United States: Key Compliance Considerations From DOJ's New Redlining Settlement

Last Updated: July 30 2019
Article by Melanie Brody

Last month, the United States Department of Justice ("DOJ" or the "Department") settled redlining claims against First Merchants Bank ("First Merchants" or the "Bank"), an Indiana-based bank regulated by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC"). The First Merchants settlement is the first redlining matter initiated1 and settled under the Trump administration, and it contains useful insights for institutions seeking to evaluate their own redlining risk. This Legal Update summarizes the case and the key compliance takeaways.

Background and Allegations

Investigation Was DOJ-Initiated

Although many DOJ fair lending investigations arise out of referrals from a prudential regulator or the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau,2 the First Merchants settlement documents do not mention an underlying regulatory investigation. Thus, it appears that the DOJ initiated the matter of its own accord. This suggests that even though the pace of fair lending enforcement has slowed considerably since President Obama left office,3 the DOJ has not completely abandoned the issue and is, in fact, willing to proactively open its own fair lending cases.

Factual Allegations

As is the case with all redlining matters, the DOJ's case against First Merchants consisted of a combination of factual claims and statistical allegations. According to the complaint, First Merchants adopted policies and procedures that were "intended to deny residents in majority-Black census tracts equal access to, or discourage them from applying for, real estate-related credit." Specifically, the DOJ claimed that First Merchants:

  • Largely excluded majority-Black census tracts from its Community Reinvestment Act assessment area, while including "overwhelmingly [W]hite counties," thus creating a horseshoe-shaped assessment area that "carved out the urban core" of Indianapolis-Marion County;4
  • Failed to maintain any branches in majority-Black areas of Indianapolis-Marion County despite growth and expansion into White areas in recent years;
  • Failed to employ any residential mortgage loan officers with any presence in majority-Black census tracts until more than a year after the DOJ initiated its redlining investigation;
  • Failed to "meaningfully advertise" in majority-Black areas of Indianapolis-Marion County and intentionally focused its residential mortgage loan marketing (consisting of direct mail, billboards, and online and digital advertisements) in White suburban counties; and
  • Implemented a mortgage lending policy that expressed a preference for "existing or potential customers" in its "branch footprint," which is based in majority-White areas.

Statistical Allegations

The DOJ alleged that the foregoing conduct discouraged prospective applicants in "majority-Black neighborhoods" from seeking loans from First Merchants and resulted in the Bank making a smaller percentage of loans in those neighborhoods compared to other lenders. The DOJ presented a series of statistical comparisons to support these claims.

The DOJ's statistical analyses focused on the Bank's application and origination volumes in the Indianapolis-Carmel-Anderson, Indiana Metropolitan Statistical Area (the "Indianapolis MSA") as compared to the application and origination volumes of its peer institutions.5 Specifically, the DOJ claimed that between 2011 and 2017, First Merchants' peers received applications from majority-Black census tracts within the Indianapolis MSA at three and a half times the rate of the Bank. Interestingly, the DOJ also claimed that within majority-Black census tracts, First Merchants received a majority of its applications— 69 percent—from White applicants, compared to its peers, which in the same census tracts received only 36 percent of their applications from White applicants.

The DOJ further claimed that First Merchants underperformed its peers in loan originations within majority-Black census tracts in the Indianapolis MSA. Specifically, the DOJ claimed that between 2011 and 2017, First Merchants' peers originated residential mortgage loans in majority-Black census tracts at more than two and a half times the rate of the Bank.

Summary of Settlement Terms

Among other things, the Settlement Agreement and Agreed Order between the DOJ and First Merchants requires the Bank to:

  • Refrain from discriminating on the basis of race in violation of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act or the Fair Housing Act;
  • Engage a consultant to assess the Bank's fair lending risk management program, and revise the bank's policies, procedures, monitoring and training to ensure compliance with fair lending laws as they apply to marketing and making available products in majority-Black census tracts;
  • Maintain a fair lending monitoring program, including statistical analysis of mortgage underwriting, pricing and redlining risk;
  • Conduct fair lending training;
  • Conduct a community credit needs assessment focused on majority-Black census tracts in Indianapolis-Marion County;
  • Designate a full-time director of Community Lending and Development to oversee development of the Bank's lending in majority-Black areas;
  • Serve all counties in its CRA assessment area, including Indianapolis-Marion County, and notify the DOJ of any proposed changes to its assessment area;
  • Open one new, full-service branch in a majority-Black census tract in Indianapolis-Marion County as well as a loan production office in Indianapolis-Marion County that is centrally located to multiple majority-Black census tracts and accessible to residents of those census tracts by public transportation;
  • Spend $500,000 on advertising, community outreach, consumer financial education, and credit repair counseling; and
  • Invest at least $1.12 million in a loan subsidy fund to increase the amount of home mortgage credit it extends to residents of majority-Black census tracts in Indianapolis-Marion County.

Key Compliance Takeaways

Although every enforcement action and resulting settlement is based on unique facts and circumstances, there are several lessons that residential mortgage lending institutions can learn from the First Merchants case.

First, even though fair lending enforcement appears to have been deprioritized since President Trump took office, it has not disappeared. Redlining in particular remains a focal point,6 and, of course, if a Democrat wins the next presidential election, redlining and other fair lending issues will reemerge as enforcement priorities.

Second, although redlining investigations involve an evaluation of both statistics and facts about the lender's efforts to either seek or avoid extending credit in minority areas, it is often the statistics that trigger the start of an inquiry. Agencies with fair lending enforcement authority use screening software that enables them to identify institutions that are underperforming their peers in minority area lending. Thus, even though statistics should not be used as the sole indicator of redlining risk, they do serve as an important tool for understanding areas of potential risk as well as a gauge for whether an institution is likely to be targeted for an investigation.

While it's very important to avoid using statistical findings from one case as binding compliance thresholds or clear markers of a violation, they can provide benchmarks for assessing risk. In the First Merchant's case, the DOJ claimed that the Bank's peers received applications from majority-Black census tracts at three and a half times the rate of the Bank and made loans in majority-Black census tracts at two and a half times the rate of the Bank. Lenders that underperform their peers at higher rates than First Merchants did may be more likely to face a potential redlining inquiry.7

In addition to statistical performance, lenders should consider whether their business practices raise potential redlining concerns or, on the other hand, could be used to defend inferences made from unfavorable statistical findings. For depository institutions, a CRA assessment area that gerrymanders around minority communities can be a red flag. Locating branch offices in racially and ethnically diverse locations as opposed to in exclusively White areas can serve as evidence that a lender desires to serve minority communities. Similarly, ensuring that advertising and marketing efforts reach minority area residents can counteract claims that a lender is seeking to avoid lending in such areas. Finally, implementing a strong compliance program, including monitoring and effective training, can help demonstrate a lender's commitment to fair lending.

Redlining can be a complicated issue, and every institution has a unique set of circumstances that influence whether it may be at risk. Nevertheless, lenders can use the First Merchants settlement as a tool for evaluating their own compliance situation and whether they are a likely target for a redlining inquiry.


1 In May 2018, the Trump administration's DOJ settled a redlining complaint against Minnesota-based KleinBank that President Obama's Attorney General Loretta Lynch had filed just one week before President Trump's January 20, 2017 inauguration.

2 According to the complaint, First Merchants has $9 billion in assets, making it too small to be supervised by the CFPB, which only has supervisory authority over depository institutions with assets of more than $10 billion.

3 For example, according to its most recent Fair Lending Report to Congress, during 2018, the CFPB did not bring any fair lending enforcement actions or refer any fair lending matters to the DOJ.

4 The complaint states that in 2016, First Merchants added Indianapolis-Marion County to its assessment area, thus addressing the exclusion of majority-Black census tracts.

5 For purposes of these comparisons, the DOJ defined peer institutions as other financial intuitions that received between 50 percent and 200 percent of the Bank's annual volume of mortgage applications in the Indianapolis MSA. This definition is intended to limit the institutions against which First Merchants was compared to those that had a reasonably comparable volume of mortgage lending activity. Although in some cases it may be appropriate to further refine a lender's peer group for purposes of analyzing redlining risk, e.g., by comparing predominantly conventional lenders to other predominantly conventional lenders (vs. lenders that make a material volume of government-insured or -guaranteed loans), in this case, it appears that the DOJ focused its peer definition exclusively on application volume.

6 The CFPB's June 2019 Annual Fair Lending Report also specifically indicates that "[r]edlining continues to be a priority for the Bureau in both mortgage lending and small business lending."

7 It's also worth noting that in addition to reviewing relative volumes of activity in majority-minority census tracts, the DOJ also looked at the percentage of applications from Black vs. White consumers within majority-Back census tracts.

Visit us at mayerbrown.com

Mayer Brown is a global legal services provider comprising legal practices that are separate entities (the "Mayer Brown Practices"). The Mayer Brown Practices are: Mayer Brown LLP and Mayer Brown Europe – Brussels LLP, both limited liability partnerships established in Illinois USA; Mayer Brown International LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated in England and Wales (authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and registered in England and Wales number OC 303359); Mayer Brown, a SELAS established in France; Mayer Brown JSM, a Hong Kong partnership and its associated entities in Asia; and Tauil & Chequer Advogados, a Brazilian law partnership with which Mayer Brown is associated. "Mayer Brown" and the Mayer Brown logo are the trademarks of the Mayer Brown Practices in their respective jurisdictions.

© Copyright 2019. The Mayer Brown Practices. All rights reserved.

This Mayer Brown article provides information and comments on legal issues and developments of interest. The foregoing is not a comprehensive treatment of the subject matter covered and is not intended to provide legal advice. Readers should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to the matters discussed herein.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Topics
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions