CU Times readers had plenty to say about hot credit union topics this past week, including the CFPB's complaint report and CUNA's dual membership decision.

“CFPB Releases Complaint Report,” Sept. 22

The odds of most households being able and willing to make a payment post-modification when they are facing foreclosure are SLIM, but that doesn't mean the borrowers should not be fairly evaluated and educated on what is expected. One person I know is furious that her loan modification would have required her to pay back real estate taxes … hey, the lender can lose the collateral to a tax lien, don't ya know?

—Carolyn M. Warden

“Cornerstone Supports CUNA's Decision,” Sept. 30

It's no surprise that Ensweiler (a former CUNA chairman) would support the status quo – after all, the scratching of each other's backs or whatever is a trademark of these leagues/associations. A little more disturbing is his criticism of Dave Adams for reporting that his board was opting for choice. Love the quotes though – “we asked him a bunch of questions” – wow, great stuff. Why don't you and the other league presidents share those questions with everyone. You've got to believe the statements were more of “holy cow Adams, we got 'em where we want them, if we give them a choice they will not all pay up, and where will we be?”

—dgmunity

“Leagues Debate CUNA Board Decision,” Sept. 30

This, for me, is about fundamental freedom. Any credit union should be able to join the league with or without CUNA's involvement. CUNA has been a bureaucratically overblown entity for decades. The leagues and CUNA should be mutually exclusive organizations.

—WVF

“NCUA Bans Three Women,” Sept. 30

You do realize the sexist overtone of the article headline, right? What is the significance that the three criminals were women? Would we ever see these headlines – “NCUA bans three men”; “NCUA bans three Hispanics”; “NCUA bans three brown-haired, Nascar-loving, Trump-supporting Democrats”? The important part of the article (which should be in the headline to draw in the reader) is that these three are prohibited from working with any FI in the future.

—Bill Board

Thank you for your comment. We absolutely did not intend for the headline to be sexist. The NCUA releases these lists every month, and has for years – it's difficult to create an original headline every month.

If the list of banned individuals included three men, we would absolutely use NCUA Bans Three Men instead; and like this story, it would merely be descriptive.

—Heather Anderson

Executive Editor

CU Times