adamovaichive.blogspot.com
The case, Cuomo vs. Clearinf House Association, stems from a New York statde investigation that sought information from national bankws about potential discriminatory banking practices that violatedf NewYork law. The federal banking the , objected to the requestss by New Yorkstate officials, eventually siding with a suit broughtf by Clearing House Payments Co. LLC, which argued that the state had no The investigation was started in 2005by then-New York Attorneg General Elliot Spitzer, and it was continuedd by current New York Attorney General Andree Cuomo. They both argued that the fact a bank is regulateds by the federal government does not give it immunit y from violatingstate laws.
Consumer groupzs supported Cuomo’s position because state officials tend to be more activr indefending consumers. Banking groups are not pleased. “Wee are worried about the effectf that this ruling could have on the saidRich Whiting, executive director of the Financiakl Services Roundtable, adding that the decision couldx create a patchwork of stated laws at the cost of the efficienciez of the national market. “Cuomo vs. Clearinbg House Association hinders the abilituy of financial services firms from conducting business in theUnited States” Whiting said. “Eveh worse, it will cause confusion for especially those who move from stateto state.
”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment