DataBreaches.Net

Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report
Menu

House Bill to Limit Scope of Red Flags Rule with Amended "Creditor" Definition

Posted on November 20, 2010 by Dissent

Hunton & Williams have an informative law blog, Privacy and Information Security Law Blog, and if you haven’t already bookmarked, you should.   Yesterday they wrote:

On November 17, 2010, Representative John Adler (D-NJ) introduced the Red Flag Program Clarification Act of 2010 (H.R. 6420) to “amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act with respect to the applicability of identity theft guidelines to creditors.”  The bipartisan bill seeks to limit the scope of the FTC’s Identity Theft Red Flags Rule, which requires “creditors” and “financial institutions” that have “covered accounts” to develop and implement written identity theft prevention programs to help identify, detect and respond to patterns, practices or specific activities that indicate possible identity theft.

If passed, H.R. 6420 would add a more narrow definition of “creditor” to Section 615(e) of the FCRA, which reads, “any person who regularly extends, renews, or continues credit; any person who regularly arranges for the extension, renewal, or continuation of credit; or any assignee of an original creditor who participates in the decision to extend, renew, or continue credit.”  In response to concerns that the current FCRA definition improperly extends the Red Flag’s scope to implicate certain entities, including attorneys, law firms and health providers, the proposed definition would exclude those “that advance funds on behalf of a person for expenses incidental to a service provided by the creditor to that person.”

[…]

What does that last exclusion mean?  What do they mean “advance funds… for expenses incidental…?” Can anyone translate that into plain English, please?  If a non-physician healthcare provider allows a patient to “pay them later,” does that constitute an “advance of funds?”

In May 2010, the American Psychological Association had reported that

the House passed a bill that would exempt from the Red Flags Rule psychology (and other health care) practices with 20 employees or fewer. …. The House bill, H.R. 3763, passed with 400 votes and no objections. The APA Practice Organization supports the passage of similar Red Flags Rule legislation in the Senate. The Senate has not yet taken action on this legislation.

H.R.3763 is not the same bill as H.R.6420.  The former passed the House in October 2009 and has yet to see any action in the Senate.   So why has the Senate seemingly done nothing on this issue?

No related posts.

Category: Uncategorized

Post navigation

← Penalty-based system could make you sick
(update and correction) North Carolina Baptist Hospital/Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center breach →

Now more than ever

"Stand with Ukraine:" above raised hands. The illustration is in blue and yellow, the colors of Ukraine's flag.

Search

Browse by Categories

Recent Posts

  • DOJ investigates ex-ransomware negotiator over extortion kickbacks
  • Hackers Using PDFs to Impersonate Microsoft, DocuSign, and More in Callback Phishing Campaigns
  • One in Five Law Firms Hit by Cyberattacks Over Past 12 Months
  • U.S. Sanctions Russian Bulletproof Hosting Provider for Supporting Cybercriminals Behind Ransomware
  • Senator Chides FBI for Weak Advice on Mobile Security
  • Cl0p cybercrime gang’s data exfiltration tool found vulnerable to RCE attacks
  • Kelly Benefits updates its 2024 data breach report: impacts 550,000 customers
  • Qantas customers involved in mammoth data breach
  • CMS Sending Letters to 103,000 Medicare beneficiaries whose info was involved in a Medicare.gov breach.
  • Esse Health provides update about April cyberattack and notifies 263,601 people (1)

No, You Can’t Buy a Post or an Interview

This site does not accept sponsored posts or link-back arrangements. Inquiries about either are ignored.

And despite what some trolls may try to claim: DataBreaches has never accepted even one dime to interview or report on anyone. Nor will DataBreaches ever pay anyone for data or to interview them.

Want to Get Our RSS Feed?

Grab it here:

https://databreaches.net/feed/

RSS Recent Posts on PogoWasRight.org

  • Oregon Amends Its Comprehensive Privacy Statute
  • Wisconsin Supreme Court’s Liberal Majority Strikes Down 176-Year-Old Abortion Ban
  • 20 States Sue HHS to Stop Medicaid Data Sharing with ICE
  • Kids are making deepfakes of each other, and laws aren’t keeping up
  • The Trump administration is building a national citizenship data system
  • Supreme Court Decision on Age Verification Tramples Free Speech and Undermines Privacy
  • New Jersey Issues Draft Privacy Regulations: The New

Have a News Tip?

Email: Tips[at]DataBreaches.net

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

Contact Me

Email: info[at]databreaches.net

Mastodon: Infosec.Exchange/@PogoWasRight

Signal: +1 516-776-7756

DMCA Concern: dmca[at]databreaches.net
© 2009 – 2025 DataBreaches.net and DataBreaches LLC. All rights reserved.
Menu
  • About
  • Breach Notification Laws
  • Privacy Policy
  • Transparency Report