You are on page 1of 9

From: Ian A.

MacKechnie
To: Hinshelwood, Meredith; Phillips, Trent; "Rustin, Jessica"; "Jim Daughton"; "Will McKinley"; "Stewart, Carol";
"Mongiovi, Jamie"; "Larkin, Courtney"; "Oaks, Greg C"; Luczynski, Ned; Knudson, James; Johnson, Lisa
Subject: RE: UPDATED: Proposed Changes for HB 857 (Deferred Presentment Transactions)
Date: Thursday, January 11, 2018 10:08:24 AM

Meredith,
These changes are fine with us, thanks for all your hard work!
Ian
From: Hinshelwood, Meredith [mailto:Meredith.Hinshelwood@myfloridahouse.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2018 7:18 PM
To: Phillips, Trent; 'Rustin, Jessica'; 'Jim Daughton'; 'Will McKinley'; Ian A. MacKechnie; 'Stewart, Carol'; 'Mongiovi,
Jamie'; 'Larkin, Courtney'; 'Oaks, Greg C'; Luczynski, Ned; Knudson, James; Johnson, Lisa
Subject: UPDATED: Proposed Changes for HB 857 (Deferred Presentment Transactions)
Hi everyone,
Attached is an updated version of HB 857 with proposed changes. Compared to the version that I
sent this morning, the following changes have been made to the language as a result of discussions
with stakeholders:
· Effective date – Now proposed as July 1, 2019, rather than the previously proposed January 1,
2019.
· Subsections (21) and (22) of section 560.404, F.S. – These subsections now reflect that a
drawer (borrower) may inform the deferred presentment provider (lender) not only in
person but also in writing that he or she cannot afford the check. This provides parity with
subsection (23)’s language that relates to the new deferred presentment product.
Additional language may be needed to give OFR sufficient authority to modify the database. Jamie
Mongiovi from OFR will work with her folks on the right language. I will continue working on it with
folks here in the House that work on appropriations and procurement issues. Stay tuned for word
on this additional language.
Lastly, thank you to everyone for your input, willingness to work on this bill, and patience with all of
my back-and-forth emails and phone calls! . . . You may hear from me tomorrow. J

Meredith Hinshelwood
Attorney, Insurance & Banking Subcommittee
Florida House of Representatives
303 House Office Building
402 South Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1300
(850) 717-5487

Click here to report this email as spam.

** This email originated from an external address / outside the company. **


Please do not circulate suspicious email.
Report suspicious email to the Help Desk.
This Email message and any attachments are confidential. If you are not the intended
recipient, please notify Amscot Financial, Inc. immediately by replying to this message
and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments.Thank You.
From: Hinshelwood, Meredith
To: Phillips, Trent; "Rustin, Jessica"; "Jim Daughton"; "Will McKinley"; "Ian A. MacKechnie"; "Stewart, Carol";
"Mongiovi, Jamie"; "Larkin, Courtney"; "Oaks, Greg C"; Luczynski, Ned; Knudson, James; Johnson, Lisa
Subject: RE: THIRD UPDATE: Proposed Changes for HB 857 (Deferred Presentment Transactions)
Date: Monday, January 15, 2018 6:45:05 PM

Here is one last clarification that I think needs to be made. Something didn’t seem quite right with s.
560.404(12), F.S., in the context of the new deferred presentment product. The highlighted portion
is what I propose to add to the strike-all. I know that Jessica Rustin is good with it. For the others on
this email, please let me know by 10am tomorrow (Tuesday, January 16) if you are good with this
proposal. If I do not hear back by that time, I will assume you are good with the proposed changes.
(12) The deferred presentment agreement and the drawer’s initial check must bear the same date,
and the number of days of the deferment period shall be calculated from that date. For deferred
presentment installment transactions, the deferred presentment provider may accept additional
checks, subject to the limitations in subsection (5), each bearing the date that the check was given
to the provider, and the deferred presentment agreement must include the deferment period
applicable to each check. The deferred presentment provider and the drawer may not alter or
delete the date on any written agreement or check held by the deferred presentment provider.
Thank you,

Meredith Hinshelwood
Attorney, Insurance & Banking Subcommittee
Florida House of Representatives
303 House Office Building
402 South Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1300
(850) 717-5487
From: Hinshelwood, Meredith
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 7:34 PM
To: Phillips, Trent ; 'Rustin, Jessica' ; 'Jim Daughton' ; 'Will McKinley' ; 'Ian A. MacKechnie' ; 'Stewart,
Carol' ; 'Mongiovi, Jamie' ; 'Larkin, Courtney' ; 'Oaks, Greg C' ; Luczynski, Ned ; Knudson, James ;
Johnson, Lisa
Subject: THIRD UPDATE: Proposed Changes for HB 857 (Deferred Presentment Transactions)
Hi everyone,
Based on three areas of feedback from OFR, I have another updated version of HB 857 with
proposed changes. The revised proposed changes are indicated by the comments that begin with
“REVISED PROPOSAL”. Please let me know as soon as possible whether you have questions,
comments, concerns, tweaks, etc. If I do not hear back by 9am Tuesday morning, I will assume you
are good with the proposed changes.
Thank you,

Meredith Hinshelwood
Attorney, Insurance & Banking Subcommittee
Florida House of Representatives
303 House Office Building
402 South Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1300
(850) 717-5487
From: Ian A. MacKechnie
To: Hinshelwood, Meredith
Cc: Phillips, Trent; Rustin, Jessica; Jim Daughton; Will McKinley; Stewart, Carol; Mongiovi, Jamie; Larkin, Courtney;
Oaks, Greg C; Luczynski, Ned; Knudson, James; Johnson, Lisa
Subject: Re: THIRD UPDATE: Proposed Changes for HB 857 (Deferred Presentment Transactions)
Date: Tuesday, January 16, 2018 8:23:50 AM

Meredith,
That makes sense, ok with me!

Thanks,
Ian

On Jan 15, 2018, at 6:45 PM, Hinshelwood, Meredith


<Meredith.Hinshelwood@myfloridahouse.gov> wrote:

Here is one last clarification that I think needs to be made. Something didn’t seem
quite right with s. 560.404(12), F.S., in the context of the new deferred presentment
product. The highlighted portion is what I propose to add to the strike-all. I know that
Jessica Rustin is good with it. For the others on this email, please let me know by 10am
tomorrow (Tuesday, January 16) if you are good with this proposal. If I do not hear
back by that time, I will assume you are good with the proposed changes.
(12) The deferred presentment agreement and the drawer’s initial check must bear the
same date, and the number of days of the deferment period shall be calculated from
that date. For deferred presentment installment transactions, the deferred
presentment provider may accept additional checks, subject to the limitations in
subsection (5), each bearing the date that the check was given to the provider, and the
deferred presentment agreement must include the deferment period applicable to
each check. The deferred presentment provider and the drawer may not alter or
delete the date on any written agreement or check held by the deferred presentment
provider.
Thank you,

Meredith Hinshelwood
Attorney, Insurance & Banking Subcommittee
Florida House of Representatives
303 House Office Building
402 South Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1300
(850) 717-5487
From: Hinshelwood, Meredith
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 7:34 PM
To: Phillips, Trent <Trent.Phillips@myfloridahouse.gov>; 'Rustin, Jessica'
<jrustin@advanceamerica.net>; 'Jim Daughton' <Jim.Daughton@MHDFirm.com>; 'Will
McKinley' <will@poolemckinley.com>; 'Ian A. MacKechnie'
<ian.a.mackechnie@amscot.com>; 'Stewart, Carol' <CStewart@advanceamerica.net>;
'Mongiovi, Jamie' <Jamie.Mongiovi@flofr.com>; 'Larkin, Courtney'
<Courtney.Larkin@flofr.com>; 'Oaks, Greg C' <Greg.Oaks@flofr.com>; Luczynski, Ned
<Ned.Luczynski@myfloridahouse.gov>; Knudson, James
<Knudson.James@flsenate.gov>; Johnson, Lisa <Johnson.Lisa@flsenate.gov>
Subject: THIRD UPDATE: Proposed Changes for HB 857 (Deferred Presentment
Transactions)
Hi everyone,
Based on three areas of feedback from OFR, I have another updated version of HB 857
with proposed changes. The revised proposed changes are indicated by the comments
that begin with “REVISED PROPOSAL”. Please let me know as soon as possible whether
you have questions, comments, concerns, tweaks, etc. If I do not hear back by 9am
Tuesday morning, I will assume you are good with the proposed changes.
Thank you,

Meredith Hinshelwood
Attorney, Insurance & Banking Subcommittee
Florida House of Representatives
303 House Office Building
402 South Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1300
(850) 717-5487

Click here to report this email as spam.

** This email originated from an external address / outside the company. **


Please do not circulate suspicious email.
Report suspicious email to the Help Desk.

This Email message and any attachments are confidential. If you are not the intended
recipient, please notify Amscot Financial, Inc. immediately by replying to this message
and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments.Thank You.
From: Rustin, Jessica
To: Hinshelwood, Meredith; Phillips, Trent; "Jim Daughton"; "Will McKinley"; "Ian A. MacKechnie"; Stewart, Carol;
"Mongiovi, Jamie"; "Larkin, Courtney"; "Oaks, Greg C"; Luczynski, Ned; Knudson, James; Johnson, Lisa
Subject: RE: THIRD UPDATE: Proposed Changes for HB 857 (Deferred Presentment Transactions)
Date: Saturday, January 13, 2018 12:20:53 PM

These changes look fine to us. Thanks!


Jessica Steadman Rustin
Chief Legal Officer & Chief Compliance Officer
Advance America, Cash Advance Centers, Inc.
(864)342-5079
From: Hinshelwood, Meredith [mailto:Meredith.Hinshelwood@myfloridahouse.gov]
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 7:34 PM
To: Phillips, Trent; Rustin, Jessica; 'Jim Daughton'; 'Will McKinley'; 'Ian A. MacKechnie'; Stewart, Carol; 'Mongiovi,
Jamie'; 'Larkin, Courtney'; 'Oaks, Greg C'; Luczynski, Ned; Knudson, James; Johnson, Lisa
Subject: THIRD UPDATE: Proposed Changes for HB 857 (Deferred Presentment Transactions)
Hi everyone,
Based on three areas of feedback from OFR, I have another updated version of HB 857 with
proposed changes. The revised proposed changes are indicated by the comments that begin with
“REVISED PROPOSAL”. Please let me know as soon as possible whether you have questions,
comments, concerns, tweaks, etc. If I do not hear back by 9am Tuesday morning, I will assume you
are good with the proposed changes.
Thank you,

Meredith Hinshelwood
Attorney, Insurance & Banking Subcommittee
Florida House of Representatives
303 House Office Building
402 South Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1300
(850) 717-5487

This email, any attachment thereto, and the information therein may contain privileged or
otherwise legally protected confidential or proprietary information and communications of
Advance America, Cash Advance Centers, Inc., or its subsidiaries ("Advance America"). If
you are not an intended recipient of this email, you are prohibited from using, distributing, or
publishing this email, any attachments, or information contained therein. Please report any
misdirected emails by calling 864.515.5600 and permanently delete this email and any copies
thereof. ­
From: Hinshelwood, Meredith
To: Luczynski, Ned
Subject: FW: Florida requested info
Date: Monday, December 04, 2017 12:02:32 PM
Attachments: Florida Requested Info.11.28.17.docx

Meredith Hinshelwood
Attorney, Insurance & Banking Subcommittee
Florida House of Representatives
303 House Office Building
402 South Monroe Street
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1300
(850) 717-5487
From: Jim Daughton [mailto:Jim.Daughton@MHDFirm.com]
Sent: Monday, December 4, 2017 12:02 PM
To: Hinshelwood, Meredith
Cc: 'Rustin, Jessica' ; Ian A. MacKechnie (ian.a.mackechnie@amscot.com) ; 'Will McKinley'
Subject: Florida requested info
HI Meredith—Jessica prepared the attached handout as a follow up to the call last week. Please let
us know if you have additional questions. I’ve copied everyone from our end to ensure a quick
response.
Jim

This transmission and its attachments, if any, may contain confidential and legally privileged information. If you are
not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, distribution, duplication, or use of any of the
information contained in or attached to this transmission is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient,
please immediately notify us by reply e-mail and destroy the original transmission and its attachments without
reading or saving in any manner. Please note that this transmission does not create an attorney-client relationship if
the recipient is not already a client.
­
Outstanding
Due Date Accrued Interest* Verification Fee Payment
Transaction Balance
1/1/2016 $ 500.00 $ 40.00 $5.00 $ (126.48)

1/15/2016 $ 418.52 $ 33.48 $ (126.48)

1/29/2016 $ 325.52 $ 26.04 $ (126.48)

2/12/2016 $ 225.08 $ 18.01 $ (126.48)

2/26/2016 $ 116.61 $ 9.33 $ (126.48)


Total Interest: Total Amount Paid:
$0
$126.86 $632.40
APR 217.84%
(includes verification fee)
*Interest accrues daily at 8% of the transaction balance (not including the verification fee) on a biweekly
basis. (Example of first due date: 8% of $500=$40)

Check Scenarios:
1. Electronic Authorization for Payments. At the time of origination, the customer authorizes the
lender to debit her account on each of the due dates above for $126.48. The authorization
would limit the lender to debit only the remaining amount owed on the due date. Thus, if the
customer made a $100 payment on 1/12 in the example above, the customer’s account would
only be debited for $26.48.
a. Electronic Funds Transfer Act (EFTA) and Regulation E would prohibit a lender from
requiring a customer to provide a “preauthorized electronic fund transfer” as a
condition of credit. 12 CFR Section 1005.10(e). “Preauthorized electronic fund transfer
is defined as a transfer authorized in advance to recur at substantially equal intervals. 12
CFR Section 1005.2(k).
2. Electronic Authorization on Default. At the time of origination, the customer authorizes the
lender to debit her account for the Outstanding Transaction Balance plus Accrued Interest.
Thus, if the customer fails to make a payment on 1/15 in the example above, the lender would
have the ability to debit her account for $452.
3. Single Check. At the time of origination, the customer would write a check for the Outstanding
Transaction Balance plus Accrued Interest at the time of Default. With each subsequent cash
payment, the customer would be given their old check and would be asked to write a new check
for the updated Outstanding Transaction Balance plus Accrued Interest at the time of the 2nd
payment due date. Thus, in the example above, the customer would write a check for $545,
which would be the total amount owed if the customer defaulted on 1/15. If the customer
makes cash payment on 1/15, she would replace the first check with a second check in the
amount of $452.
a. It should be noted that the lender needs to define “default” by contract. Default may be
defined as (1) the date of the missed payment; (2) date of the missed payment plus x
days; or (3) 2 or more missed payments. In practice, most lenders would not defined
default as the date of the missed payment, as they would want to give the customer the
opportunity to “cure” the loan with a late payment.
4. Multiple Checks. At the time of origination, the customer would write a check for each
scheduled payment. In the example above, the customer would provide 5 checks of $126.48
each.
a. The downside to this approach is that, in the event the customer defaults, the lender
would hold multiple checks that could exceed the total amount the customer owes at
the time of default (because interest would stop accruing at default.) Thus, a lender
could either deposit less than all the checks and not be “collateralized” for the full
amount, or the lender could deposit all the checks and be “overcollateralized” for the
amount owed which requires the lender to make a refund to the customer if all the
checks clear.

Related Interests