technical legal issues, but they have found operational consequences for credit unions. And one of the issues is going to be as the scope of liability increases, is this going to be another thing that makes it more and more difficult for small to medium sized credit unions to avoid cost effectively?

Sarah Cooke 18:51

Yeah, absolutely. I imagine that could get some serious hits there. When a credit union has refunded a few people who were defrauded, you know, on Zell, or whatever. But that is something you got to watch very carefully, because it could it could snowball, for sure.

Henry Meier 19:13

Now, all the all these new areas they raise issues with regard to ranging from the cost of insurance to, to, to the cost of the technology you need to invest into the cost of the additional staff. So, unfortunately, everything we're talking about here is if you want to look at the really big picture, getting another reason why it's getting more and more difficult for small to medium sized per years to avoid cost effectively. Right,

Sarah Cooke 19:46

right. And you see their non interest income getting chopped away, you know, over time and we've got legislation from Durbin on overdrafts, that he's probably gonna try and get into some sort of omnibus bill, got the junk fees, quote unquote, from the CFPB. And they just announced the $8 late fee threshold, safe harbor threshold and

Henry Meier 20:16

Larger credit unions. Yeah. You know, what all this has in common is, first of all, your right, even if I agree with the policy behind it, the timing couldn't be worse. It's interesting, these institutions with the exception of the CFPB. The purpose of the FDIC, the purpose of the OCC, the purpose of the NCUA is primarily to ensure safety and soundness. And that whole concept seems to be getting, taking a backseat, when precisely at the moment when things are, when things are getting so much more expensive when we have an unsettled economic environment, this from a safety and soundness point, even even if I agreed with the underlying policy, is not the time to be going after fee income, it's not the time to be coming, going after a source of income, which is important to many institutions, okay. And then you will get the whole policy, then you will look at the underlying policy. And this is something I've written about as well. To me, a fundamental target of any business, and I don't care to credit union, bank or Tesla is to figure out, how they are going to place their products in a way that attracts the most business and that in a way, in the way that is fair to the membership. And with overdraft fees, and other fees, what you're saying is, okay, you're going to be paying extra for the park service. Now my criteria is, so long as someone has the option and the ability of not taking advantage of the service for which the BT, such as if I don't want overdraft protection, I don't need to get it. And I don't know, as they count the slopes in the hole but doesn't explain that to people. That should be an option that is left to the individual credit union, which has to balance, how much it is going to charge against the need for keeping the business, keeping the business going, and more importantly, providing services in the way that their members most want it. And I've never talked to several CEOs about this issue. The reality is that it's great to talk about horrible junk fees. These are fees that there was a demand for, okay, if you did away with overdraft fees tomorrow among many institutions, the membership would be like, I, there would be a core part of the membership for whom that's a central source. They want to know why you did that. So the big issue is for safety and soundness standpoint, this is not the time to be messing around with an important source of income. More importantly, though, even if everything was pristine, ultimately, institutions to be allowed to choose among themselves with their membership of subject to proper disclosures, how they are going to provide services, how

much they're going to cost and the membership can decide for itself whether or not it wants to take advantage of those services. And in that discussion, you excluded the CFPB. Well, when you were talking about the safety, safety and specifically I kept the CFPB slack to this extent. I say we have the CFPB primarily because of, they invite me on when they became an oversight over consumer products. Okay, we don't need other agencies trying to be me, try to engage in a me-tooism where we have we are all over consumer protection, section as well. Now their primary job is seeking exam that's that don't get me wrong. I'm not letting the CFPB off the hook. But but because not from a safety standpoint, but because they are utilizing their powers in a way, which is I would argue, almost outside the authority given to them by Congress, which is a whole 'nother issue we could spend some time talking about. Yeah,

Sarah Cooke 24:33
'Cuz there's a case right now, regarding the CFPB and trying to strike it down.

Henry Meier 24:41

We have this we have one of the key cases before the Supreme Court right now, which they will be a decision, is a case in which the the argument is that the CFPB's funding mechanism is unconstitutional. Now, as a result, you have at least one record that said that as a result of this constitutional defect, any foreign regulation, which was passed with this money, therefore was invalid. And that wouldn't be the armageddon. Now, based on what this what the court was saying during argument, it's highly unlikely that this case is going to be successful. But there was another group of cases before the Supreme Court in which they are going to be examining the extent to which agencies like the CFPB, and like the NCUA have the authority to interpret how poorly agencies have the way to interpret the regulations in a way that they think it should be interpreted. That, I know it could put some people asleep. But that is actually one of the key issues that we deal with on a daily basis. And what it would do is, depending on how the court decides that issue, we could once again place more emphasis on the legislative arm of government, because the answer could be No, no, the statute says what it says. If you want to make this change, you got to get the change, agreed to through Congress and through the state legislature. And that's why I enjoy doing, that's why I try to avoid practice, because there's this thought that, okay, you can be a compliance attorney, or you can be a legislative attorney, or you can be contracted to it. The reality is, in this day and age, if you're going to be effective in any one of those fields, you have to be cognizant of each one of the areas where more regulation is being it's being impacted, and being shaped. And this is, this is a great example, because depending on what the word was, with regard to the CFPB's power, specifically, and the power of regulators in particular, it will place more emphasis on what the legislature was doing. Hey, I lobby lobbying in New York, New York State and I still do some work, some work in New York State. My clients need to know what, what is going to be what is going on in the New York State. And that's true, a credit union that needs to know what is going on at the legislative level, because and you need someone, my goal is always to bring all that knowledge together and put it in one place, and to synthesize it in a way that they can use it.

Sarah Cooke 27:42

Yeah, because you can throw a bunch of money at them, or excuse me a bunch of information at them. But if it's just a data dump, it's not helpful. It's how can they use it? How is it going to impact that particular credit union?

Henry Meier 27:57

And one of the things I've seen in the industry in the past is, and I'm not saying this is unique to credit unions, but there is a there is a a pipe, not a pipe, but there is a way there is a tendency to segregate responsibilities, like, Okay, I'm the compliance person. I'm the legal person, I'm the, I'm the lobbyist, I'm the operational force, okay? In reality, to most effectively help the credit union, all that has to be understood. So let's break down the silos and get everything into, into a coherent narrative, where everyone could see the impact of not only responding to changes in the law and regulation, but in the best case scenario, let's position ourselves in a way that actually, we can benefit. And to do that we have the end is silo approach to the way we look at a lot of public policies in general, and operational issues as well. It's

Sarah Cooke 29:12

interesting, you're talking about that, because I remember speaking with the CEO of a multibillion dollar credit union maybe 10 years ago now. And they didn't have a compliance person at all. Like they didn't have a lawyer on staff at all, each line of business was responsible for its own compliance. And while people don't necessarily have to be a lawyer to be very familiar with the compliance, it seems like in today's world, that just wouldn't fly.

Henry Meier 29:39

Well, do you want some wonderful compliance people? My thing is that we always try to make this as easy, this compliance, this is legal. That's, that's another silo that I've always been interested in cutting down because it's a, it's an impossible distinction to make. I actually think both disciplines benefit from the other. I have a very good colleague who wants to work with his own lawyer, but loves to work with quick and wise people, because the compliance person, if they understand the law can translate somewhat esoteric or very complicated legal things, it issues into operational protocols that so, so that, but there's a there's a need for both them as an effect. And that's the key. That's another big silo that really has to be addressed.

Sarah Cooke 30:39
Yeah, and another expense for smaller credit unions to be able to survive too.

Henry Meier 30:43

It is. Mentally, we all have to be cognizant. It's difficult. It's another reason why it is so difficult, first small credit unions, and that's one of the things the NCUA has to keep in mind as well. They, if not, and I'm gonna get beyond overdraft. Every time they pass a regulation, we'll come out with a guidance policy that should be you know, we have to start, we have to start more regularly making a distinction between what credit unions have to do based on their size and sophistication. And, and because the, it has to be more clear cut, then simply, well no, create your plan based on your sizes and sophistication. Because every time you come out with a regulation, it isn't reasonable expense. And we always try to make that distinction before between regulatory responsibilities, the safety and soundness. The old rule of thumb used to be that the smaller you are, the more we're going to be concerned by primarily the safety at Dallas. And in the old days, from what I've been told, it wasn't uncommon for the examiner to be the de facto compliance person. Okay. Those days are over. And I think one of the things we all have to look at it from a regulatory and political standpoint is if we truly want small credit unions to survive, and I think it is in everyone's interest that they do survive. We have to start looking at how we can more aggressively make the argument that the small credit unions in particular need need, mandating. If it's something that is an argument that we have on the state level in the state, like New York, which is one of the more aggressive states in terms of coming up with mandates, try to make that distinction between the responsibility of even a $1 billion credit union and Citibank. Okay. On the face of it, it shouldn't be that difficult to make. But that's the problem when you have all regulatory mindset,

Sarah Cooke 33:01

which regulators are going to have. Exactly. So, talk a little bit about like, your days at the New York Credit Union Association, and what were you, what were some of the specific things that you were seeing credit unions of all sizes needing assistance with?

Henry Meier 33:24

The the one thing that is a quick vote from I think we can benefit from, we can we can all hang together, or we can all hang separately. And the reason why my gag just ended. I know it's not I mean, the gag came up with the Government Affairs Conference ended a few weeks ago, I always forget what the new acronym is now. But the one thing that's most important, the one thing that everyone can agree on, is the need to speak with one voice. They are core issues in this industry, and these core issues, best advocate for when we when we work is one thing. So I think one area where we can all work together is and should continue to work together is when it comes to court advocacy issues, such as, like giving an example on cannabis banking, is an issue where, okay, even if you don't have any, any desire to get involved with taking marijuana businesses, and even if you're small, okay, and you don't want to get involved, you have a real interest in knowing what the regulations are in terms of who you can deal with whether that member can even be given an account because they they want to opt in too, they are involved in the marijuana business. So, there are issues such as that. So the number one thing, would always would always be a, will always be a lobbying and regulatory advocacy. Okay. And then what generally, is the issue of making sure that credit unions are not disadvantaged by the banking industry. I mean, the reality is, I used to tell people, I used to love lobbying for the banking industry, because, excuse me, the credit unions industry, because I'm not anti bank. I'm just pro credit union. Okay. I like to say that, and I continue to believe that. But the reality is, as an industry, we have to make sure we don't bring a knife to a gunfight. The baking industry, there are lobbyists who get bonuses for, I mean the credit union tax exemption tomorrow. So another key issue that we can all agree on is the need to advocate and do what we can to demonstrate why we need tax exemption. Now, when you get into more specific areas, it does get more challenging based based on size, because the technological needs of a larger credit union, for instance, might be different than small one. That being said, I know, I sound like I'm beating a dead horse here. But everyone has been to the issue of vendor management, and how to properly oversee and vet potential vendors. So that's an issue that everyone could agree on. It goes back, it goes back to the size. And then the the more general issue, which is always going to be challenging us, What is the, we are a cooperative industry. It is structured as cooperaative. So how do we, what obligations do we have to each other? In other words, like this is a bit controversial, but to the extent that we want to see small credit unions remain viable? Are there things that we all should be doing, to work together to make that, to make that a more realistic possibility? So those are the issues that I think generally, I always tried to concentrate on and really swear to God, concentrate on issues that could be, that you notice, those were the ones that were most common. And they all come down to though, recognizing, where we have common values, recognizing the need to make sure that we continue to have access, and the responsibility that comes with that, to latest regulatory innovations, and helping us helping each other out when we can. Yeah,

Sarah Cooke 37:59

yeah, absolutely. I agree. I love the cooperative spirit. And it is part of what will save smaller credit unions as long as we follow that philosophy. So I love that I almost feel like you already answered this one. But I always give my guests the opportunity to provide their final thoughts. So you want to wrap it up for us? What are your final thoughts today, Henry?

Henry Meier 38:23

Yeah. My final thoughts are that it's anyone who has the opportunity to work in the financial services sector. It's a fascinating field. Okay, it's a field that is impacted by technology, by business, by, by changes in people's thoughts and behavior towards each other, frankly, We're cooperative, well, people want to cooperate movement. The entity, the need for responding and recognizing change and responding to and getting ready for, it's going to become even more important. We actually won the entire 15 minutes without talking about AI, for instance, okay. Bottom line is this industry that's going to constantly be evolving, always has, and always will, but the speed of that evolution is going to be that much quicker. So we're all fortunate to be part of it. And the more we can work with each other and make sure we have the resources to respond quickly to those changes. And put those changes in the context of the movement, the better off we're going to be as a whole.

Sarah Cooke 39:39
Alrighty, so Henry, you brought up AI? What does that mean for the credit union field and the legal field for you?

Henry Meier 39:48

Oh, I think it's, I think it's, we don't know the full extent that it is going to have any impact, but you can already see a saving, shaping the regulatory and legal environment with regard to banking. For instance, late last year, several regulators including, including the CFPB, and the Department of Justice indicated that the use of AI for instance, doesn't excuse compliance with the Equal Credit Opportunity Act. Okay. So and, so is, so here's what I find so interesting about it in a nutshell. The whole premise of AI, one of the possibilities of AI is that computers may be able to discover as a result of sifting through huge amounts of data, correlations between one thing and some are paying back that loan that we haven't seen before. In other words, they might come up with these incredibly complex Dow Algos. Now, one of the core concepts of a fair lending, particularly the ECOA, is that you need to explain in common sense terms of why someone was denied a loan. Well, what are we going to do in those situations where the algorithm is so complicated, and the algorithm is constantly changing, because the AI by its very nature, is responding to changes. As it gets more information, we won't be able to explain precisely why in this situation someone's getting a loan. And in another situation, they may not. Now I have talked to people who understand the technology, much better idea. And they do say that now and we were gonna get to a point and might be already where we will be able to explain the basis for lending decisions. But it that it also depends on how responsible that person putting together the algo we're collecting information is going back. So from a legal perspective, that means that it's going to make it that much more complicated. And that was more challenging to to explain and put in place a top of fair lending, a lending program that is fair lending to copliant, fair lending compliant. On a more positive note, though, it does mean that perhaps with AI, it perhaps with its growth of it looking into data to extent that human beings just have not been able to. And perhaps there will be a way of expanding the availability of lending options for people who otherwise would not have the opportunity based on the traditional type, the hand set of criteria that has been used by backing. It is interesting, though, that you're seeing this new emphasis on fair lending, not only with AI, but for instance with the NCUA, one of the references they're going to be facing this year. Our new examiner's, it is to more closely scrutinized, fair lending examinations and fair lending to citizens and programs of credit unions as well as general compliance, for credit unions as well. So all of this is going to come together as the banking system becomes more dependent on technology. And as members demand quicker and quicker decisions. They're going to have to be, the interplay between technology and fair lending was and what can be expected of them as long as to be one of the key issues, is going to be one of the really interesting issues that we're going to have to look at a couple years.

Sarah Cooke 44:02
Already well since that's your real final thought now, thank you for for being here today. Henry.

Henry Meier 44:09

Thank you