New Unused Credit Policy

[Guest]

.

[Jan & John]

I agree with Diane about the gift certificates - I still have two from this fall that haven't redeemed theirs yet, so I will still talk about Kiva but I won't involve anyone who might not stay involved.  Some of my young gift receivers have still only the one loan so will be donating to Kiva fairly soon I would imagine.  (12 months following the last repayment?? )

Tax receipts would be useless to those of us here in Canada because Kiva has still not registered as a charity in our country, so I will do as Colette and make sure I always have at least one long active loan and my passwords are already recorded.

I know Kiva is not a bank and anyway your rules in the US differ from ours.  My experience comes from working for one of our banks - we sent out inactive notices after 2 years and again 5 years and dormant notices yearly after that until the money went to the Bank of Canada at year 10.   Of course we charged for the service so a small amount could get eaten up by the charges but legally the money remained with the client.  But then the Kiva lawyers have obviously got their ducks in a row (sorry Ann) or this would not have been announced in the newsletter we haven't received yet

I can understand Kiva needing to rearrange the rules to use my money until such time as I claimed it...

However closing the books on an inactive account after only 1 year of no replies is IMHO not acceptable. 

jan

[Ulli]

If anyone has received the newsletter, can you forward me a copy at scott@scott-paterson.com?

Thanks,

-Scott

Or even post it here on Kivafriends.org, because I have not gotten anything so far.

Ulli

[RichardF]

Gerard, please cite the applicable state and federal statutes Kiva considers applicable to and in support of this New Unused Credit Policy.

[cpbailey]

Gift Certificate laws in CA, where Kiva is located, are not subject to becoming a gift to the business.  You get your money!  NO expiration dates, either.  Here is a reference for that...http://www.restaurant.org/government/state/giftcards/giftcards_200309_states.pdf

I think there should be due diligence to locate a person before taking the money.  If someone has passed, there are no easy ways to find a kiva account and give it to heirs. 

For the broader issue of escheating the money, Kiva is in a rather uncomfortable place.  You give them money to lend, like a bank, but it choses not to follow banking procedures.  I would NOT want to have to defend this position in court.

Colette

[nobodynowhere]

I'd be surprised if this were actually legal.  Companies aren't allowed to take the balance for themselves; there would seem to be no effective difference between Kiva taking the money, and considering it a "donation."

[Diane R]

Gerard, please cite the applicable state and federal statutes Kiva considers applicable to and in support of this New Unused Credit Policy.

I'll second Richard's request.

--Diane.

[AccountAbility]

I have been reluctant to bring up the escheat laws, because there is some legitimate debate about internet funds and where they "reside" and who or which governmental entity has jurisdiction.  But unless Kiva can avail themselves of these particular exceptions, California would seem to be the applicable jurisdiction.  

And California is aggressive enough to assert it with significant determination.  Just ask some of the major banks doing business in California, who had to fork over millions to the state for continuing to take bank service fees from accounts without activity instead of turning the funds over under the escheat rules.

As I said earlier, they are walking into a minefield.  I do think there might be ways to work through it to the other side, but it won't be simple.

I wonder whether it would be easier to come up with a way to have each lender grant to Kiva the right to re-loan idle credits to borrowers they select -- to keep the funds in play toward meeting the original goal.  But in any event, it will have to be carefully crafted into the original lender sign-up or its equivalent, not buried in some fluid and ephemeral Terms of Use.

Dan

[nobodynowhere]

The State of California's unclaimed property FAQ:
https://scoweb.sco.ca.gov/UCP/FAQ.aspx

The State acquires unclaimed property through California's Unclaimed Property Law, which requires "holders" such as corporations, business associations, financial institutions, and insurance companies to annually report and deliver property to the Controller's Office after there has been no customer contact for three years.
...
The Unclaimed Property law was enacted to prevent holders of Unclaimed Property from using your money and taking it into their business income. This law gives the State an opportunity to return your money and provides California citizens with a single source, the State Controller's Office, to check for Unclaimed Property that may be reported by holders from around the nation.

[Soriak]

Wouldn't it be easier to set up shop in the Cayman Islands to deposit and transfer the funds? Far less compliance to worry about, which also means fewer expenses. Transactions to developing countries should also go faster. A financial institution based only in the US seems like a generally bad idea.

[macsapiens]

Gerard,

Kiva has over 363,000 lenders.  As of now 215 have read your post on this site.  You say that kiva will do plenty of communicating regarding this matter.  I've never seen your newsletter, so I don't know what you're referring to.  Anymore than I know what's going on relative to the zero activity on any of my loans.  I don't know how many Kiva lenders know of this site, but I'll wager it's not many.  Kiva, to my knowledge, never mentions it.

I don't know who you are Gerard.  I don't know what your position is in Kiva, or what authority you speak with.  The one thing Kiva has done an excellent job of, is not communicating with lenders.  I think you guys have a very narrow view of lenders and what's important to them.  And quite frankly I don't see any behavior on Kiva's part that would indicate you care.  From the perspective of a business plan, to ignore your source of funding, is the epitome of folly.

Daniel