Karen Petrou: Next Up: Federal Preemption Standards for Elder-Fraud Prevention
As we noted before the August recess, Senate Democrats have pressed a new bill designed to make the CFPB Director’s wish the command of law: banks would be clearly accountable for many instances in which consumers fall prey to those impersonating bankers, FBI agents, the CIA, and anyone else they think will persuade a customer, often elderly, to part with a whole lot of cash. Nothing will come of this bill in this Congress, but it will surely be back in the next. With it will come measures also to create a federal framework for the patchwork of state laws holding banks accountable for elder fraud. This sounds good, but drafting here is devilishly difficult.
There is no question that elder fraud is a grievous concern. I saw it firsthand as my father slipped farther and farther from being able to discern that the “nice” people happy to talk to him for hours were not beguiled by his avuncular charm – they wanted his bank account number. Washington media is full of stories of the “gold-bar” fraud stealing millions from local retirees and this is, of course, just a tiny sample of a problem estimated to cost at least $3.4 billion a year.
Is there a need for federal preemption? Last week’s American Banker had a helpful run-down of various state approaches. In general, state laws or pending measures seek remedies such as notifications to adult protective services or law enforcement, mandatory holds on suspect transactions, or at the …