Quiero saber acerca de...

6308

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 12 / Thursday, January 21, 2021 / Notices
assistance to LEP consumers. 20
Specifically, the RFI asked:
Should the Bureau provide additional clarity under ECOA and/or Regulation B to further encourage creditors to provide assistance, products, and services in languages other than English to consumers with limited English proficiency? If so, in what ways? 21

The Bureau received a wide variety of responses to this question from several stakeholder groups, including consumer and civil rights advocacy organizations, financial institutions, industry trade associations, other financial regulators, and individuals.22 Almost all commenters recognize the importance of providing products and services to LEP
consumers. Some consumer advocacy organizations request that changes to LEP-related legal requirements take place via notice-and-comment rulemaking. They also suggest that the Bureau require institutions to develop a Language Access Plan, similar to guidance by other Federal agencies.23
20 Id.

at 46601.
at 4660102.
22 See, e.g., Americans for Financial Reform Education Fund Language Access Task Force, Comment Letter on Request for Information: Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B, Document No. CFPB202000260145; National Community Reinvestment Coalition, Comment Letter on Request for Information: Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B, Document No.
CFPB202000260128; East Bay Community Law Center, Comment Letter on Request for Information:
Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B, Document No. CFPB202000260131; Housing Policy Council, Comment Letter on Request for Information: Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B, Document No. CFPB20200026
0103; Consumer Bankers Association, Comment Letter on Request for Information: Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B, Document No.
CFPB202000260147; National Association of Federal Credit Unions, Comment Letter on Request for Information: Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B, Document No. CFPB20200026
0135; Anonymous, Comment Letter on Request for Information: Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B, Document No. CFPB20200026
0067; National Fair Housing Alliance, Comment Letter on Request for Information: Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B, Document No.
CFPB20200026133; American Financial Services Association, Comment Letter on Request for Information: Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B, Document No. CFPB20200026
0140; American Bankers Association, Comment Letter on Request for Information: Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B, Document No.
CFPB202000260143; Center for Capital Markets, Comment Letter on Request for Information: Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B, Document No. CFPB202000260136; City of Houston City Controller, Comment Letter on Request for Information: Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B, Document No. CFPB2020
00260120.
23 See, e.g., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Language Access Plan 2012, https www.justice.gov/civil/file/
997661/download noting that its LEP Access Plan is not intended to create new services or obligations, but to eliminate or reduce limited English proficiency as a barrier or impediment to
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with NOTICES

21 Id.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

20:44 Jan 19, 2021

Jkt 253001

Consumer advocacy organizations, financial institutions, and industry trade associations alike encourage the Bureau to provide more translated documents and notices.
Financial institutions and industry trade association commenters advocate for flexibility in serving LEP consumers, including allowing risk-based approaches to decision making related to the scope and support for nonEnglish languages. These commenters explained that, because there are over 350 languages spoken in the United States, it would be unrealistic and costprohibitive for any financial institution to fulfill all the credit needs of all customers in all languages. In addition, industry representatives express uncertainty regarding how to prioritize one language over others and what factors may be considered when institutions seek to provide services in one or more languages.24 Some industry groups also request clarity regarding marketing in non-English languages, including whether a disclosure describing the extent of services in that language is sufficient on its own to dispel risks that the practice would be considered an unfair, deceptive, or abusive practice.25
A few trade associations also underscore the technical, operational, and compliance challenges specific to providing translated documents to LEP
consumers. For example, the commenters point to the operational complexity of translating and disseminating documents and data through technology platforms designed to rely on standard English characters.26
Moreover, if financial institutions do opt to translate documents, they cite uncertainty regarding which documents to translate, how to determine the accuracy of those translations, and how to defend the rationale for selecting particular forms or disclosures for translation.27 As a result, some of these industry groups assert that providing verbal interpretation via telephone is a accessing the core programs and activities of the Civil Division.
24 See, e.g., Housing Policy Council, Comment Letter on Request for Information: Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B, Document No.
CFPB202000260094, 2 Dec. 1, 2020.
25 See, e.g., Mortgage Bankers Association, Comment Letter on Request for Information: Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B, Document No. CFPB202000260115, 4 Dec. 1, 2020 noting that some institutions forego providing marketing in non-English languages as a result of the regulatory uncertainty.
26 See, e.g., Housing Policy Council, Comment Letter on Request for Information: Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B, Document No.
CFPB202000260094, 2 Dec. 1, 2020.
27 See e.g., id. at 3.

PO 00000

Frm 00020

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

more effective short-term solution to improving services for LEP consumers.
In considering whether and how to offer services to LEP consumers in languages other than English, industry stakeholders express a willingness and desire to serve LEP consumers, but cite challenges related to balancing legal requirements and practical considerations, including resource and operational constraints. Specifically, these challenges arise in making:
1 Language selections: Determining in which non-English languages to provide products and services; and 2 Product and lifecycle selections:
Deciding a which products and services to offer in non-English languages, and b where in the product lifecycle to provide services in non-English languages.
Industry and trade association stakeholders are particularly concerned about potential fair lending risks under ECOA regarding making and implementing decisions about language selection for non-English language services. These stakeholders are also concerned about potential UDAAP risks in determining how and in which languages to offer products and services, particularly where not all products and services are provided in languages other than English. Some of these groups request Bureau clarification that: 1 An inability to offer support in languages other than English, unless specifically required by law, does not violate ECOA
or Regulation B, and/or 2 offering support in a specific non-English language and not in other non-English languages is not considered an unfair, deceptive, abusive, or discriminatory practice. These groups also encourage the Bureau to clarify that collecting consumers language preference information does not violate the ECOA
or Regulation B.28
These legal issues create some uncertainty and can impose costs, which may inhibit some financial institutions from serving LEP
consumers.29 As a result, LEP
28 See, e.g., U.S. Bank, Comment Letter on Request for Information: Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B, Document No. CFPB2020
00260110, 3 Dec. 1, 2020.
29 The Bureau has a variety of tools that financial institutions can use to reduce legal uncertainty, including the No-Action Letter Policy, Compliance Assistance Sandbox Policy, and Policy to Encourage Trial Disclosure Programs. See CFPB, Innovation at the Bureau, https www.consumerfinance.gov/
rules-policy/innovation/ last accessed 12/14/20.
Similarly, the Bureaus Advisory Opinion program provides written guidance to assist financial institutions in understanding their legal and regulatory obligations through advisory opinions;
see also CFPB, Advisory Opinion program, https
www.consumerfinance.gov/compliance/advisoryopinion-program/ last accessed 12/14/20

E:FRFM21JAN1.SGM

21JAN1