Helm Bank USA: Key Legal Risks in Privacy Disclosure & T&C—A Professional Redline Analysis | Erayaha

## When Privacy Gaps Can Cost Millions: Helm Bank USA’s T&C Under the Microscope

When we examined Helm Bank USA’s Privacy Disclosure Statement, our analysis revealed several legal and logical risks that could expose the institution to significant regulatory fines and litigation costs. For example, under the GDPR, fines can reach up to €20 million or 4% of global annual turnover for non-compliance, while U.S. state laws like CCPA impose statutory damages of $100–$750 per consumer per incident. Below, we break down four critical issues and provide actionable redlines to mitigate these risks.

1. Ambiguous Data Sharing After Customer Relationship Ends Helm Bank USA states it continues to share personal information even after a customer relationship ends, but does not specify the purposes, duration, or legal basis for such sharing. This ambiguity could result in regulatory scrutiny and class-action exposure, especially under GDPR and CCPA.

Legal Analysis

high Risk

Removed

Added

When you are no longer our customer, we continue towill retain and share your personal information only as required by applicable law, for specified legal, regulatory, or contractual obligations, and for no longer than necessary to fulfill those purposes. All such sharing will be subject to the same protections and limitations described in this Noticeherein.

Legal Explanation

The original clause is ambiguous regarding the duration, purpose, and legal basis for continued data sharing, risking non-compliance with privacy laws like GDPR and CCPA. The revision clarifies the legal basis, retention period, and scope of sharing, reducing regulatory and litigation risk.

2. Lack of Explicit Customer Rights Under State Laws The T&C references state laws but fails to enumerate specific consumer rights (e.g., access, deletion, opt-out) as required by CCPA and similar statutes. This omission increases the risk of non-compliance penalties and reputational harm, particularly in California where enforcement is aggressive.

Legal Analysis

high Risk

Removed

Added

State laws and individual companies, including but not limited to the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), may givegrant you additionalspecific rights such as the right to limit sharingaccess, delete, or opt out of the sale of your personal information.(See Please refer to the section below for more ona detailed description of your rights under state lawand instructions on how to exercise them.)

Legal Explanation

The original clause is vague and fails to enumerate specific consumer rights required by state privacy laws. The revision provides clarity and ensures compliance with CCPA and similar statutes, reducing the risk of statutory damages and enforcement actions.

3. Insufficient Detail on Security Measures While the bank claims to use security measures that comply with federal law, it does not specify the types of safeguards or standards (e.g., encryption, SOC 2, ISO 27001). This lack of specificity could weaken enforceability and leave the bank vulnerable to negligence claims in the event of a data breach, with average breach costs exceeding $4.45 million (IBM 2023).

Legal Analysis

high Risk

Removed

Added

To protect your personal information from unauthorized access and use, we useimplement industry-standard security measures that comply, including but not limited to encryption, regular security audits, access controls, and compliance with recognized frameworks such as SOC 2 or ISO 27001, in addition to those required by federal law. These measures include computer safeguards and secured files and buildings.

Legal Explanation

The original clause lacks specificity regarding the types and standards of security measures, which may undermine enforceability and increase liability in the event of a data breach. The revision specifies recognized standards and controls, strengthening legal defensibility.

4. Vague Definition of "Everyday Business Purposes" The phrase “everyday business purposes” is undefined and overly broad, creating uncertainty about the scope of permissible data use. This vagueness could be challenged by regulators or in court, leading to costly disputes and compliance failures.

Legal Analysis

medium Risk

Removed

Added

For our everyday business purposes –such as, which are limited to processprocessing your transactions, maintainmaintaining your account(s), respond tocomplying with court orders and legal investigations, or reportand reporting to credit bureaus, as specifically permitted by applicable law.

Legal Explanation

The original clause uses an open-ended phrase that could be interpreted broadly, creating legal uncertainty. The revision narrows the scope to specific, lawful purposes, reducing the risk of regulatory challenge or litigation.

---

Conclusion: Proactive Legal Redlines for Financial Protection Our analysis reveals that Helm Bank USA’s current T&C language exposes the institution to substantial regulatory and financial risks. Addressing these issues with precise, enforceable language can help avoid multimillion-dollar fines, litigation, and reputational loss. Proactive legal review is essential for sustainable compliance and customer trust.

Are your contracts exposing your organization to hidden liabilities? How often do you update your privacy disclosures to reflect new laws? What’s your process for identifying ambiguous or unenforceable terms?

---

This analysis is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For actual legal guidance, consult with a licensed attorney. This assessment is based on publicly available information and professional legal analysis. See erayaha.ai’s terms of service for liability limitations.