notquiteaff, I appreciate your comment. I will answer your questions and elaborate a bit,

(o) "Why do you feel a green card or passport is more sensitive than your drivers license or state ID? " - When I say sensitive documents, I mean that a green card or passport is more than just ID document. They are also documents about your immigration/citizenship status. The bank had explicitly asked for more information than it needed for identification purposes. If they needed just identification documents, they would also list a driver license or state ID card. Is it really an identification process or something else, or is it an outright scam? I don't know... It's the first time I've seen it in my life, so it made me think about questions Q1 and Q2, which I raised in the original post.

When you say "It’s not unheard of that banks want...", this is what I more or less challenge in this thread (the word "unheard" is the culprit). A bank may want to know your age, sex, race, religious status, etc (you know where I am going, right?) But, as you probably know, we, as a society, have come to the understanding that this information creates the basis for discrimination. For example, if a bank could use information about potential borrower age, then very few elderly people would ever be able to get a credit card.

A bank would love to know that information: they can build a much better risk management model and reduce its losses while maxing out profit. Yet, we believe this would be against the interests of society as a whole, and we prevent banks from getting and using this information.

Another point, which you probably know as well. When you get a driver license, it's almost in all states a REAL ID, which, besides everything, checks your immigration/citizenship status. So technically, if you have a valid REAL ID driver license, it means you are a lawful resident at least until the driver's license expiration date.

(o) "What happened since your original post - any update?"

Well, actually, nothing. It was the end of the story. I didn't send them what they asked for, and they never sent me a letter explaining their decision on the application. mia and philemer suggested in the post above that "not responding" provides the bank a ground to consider the case abandoned and relieves the bank from sending an explanation letter. Which I don't agree with, but you can read more on this in my posts above. I would expect getting a letter saying "we were unable to identify you..." at least if it was the reason. It was my Q3.

 

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/ask-...tizen-en-1187/

 

Credit card issuers do ask for the applicant's birthdate, which means they do know the age, and yet elderly people can open and use credit cards. Collecting information does not mean that the issuers will use it improperly.

 

Based on the information from the CFPB's website (link above; thanks notquiteaff), I can see a partial answer to Q1, in the following form,

Q1*. Can a lender take into consideration immigration information?
A1*. A lender is allowed to consider immigration and residency information.

 

Good point. Though strictly speaking birth date is not age. To derive age from the birth date, the lender needs to do some manipulation on the input datum (though trivial). I wouldn't be surprised if regulations directly prohibit doing this calculation on the users data, so technically the lender "doesn't know" the age. But I am guessing here. Btw, same applies to the zip codes. They can be linked to race due to results of racial segregation. And I know lenders avoid using the zip codes in order not to get in troubles.

(o) "Collecting information does not mean that the issuers will use it improperly". mia, I totally agree with you here. It is not the same. But the best way to protect yourself and your customers is not to ask information you don't need. You want to avoid collecting and keeping something that can get you in troubles. Given the link notquiteaff has posted, I suspect that the current understanding from CFPB is that a lender is allowed to use immigration status for setting loan terms but not denying the loan. Which sounds more or less justified to me.

 

Lenders are required to know if the applicant is old enough to legally enter into a contract, and there are special rules for applicants who are old enough to apply, but not yet 21.

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/ask-...rd-to-me-en-20.

​​​​​​​

 

Yes "to legally enter into a contract". Collecting and keeping and using age is No.

 

So if they can’t discriminate based on age, do you think any regulator or judge would let them get away by discriminating against applicants born before Nov 3, 1958?

I think there is a really easy response to your concern: file a complaint with the regulator and voice your concerns. You will presumably get an authoritative answer instead of speculation from us anonymous peanut gallery denizens

 

No. I don't think so.

 

Because it is closely related to our discussion above, latest news today - WSJ posted an article - "Citigroup Fined for Discriminating Against Armenian Americans".

o) Citigroup was fined more than $25 million for discriminating against Armenian Americans and blocking them from getting credit cards.
o) “Citi stereotyped Armenians as prone to crime and fraud,” CFPB Director Rohit Chopra said in a statement.
o) “In reality, Citi illegally fabricated documents to cover up its discrimination.”

Source: https://www.wsj.com/finance/regulati...5618771?page=1

 

If they will not use this information for credit card approval process, why do they collect this information then? If it is not essential information, you have all rights decline providing it. And it shouldn't be the reason of ignoring your application and not sending the formal letter about the decision of your application process.

 

What information do you think they collect, but do not use?