# OCC Interpretive Letter No. 796: Letter states that arrangement in which Bank A's customers may deliver deposits to Bank B via independent messenger service for credit to their accounts in Bank A, and make withdrawals in same manner, is a correspondent service, not branching. (08/05/97)

> Federal · Agency guidance · In force

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/OCC_INT0796

## Section

- **Citation:** OCC Interpretive Letter No. 796
- **Heading:** Letter states that arrangement in which Bank A's customers may deliver deposits to Bank B via independent messenger service for credit to their accounts in Bank A, and make withdrawals in same manner, is a correspondent service, not branching. (08/05/97)
- **Jurisdiction:** Federal
- **Kind:** Agency guidance
- **Status:** In force
- **Text as of:** August 14, 2026
- **Source:** Compiled text
- **Location:** OCC Interpretive Letters / Letter states that arrangement in which Bank A's customers may deliver deposits to Bank B via independent messenger service for credit to their accounts in Bank A, and make withdrawals in same manner, is a correspondent service, not branching. (08/05/97)

## Text

Comptroller of the Currency
Administrator of National Banks
Washington, DC 20219
Interpretive Letter #796
September 1997
August 18, 1997
12 U.S.C. 36J3 &36J2
12 U.S.C. 24(7)18
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[ ]
Dear [ ]:
This is in response to your letter of June 25, 1997, in which you requested confirmation that a
proposed arrangement between a national bank that you represent (“the Bank”) and a bank in
another state (“the Correspondent Bank”) involves correspondent services and would not raise
branching concerns. For the reasons discussed below, I agree with this conclusion.
Factual Background
According to your letter and subsequent telephone conversations, the Bank is located in
[ State1 ] but has several business customers with operations in [ State2 ]. From time to
time, those customers have a need for cash, or have a surplus of cash which they would like to
have returned to their [ State1 ] accounts. Although the customers maintain their deposit
relationships directly with the Bank in [ State1 ], it is too expensive for the Bank and its
customers to arrange for cash shipments by armored carrier between the Bank’s cash vault and
the customers’ [ State2 ] locations. The customers, for cash management and other
reasons, also do not want to establish separate deposit arrangements in [ State2 ] simply to
meet their cash vault needs.
To solve this problem, the Bank would like to establish a correspondent account at an
unaffiliated bank in [ State2 ] and arrange for that institution to provide cash vault services
for the Bank’s customers in that state through the correspondent account. You envision that the
arrangement would work as follows:
For customers with excess cash:
1. A customer with excess cash would deliver the cash by courier to the
cash vault of the Correspondent Bank in [ State2 ].
unt at an
unaffiliated bank in [ State2 ] and arrange for that institution to provide cash vault services
for the Bank’s customers in that state through the correspondent account. You envision that the
arrangement would work as follows:
For customers with excess cash:
1. A customer with excess cash would deliver the cash by courier to the
cash vault of the Correspondent Bank in [ State2 ].

- 2 -
2. The customer would use the Bank’s touch-tone banking system to
report the transaction to the Bank.
3. The deposit would be provisionally credited by the Bank at that time,
subject to verification that funds have been credited to the Bank’s
correspondent account at the Correspondent Bank.
4. The Correspondent Bank would process and verify the cash deposit,
credit the Bank’s correspondent account, and notify the Bank of any
exceptions.
For customers in need of cash:
1. The customer would notify the Bank (usually electronically) of its
need for cash.
2. Upon its receipt of the notice, the Bank would notify the
Correspondent Bank to charge the Bank’s correspondent account,
prepare the cash for pickup, and make the cash available to a courier for
delivery to the customer.
3. The Bank would charge the customer’s account in [ State1 ] for the
amount delivered to the courier.
4. The withdrawal would be considered to be made at that time, subject
to verification that the Bank’s correspondent account at the
Correspondent Bank has been debited.
In each side of this arrangement, the courier would be a “third-party messenger service,” as
that term is used in the OCC’s Interpretive Ruling § 7.1012, 12 C.F.R. § 7.1012. All
couriers would be hired directly by customers to act as their agents, although the Bank may
reimburse customers for the costs of the messenger service. Customers would bear the risk of
loss in transit
k has been debited.
In each side of this arrangement, the courier would be a “third-party messenger service,” as
that term is used in the OCC’s Interpretive Ruling § 7.1012, 12 C.F.R. § 7.1012. All
couriers would be hired directly by customers to act as their agents, although the Bank may
reimburse customers for the costs of the messenger service. Customers would bear the risk of
loss in transit.
You noted that, although it would be possible to wire funds between the Bank and the
Correspondent Bank instead of crediting or charging the Bank’s correspondent account at the
Correspondent Bank, this would result in significantly higher costs, would be much more
complex, and would be prone to error. You believe that banks often enter into agreements
with larger institutions to provide cash vault services, and this arrangement should not cause
the Correspondent Bank to be a branch of the Bank. However, since you did not discover any
OCC interpretations directly on point, you have requested our views.

- 3 -
It appears that the Bank will consider deposits to be made at the time it credits customers’
1
accounts on its books. The courts have held that, while banks and their depositors are free to contractually
agree on any terms they choose for the handling of deposits, a deposit is deemed to be “received” for
branching purposes when a customer delivers a sum of money to a bank-established facility for credit to
his or her account. First Nat’l Bank in Plant City v. Dickinson, 396 U.S. 122, 136-37 (1969); Independent
Bankers Ass’n of America v. Smith, 534 F.2d 921, 940 (D.C. Cir.), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 862 (1976).
Presumably the same rule would apply to non-established facilities, therefore it could be argued that
deposits will be received by the Bank for purposes of 12 U.S.C. § 36 either when they are received by
the Correspondent Bank, or at the time the Bank’s correspondent account is credited.
Legal Analysis
For a banking facility to be a “branch” within the meaning of 12 U.S.C
429 U.S. 862 (1976).
Presumably the same rule would apply to non-established facilities, therefore it could be argued that
deposits will be received by the Bank for purposes of 12 U.S.C. § 36 either when they are received by
the Correspondent Bank, or at the time the Bank’s correspondent account is credited.
Legal Analysis
For a banking facility to be a “branch” within the meaning of 12 U.S.C. § 36, three
requirements must be satisfied:
1. The facility must perform at least one of the core banking functions of
receiving deposits, paying checks, or lending money, listed in 12 U.S.C. § 36.
2. The facility must be “established,” i.e., owned or rented, by the bank.
3. The convenience of the location of the office or facility to the public must
give the bank a competitive advantage in obtaining customers.
If any of these factors is lacking, the facility is not a branch. See generally, Interpretive Letter
No. 634, [1993-1994 Transfer Binder] Fed. Banking L. Rep. (CCH) ¶ 83,518 (July 23,
1993), and cases cited therein. I find that the Correspondent Bank will not be a branch of the
Bank because, even though deposits may arguably be received there, the other two
1
requirements will not be satisfied.
The Correspondent Bank will be an independent institution not owned by or affiliated with the
Bank. Although the Correspondent Bank will be compensated by the Bank for its services, the
mere payment of fees or charges for the use of a facility by a bank’s customers does not make
the facility one that is “rented” for purposes of branching. Independent Bankers Association of
New York v. Marine Midland Bank, 757 F.2d 453, 463 (2d Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 476 U.S.
1186 (1986). Since it will be neither owned nor rented, the Correspondent Bank will not be
“established” by the Bank.
The Correspondent Bank’s location will not provide the Bank with a competitive advantage
because the Bank will not be competing for customers at the Correspondent Bank’s location
sociation of
New York v. Marine Midland Bank, 757 F.2d 453, 463 (2d Cir. 1985), cert. denied, 476 U.S.
1186 (1986). Since it will be neither owned nor rented, the Correspondent Bank will not be
“established” by the Bank.
The Correspondent Bank’s location will not provide the Bank with a competitive advantage
because the Bank will not be competing for customers at the Correspondent Bank’s location.
This service will be offered only to existing customers of the Bank, and the Correspondent
Bank will not open new accounts for the Bank or engage in any other activity designed to
attract new business for the Bank.

- 4 -
Even if the Correspondent Bank’s main office is used, so that the Correspondent Bank’s own
2
customers have access to the facility, there will be no public access to the Correspondent Bank for the
Bank’s customers. Their only contact with the Correspondent Bank will be via the courier. A facility does
not offer public access if it does not serve customers in person and the only access is by means of a
messenger service. Interpretive Letter No. 639, supra. As far as the Bank’s customers are concerned, the
Correspondent Bank’s facility will be merely a nonbranch back office. An independent courier service as
described in the OCC’s interpretive ruling is not itself a branch, and may deliver deposit items to both
branch and nonbranch facilities. See generally Interpretive Ruling 7.1012(c), 12 C.F.R. § 7.1012(c).
Moreover, an indispensable aspect of the competitive advantage test is public access, because
if customers do not make use of a banking facility in person, its location is irrelevant and
provides no competitive advantage. Interpretive Letter No. 634, supra. At this time, the
specific facility to be used is undetermined. However, you note that it will be whatever the
Correspondent Bank uses as its main cash vault, which normally is either a bank’s main office
or a nonpublic facility
ause
if customers do not make use of a banking facility in person, its location is irrelevant and
provides no competitive advantage. Interpretive Letter No. 634, supra. At this time, the
specific facility to be used is undetermined. However, you note that it will be whatever the
Correspondent Bank uses as its main cash vault, which normally is either a bank’s main office
or a nonpublic facility.
If it is the latter, there will be no public access, and the arrangement you propose will be
essentially the same as the one discussed in Interpretive Letter No. 639, [1993-1994 Transfer
Binder] Fed. Banking L. Rep. (CCH) ¶ 83,526 (January 14, 1994). There, deposits were
delivered by an independent courier to a nonpublic facility of a third party contractor hired by
the bank. The contractor processed the deposits and then forwarded them to the Federal
Reserve Bank. The OCC concluded that the contractor’s facility was not a branch because it
was not established by the bank and had no public access. Here, the Correspondent Bank will
function in exactly the same way. It will simply be a third party contractor hired by the Bank
to process deposits that it receives from a messenger service.2
Rather than branching, the arrangement between the Bank and the Correspondent Bank is
properly characterized as a correspondent service. Correspondent banking is a “system of
interbank relationships in which a bank sells services to other financial institutions. The
institution providing the services is the correspondent bank or upstream correspondent. The
institution buying the services is the respondent bank or downstream correspondent.” Charles
J. Woelfel, The Fitzroy Dearborn Encyclopedia of Banking & Finance 258 (10th ed. 1994).
Correspondent banking enables banks to obtain, through other banks, services that they cannot
economically perform themselves
nstitution providing the services is the correspondent bank or upstream correspondent. The
institution buying the services is the respondent bank or downstream correspondent.” Charles
J. Woelfel, The Fitzroy Dearborn Encyclopedia of Banking & Finance 258 (10th ed. 1994).
Correspondent banking enables banks to obtain, through other banks, services that they cannot
economically perform themselves. The Supreme Court has noted that correspondent banking
goes back to colonial times and today includes a wide range of services that is “varied,
extensive, and constantly expanding.” United States v. Citizens & Southern National Bank,
422 U.S. 86, 115 (1975). It is recognized that one of the services a correspondent bank may
provide is acting as a depository for liquid balances of the respondent bank. Donald P. Jacobs
et al., Financial Institutions 133 (5th ed. 1972).
The OCC has long recognized that correspondent services include deposit-related services. In
fact, as long ago as 1966, the OCC approved an arrangement that was virtually the same as
what you propose:

- 5 -
Facility banking between affiliate institutions has since been authorized by statute. 12 U.S.C. §
3
1828(r).
Bank B has customers in Bank A’s service area. Bank B opens a correspondent
account in Bank A. Bank B’s customers deposit their funds in Bank A to the
account of Bank B. From time to time Bank B draws down its account in Bank
A and deposits these funds to the accounts of its customers who had deposited
the funds in Bank A . . . .
The transaction you describe is not an uncommon practice for correspondent
banks . . . . It provides for the convenient movement of funds from one bank
to another and is recognized as a service of correspondent banking.
Transactions such as these are not prohibited by Federal statute or regulation nor
do they constitute unauthorized branch banking . . . .
Letter of Robert L. Schwind, Regional Counsel, Sixth National Bank Region, January 10,
1966 (unpublished)
espondent
banks . . . . It provides for the convenient movement of funds from one bank
to another and is recognized as a service of correspondent banking.
Transactions such as these are not prohibited by Federal statute or regulation nor
do they constitute unauthorized branch banking . . . .
Letter of Robert L. Schwind, Regional Counsel, Sixth National Bank Region, January 10,
1966 (unpublished).
The arrangement you describe also closely resembles the correspondent service known as
“facility” or “agent” banking. In facility banking, customers of one depository institution may
perform deposit, withdrawal, and certain other transactions in person at another institution.
We have concluded that this is a correspondent service, and the agent or correspondent bank is
not a branch of the customer’s bank. Interpretive Letter No. 610, [1992-1993 Transfer
Binder] Fed. Banking L. Rep. (CCH) ¶ 83,448 (October 8, 1992). The only apparent
3
difference between facility banking and your proposal is that the Bank’s customers will not
visit the Correspondent Bank in person.
I therefore conclude that the proposed arrangement between the Bank and the Correspondent
Bank will be a correspondent service and will not constitute branch banking. This conclusion
is based on the facts contained in your letter and subsequent telephone conversations. A
material change in the facts could lead to a different conclusion.
I trust that this has been responsive to your inquiry. If you have further questions, please
contact me at (202) 874-5300.
Sincerely,

- 6 -
/s/
Christopher C. Manthey
Senior Attorney
Bank Activities and Structure Division

## Nearby sections

- [OCC Interpretive Letter No. 719 Letter concludes that an ESOP is a "company' for purposes of 12 U.S.C. 371c and that an ESOP that controls at least 25% of a bank's voting stock is an "affiliate" under sec. 371c (supersedes existing OCC interpretive letter #261). (10/26/89)](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/OCC_INT0719.md)
- [OCC Interpretive Letter No. 720 Group of affiliate national banks may collectively own, through operating subsidiaries, minority interest in a merchant credit card processing subsidiary. (01/26/96)](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/OCC_INT0720.md)
- [OCC Interpretive Letter No. 722 A national bank may invest CIF assets in mutual funds, including mutual funds that pay the bank a servicing fee, without the bank having to reduce its trustee fees, if the bank concludes, based upon a reasoned opinion of trust counsel, that such an arrangement is authorized by applicable state law, is consistent with the trust instrument, is appropriate for the particular trust accounts, and is consistent with OCC regulations, including in particular 12 C.F.R. 9.18(b)(12). (03/12/96)](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/OCC_INT0722.md)
- [OCC Interpretive Letter No. 724 Bank can sell vehicle service contracts to customers who use home equity loan proceeds to purchase a vehicle, and the maturity of the service contract may be different from the maturity of the loan. (04/22/96)](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/OCC_INT0724.md)
- [OCC Interpretive Letter No. 725 National bank to establish an operating subsidiary to engage in permissible derivatives-related activities. (05/10/96)](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/OCC_INT0725.md)
- [OCC Interpretive Letter No. 726 Letter concerns the application of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) regulations to financial institutions' support of microenterprise lending programs. (06/21/96).](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/OCC_INT0726.md)
- [OCC Interpretive Letter No. 730 Letter concludes that loans proposed by the bank to an unaffiliated distributor of mutual funds would not be subject to interaffiliate lending restrictions contained in 12 U.S.C. 371C. (05/29/96).](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/OCC_INT0730.md)
- [OCC Interpretive Letter No. 732 National bank may make a 5.5% investment in software company which is engaged in the design, development, marketing and maintenance of a network for electronic funds transfers and electronic data interchange, including transacting electronic commerce and marketing software products for use on its world-wide electronic commerce network. (05/10/96).](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/OCC_INT0732.md)
- [OCC Interpretive Letter No. 733 National bank receiver is subject to the rights of secured creditors and creditors entitled to setoff. U.S. legal principles regarding enforcement of security interests are applicable to a receivership of a federal branch or agency conducted under National Bank Act. Therefore, receiver of an uninsured federal branch or agency does not have the right to interfere with the rights of secured creditors, including application of collateral held in U.S. to obligations of a non-U.S. office of the bank. (06/19/96).](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/OCC_INT0733.md)
- [OCC Interpretive Letter No. 736 Lending limit exception for participations not limited to banks. Non-banks may act as participants. (07/25/96)](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/OCC_INT0736.md)
- [OCC Interpretive Letter No. 737 Huntington National Bank's acquisition of minority interest in a limited liability company providing stored value systems. (08/19/96)](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/OCC_INT0737.md)
- [OCC Interpretive Letter No. 738 National bank's participation in a guaranty issued by an agent for a syndication of lenders with respect to their borrower's letter of credit reimbursement obligations to another bank or financial institution is permissible under I.R. 7.1016. (08/14/96)](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/OCC_INT0738.md)
- [OCC Interpretive Letter No. 740 Letter advises the Bank as follows: 1) The question of whether "salary" as used in 12 C.F.R. 2.4 includes an officer's base salary, bonuses, director's fees and/or any other compensation paid by the Bank must be determined by the Bank's management; 2) the question of whether the payment bonuses for credit life sales under 12 C.F.R. 2.4 is based on salary received by the recipient in a calendar year, a fiscal year, or any 12-month period must be determined by the Bank's management; and 3) pursuant to 12 C.F.R. 2.4, if the Bank's CEO is a loan officer and the CEO participates in the bonus plan under which payments based on credit life insurance sales are made, the CEO must be included in averaging the salaries of loan officers that participate in the Bank's bonus or incentive plan. (08/19/96)](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/OCC_INT0740.md)
- [OCC Interpretive Letter No. 741 National bank may acquire majority interest in company which operates call center facility which operates programs by which potential customers for new or used automobiles may access databases containing information on the used and new car inventories of numerous automobile dealerships in its metropolitan area. (08/19/96)](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/OCC_INT0741.md)

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/OCC_INT0796. Check the current official text before relying on it. Not legal advice.