Background
The
ombudsman received an appeal from an individual who the OCC objected
to as serving as director of a
bank-in-organization.
The
proposed director stated in his appeal that his character and
integrity had been challenged based on erroneous assumptions and
conclusions. He further
stated that to allow the decision to stand without a challenge would
imply acceptance of the fairness of the decision and the conclusions
made in the licensing process.
The
proposed director had pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor that was later
expunged after a settled repayment of funds and community service.
The proposed director's
Interagency Biographical and Financial Report submitted with the
charter application initially described the charge as a
personal-property dispute. The Licensing department
concluded that the individual was not forthright in the written
application and disclosures regarding the background investigation,
nor did he effectively address issues surrounding the conviction
when asked to do so in writing or orally.
Discussion
Sections
12 CFR 5.20 (g)(3)(i) Financial Resources states
that:
Each
organizer must have a history of responsibility, personal honesty,
and integrity. Personal wealth is not a prerequisite to become an
organizer or director of a national bank. However, director stock
purchases, individually and in the aggregate, should reflect a
financial commitment to the success of the national bank that is
reasonable in relation to the individual and collective financial
strength. A director
should not have to depend on bank dividends, fees, or other
compensation to satisfy financial obligations.
The
statute, 12 CFR 5.20 (f)(2) ii) Policy
Considerations further states that:
The
Office of the Comptroller may also consider additional factors
listed in section 6 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, 12 USC
1816, including the risk to the Federal deposit insurance fund, and
whether the proposed bank's corporate powers are consistent with the
purposes of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act and the National Bank
Act.
Conclusion
The ombudsman
considered all aspects of the case, reviewing all documentation from
the Licensing department, interviews with the individual as well as
the supervisory office. The information obtained in the ombudsman's
review was not inconsistent with the provisions of the statute.
Therefore, the ombudsman did not reverse the decision to object to
the
individual
