| Green
Dot Predatory
Practices
Covered Up by
CommerceOne
Redaction on
AI So FOIA
by
Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Book
Substack SOUTH BRONX/SDNY, June 25 â Green Dot Bank, the subject of extensive consumer complaints, proposes to split itself with its bank going with CommerceOne and its fintech business to (related) Smith Ventures. Fair Finance Watch has filed opposition to the Federal Reserve. "This is
early opposition to the
application of Compass Sub
Northwest, Inc., Birmingham,
Alabama "and others" to become
a bank holding company by
acquiring Green Dot
Corporation, and thereby
indirectly acquiring Green Dot
Bank, both of Provo, Utah "and
more." ... CommerceOne is a
HMDA reporter - and lending
only to whites, not to any
African American...
There are extensive consumer
complaints against the
applicant(s) here; the FRB has
taken the problematic position
that even the CFPB complaint
database is not "substantive."
FFW objects, and requests a
hearing. Ten days later,
Sullivan & Cromwell
submitted an entirely
dismissive response, to which
FFW immediately replied, with
2025 HMDA data and more -
including S&C being
slammed for misusing AI in
court. And on May 7, the
Fed asked CommerceOne /
Compass Sub North questions,
including "Describe specific
actions New CommerceOne would
take to strengthen and enhance
Green Dot Bankâs complaints
management program and to
reduce the number of customer
complaints the bank receives.
Describe any new systems,
additional staffing, and new
operations New CommerceOne
would implement at Green Dot
Bank to strengthen and enhance
its complaints management
program. 6. Provide a detailed
timeline New CommerceOne would
expect Green Dot Bank to
address each of the corrective
actions of the Consent Order
after the acquisition"
and saying, "Please provide a
copy of the public portion of
your response to the
commenter, Mr. Matthew Lee." On Saturday, May
16 Sullivan & Cromwell
sent Inner City Press a
heavily redacted answer -
information about Bill Smith
removed, and any moves to
address the predatory lending
consent order. On Inner City
Press' DocumentCloud here Inner City Press
immediately emaild a FOIA
request to the Board, which
has yet to make a notice of
appearance in the FOIA lawsuit
against it. On June 25,
embolded, CommerceOne redacted
even more. Inner City Press
immediately filed a FOIA
request: This is an immediate FOIA
request for CommerceOne's and its
subsidiaries' June 25 responses to
the June 12, 2026 Additional
Information questions posed by the
FRS in connection with its
application to acquire Green Dot
Bank.
The FRB has taken to deeming
confidential certain of its
Additional Information questions,
which Inner City Press is
challenged.
Now, emboldened, CommerceOne
is redacting nearly all of tis
answers, on Artificial Intelligence
and consumer protection - copy
attached. The FRB asked CommerceOne in
Question 1 how it intends to utilize
artificial intelligence and to
provide a copy of its AI Policy. The
public version of CommerceOne's
response contains no substantive
answer to this question â only a
blank section following the
question's text. The AI policies and
practices of a bank holding company
applicant seeking to acquire Green
Dot Bank, a fintech-oriented
institution serving millions of low-
and moderate-income prepaid card
customers, are matters of direct
public and consumer protection
interest. Inner City Press
specifically requests the full
unredacted text of CommerceOne's
response to Question 1 and a copy of
CommerceOne's AI Policy as submitted
to the Board. (This is a challenge
to all of the redactions). The public version of
CommerceOne's response to Question
8(d) â addressing BSA/AML monitoring
responsibilities at Green Dot Bank
post-acquisition â is entirely
deflected to Confidential Exhibit 3.
Green Dot Bank is currently
operating under a Cease & Desist
Order issued by the Board on July
19, 2024, specifically citing
deficiencies in risk management,
compliance, and BSA/AML programs and
controls. How CommerceOne plans to
remediate those BSA/AML deficiencies
at a bank it proposes to acquire is
not a commercially sensitive
business strategy â it is a federal
regulatory compliance obligation of
direct public concern. Inner City
Press requests the full unredacted
response to Question 8(d) and the
portions of Confidential Exhibit 3
addressing BSA/AML roles, reporting
lines, and monitoring programs. The public version of
CommerceOne's response to Question
7(b) â seeking projections of the
financial impact on Green Dot Bank's
balance sheet from planned growth
strategies â is redacted entirely
into Confidential Exhibit 4.
Likewise, Question 10 (dollar amount
of financial resources allocated to
Green Dot Bank's compliance
management system) and Question 11
(compliance staffing levels) are
entirely deflected to confidential
exhibits. The financial resources
being allocated to remediate a bank
under a federal Consent Order, and
the projected balance sheet of the
combined institution, are matters
the public must be able to evaluate
during the comment period. Inner
City Press requests the full
unredacted text of CommerceOne's
responses to Questions 7(b), 10, and
11, and the relevant portions of
Confidential Exhibit 4 addressing
the post-closing governance,
remediation, and oversight
framework. As
noted in the examples above, these
are specious confidentiality
requests, encouraged by the FRS'
increasing withholding of consumer
protection questions, including all
questions to Enova in the ongoing
Grasshopper Bank proceeding (which
has given rise to a FOIA lawsuit. Watch this
site.
*** Your
support means a lot. As little as $5 a month
helps keep us going and grants you access to
exclusive bonus material on our Patreon
page. Click
here to become a patron.
Feedback:
Editorial [at] innercitypress.com Mail: Box 130222, Chinatown Station,
NY NY 10013 Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis. Copyright 2006-2026 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com |