Fair Lending Clarity For Credit Unions

Ever feel like the compliance goalposts won’t stop moving? We sat down with regulatory expert Michael Christians, Regulatory Compliance Counsel from Michael Christians Consulting, to cut through the noise and focus on what actually protects your members and your institution. From Fair Housing’s disparate impact to ECOA’s discouragement standard and the ever‑sharp edges of RESPA Section 8, we walk through the real risks (compliance, legal, and reputational) and how to manage them without slowing your lending engine.

We break down why HUD’s signals on disparate impact don’t erase Supreme Court precedent, and how a neutral policy like minimum loan amounts can still land uneven outcomes across protected classes. You’ll hear a clear framework for auditing policies, testing for unintended bias across geographies and channels, and building alternatives that align safety, soundness, and inclusion. We also revisit the Townstone case to spotlight ECOA’s protection of prospective applicants and share content guardrails for marketing, radio, and social so your brand voice welcomes applicants rather than inadvertently deters them.

On RESPA, we parse Section 8 with practical examples: affiliate relationships, MSAs, steering risks, and what “thing of value” looks like when it’s dressed up as co‑marketing. You’ll leave with checklists for documenting fair market value, verifying actual services, and making shopping easy so members can compare rates and fees without pressure. The throughline is simple and powerful: hold your operational line. When agencies change their posture, court risk and community trust remain. A steady, well-documented program is your competitive edge.

Hit play to get the playbook: how to test policies for disparate impact, refine scripts and content, structure partnerships safely, and keep the member journey fair from marketing to closing. If you found this useful, subscribe, share it with your team, and leave a quick review. 

Sponsored by RocketPro.

Transcript

30 Second Intro

SPEAKER_01 0:00

The views and opinions expressed in this podcast do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of Acuma, its board of directors, its management staff, or its members. The podcast discussion presented is conversational in nature and for general information only.

Marker 04

SPEAKER_03 0:30

This is Acting On Boy Podcast. On today's episode, we're discussing several compliance topics ranging from fair housing to a co-op, and then we might wrap up with some Red Tops. You're not going to want to miss this episode. Before we get to our episode, just a quick word from our sponsors.

Marker 08

SPEAKER_00 0:51

Rocket Pro helps credit unions grow their mortgage business at zero cost by delivering a member-focused, fully white-labeled mortgage experience. RocketPro integrates seamlessly with your brand, team, and existing channels, strengthening member-related steps while driving acquisitions and retention. A scalable platform delivers a modern digital listing experience without disrupting course systems. While credit unions retains full ownership of their people, data, and processes. Powered by secure, compliance-first AI, Rocket Pro streamlines workflows, reduces origination costs, and improves efficiency, helping credit unions better serve members today.

SPEAKER_03 1:46

Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, welcome back to the South Boy Podcast. I'm your host, Peter Benjamin. This is the third episode of our new format where we focus on real-world issues impacting credit unions right now. But don't worry, as always, I keep saying it, we'll continue to have conversations with people making a positive impact in our industry. And as always, we'll continue to have a little fun. Today I am joined by Michael Christian's Regulatory Compliance Council with Michael Christians Consulting's LLC. Michael, my friend, how are you doing today?

SPEAKER_05 2:30

I am doing excellent. How are you, Mr. Benjamin?

SPEAKER_03 2:33

Hey, uh Mr. Benjamin's my father. Um I'm just I'm just PB. Um PB. But I'm I'm I'm I'm good. I'm I'm good. Listen, I'm I'm I'm good because it admittedly I I've been looking forward to this episode, you know, since we kind of made this transition to this this new format where we build in you know more you know technical or or more relevant topics that our our industry is facing. And the reason was because one, I mean, I think you know, I think we are we over here at Axmo love you and we appreciate everything that you do for the association and our our members, but you were literally, I might turn around, the first person we thought of and really the idea behind well, we got we need to have something more compliance focused, you know, we need to start making that trans natural transition to something a little bit more technical. And you were literally the first person that we we thought of. So although you're not the first episode uh in this this new new and improved on-point podcast, you were the first person we thought about. And so we're excited to have you here. You know, compliance is I hate to say one of my favorite topics, but it kind of sort of is. Um so I mean looking forward to it, man. You'd be you'd be one of the few. But I'm I mean I'm good, I'm glad to hear it. Hey, listen, hey, it it's I I think you know compliance is interesting, right? And and and and I I know we have to keep moving forward, but uh the reason why I I think compliance is one of my favorite topics is because there's always a right way and a wrong way to do it, right? Yep. The wrong way is very defined. The right way I've always found it's it's it's a massive scale. Like you know when you're doing something wrong. Sure. But you can get creative to get something right. So I like being creative. I mean, I I might be wrong. I mean, I know you're I mean the attorney in you is probably saying, shut up, Peter, shut up. Um, but I I've always like I've always enjoyed learning about compliance.

SPEAKER_05 4:46

You know, I think I think there's a little truth to what you said because excuse me, we hear so often that compliance as a function is designed to tell you no. And I don't necessarily dis uh I don't necessarily agree with that. To your point, compliance can draw a line in the stand and say you absolutely cannot do that. But what the compliance function within the credit union does not do or should not do is tell you you have to do it this way. Because as you said, while there is one defined way to do something wrong, there may be seven ways to do something right, and every credit union is different, and so this concept of compliance is how do we accomplish what our business model is designed to do to service our members, to service our borrowers, and do it in a way that keeps us out of trouble.

SPEAKER_03 6:07

Right. I mean, that's exactly it, right? And I love the way you frame that up and made my my silly point sound so much more eloquent and and intelligent. So thank you very much for that. Now, you know, we have three topics that I think are fantastic, very relevant for what our members are facing right now. But you know, as always, I I I have to pause. We have to bring Justin into the conversation. And well, anyways, I'll I'll just I'll I'll stop talking. We gotta bring Justin in. Justin, what is the latest grafting happening over at Acma and Hawk? How are you doing today? Good, Peter. How are you? You know, uh you know.

SPEAKER_02 6:50

Are you tired still? I mean, I did just get back from Dallas last week.

SPEAKER_03 6:54

I I'm I'm I'm bloody exhausted.

SPEAKER_02 6:59

Um that's a fun way to say an F-word, okay.

SPEAKER_03 7:03

Hey man, it's uh it does that mean that we're explicit here in the United States or just in I don't know. That's a good question. I'm gonna throw you a curveball on that one. But no, um listen, I'm I'm really tired. Um we've been nonstop in a good way. In a good way. Um, but you know, it it it's uh it's uh I'm looking forward to you know the future uh uh of the association, looking forward to the future of our events, but it's okay to be tired every once in a while.

SPEAKER_02 7:33

Exactly. So uh so we did just get back from Dallas, and if you missed it, then you probably missed uh Peter doing the hookie pokey in a corner somewhere. No? Turn myself around. There you go. I love it. All right. Uh so if you missed out on our viewpoint regional summit in Dallas, don't worry. Next or no, in a couple weeks, we're gonna be heading to uh St. Louis, Missouri. So that event's gonna be April 14th and 15th. That's gonna be the next installment of our uh Viewpoint Regional Summit. So be sure to come out and see us. We're gonna be in St. Louis, Missouri. Uh it's gonna be a great time after that. We're gonna round out our summit series by heading to Baltimore, Maryland. Uh beymoor. Uh I forgot. We gotta we gotta get to Baltimore. Is that how they said Baltimore? Baltimore. There you go. All right. Uh that's gonna be happening April 28th and 29th. Uh so there's still plenty of time to register for both of those events. So if you are local to those areas or if you're within a short distance and looking for some free education uh for our credit union key sub members, this is a great event that you don't want to miss out on. Um after that, we're gonna be heading out for our read our uh focal point workshop. Registration is open on that already. We're gonna be in San Diego May 12th and 13th. Um, two days of learning and networking. Uh again, don't want to miss these uh workshops are uh Peter always says they're the thing that he fell in love with the organization. And so come out and see why. True.

SPEAKER_05 9:02

Justin, um you know, St. Louis is not that far a drive for me. Are there uh any guarantees of uh BB doing the hokey pokey again? Because I may have to make sure.

SPEAKER_02 9:16

St.

SPEAKER_03 9:17

Louis is gonna be held out of brewery. Yeah, you get enough get get enough beers in me, you never know. Then it's almost definitely gonna happen.

SPEAKER_02 9:24

Yeah, so I mean these are good. We're gonna have we're gonna not only be holding the summit out of brewery, but the experiences you get to go on the Anheuser-Busch brewery tour and private tasting, yeah, tasting and all that kind of good stuff. So could he end up doing a hokey pokey in a corner again?

SPEAKER_03 9:42

I mean, that's definitely I I am I'm more concerned with me trying to ride a Clydesdale than dancing in a corner store.

SPEAKER_02 9:53

Yeah, so if anybody wants to know how he got banned from ever buying Budweiser, that's how.

SPEAKER_03 10:01

Have you ever seen a Clydesdale in real in real life?

SPEAKER_02 10:03

No, they are massive. They had one at um a local radio show here a few months ago, though, and I was gonna go because it's literally a year ago.

SPEAKER_03 10:14

You know? We're talking about uh the E in the morning, right? Yeah, that one. It was a year ago.

SPEAKER_02 10:20

It was a year ago. Is that a whole year ago?

SPEAKER_03 10:22

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 10:23

Oh man. Uh okay. Well, aside from the five stump here trying to ride that, doing the hook pokey and all that kind of good stuff. We also have our network meetings. Uh, so stay tuned for those. Uh YPN is coming up, and volume base will be coming up in the month of uh May, so be on the lookout for that. Um for all this and great for all this and other great information, head over to the Acuma website to get registered and learn more. All right. Thank you, sir.

SPEAKER_03 10:49

Yep, thank you. All right, Michael, coming back to you. Uh as I teed up, you know, in in my my soft intro, you know, we have a few things to discuss. You know, fair housing, COA, RESPA. Uh, do you just want to start at the top with with fair housing and the everything that's happening over uh with with that amazing act?

SPEAKER_05 11:11

Yeah. So, you know, here's what's interesting. Um if you've been paying attention, you see that back in uh January, HUD issued a proposed rule in which they said we're going to eliminate disparate impact liability from the Fair Housing Act. So let's talk about that for a minute. This disparate impact liability, there are generally, when we think about fair lending, there are generally three recognized theories of discrimination, okay? Number one is overt discrimination. That's just plain as day. Anyone can recognize it. Member walks in, your loan officer says, We don't take applications from somebody that was born outside of the United States, so don't bother applying. Okay? You all know you can't do that, right? Theory number two, which is still very much alive across the fair lending spectrum, is disparate treatment. And here you've essentially got two similarly situated applicants or bars. And what I mean by similarly situated is similar credit score, similar job time, similar uh income, whatever the case may be. But you put those two folks side by side, and one of them is paying a higher interest rate or higher closing costs or whatever, you've got to ask yourself why? Why is that person being treated differently? And is it potentially from a discriminatory perspective? Okay? So those two are pretty solid. Now since the Trump administration took over uh what, I guess 13 months ago now, there's been a big push to get rid of the third theory of discrimination, and that is disparate impact. Disparate impact. Now disparate impact is defined as when the credit union's got a uniform policy or practice, they apply it the same across the board to everybody. But for whatever reason, that policy or practice ends up having a discriminatory impact on a member of a protected classification. So, real quick example here. Let's say your credit union says, you know what? We've looked at our overhead, we've looked at our compliance costs, we've looked at our servicing costs, and we lose money if we make a first mortgage for less than$50,000. So we're just not going to be in that business. No matter who you are, where you're from, you're not gonna get a mortgage loan from us for less than$50,000. Well, that sounds innocent enough. But now, let's take that one step further. Let's say that you've got an area of your credit union's lending territory where the median housing price is below fifty thousand dollars. And let's say that same area has a high population of a certain protected classification, whether that be based on race, gender, ethnicity, whatever. Your seemingly sterile policy, if you will, is having a disparate impact on members of a protected classification, right? So there's this push to get rid of disparate impact. So it comes out in January and says, you know what, we're going to eliminate disparate impact liability from the Fair Housing Act. Well, that's interesting. Because, you know, Peter, you probably remember this. You've been in the business long enough. Um, back in 2015, there was a case out of Texas that went all the way to the Supreme Court. It was Texas Department of Housing versus I believe it was Inclusive Communities Project, done map. Long story short is that the Supreme Court said that disparate impact liability does in fact exist under the Fair Housing Act. So I think that's important for us to bring up in this conversation because regardless of what does with their rulemaking from the executive perspective, the administrative perspective, if you will, that's fine. But the legal risk is still there. And it's going nowhere.

SPEAKER_03 16:56

So two questions come out of this.

SPEAKER_06 17:00

Yeah.

SPEAKER_03 17:00

Uh you know, I I guess the the first question kind of deals with what you just mentioned. Uh, you know, SCOTUS has already ruled that disparate impact does exist. You know, within this new within the current administration and even I guess the current and and future Supreme Court, is there and again the the we might be going down a rabbit hole for this, and I apologize. Is there ever a a chance that they could change their ruling?

SPEAKER_05 17:33

Sure. You know, and and I think that's um that's a good point, right? Because we just saw Chevron Deference, which has been basically the law of the land for what 40 some years?

SPEAKER_06 17:47

Yeah.

SPEAKER_05 17:48

Where the Supreme Court said, you know, back in 1981 or whatever it was, that it courts should defer to federal agencies. Well, I think it was Loper Bright was the name of the case in this uh current uh Supreme Court. They said nope. Courts don't have to defer to anybody. So yeah, you're absolutely right that this court potentially, which of course has changed since 2015, could hear this matter again and say, nope, the 2015 court got it wrong. That being said, and we'll talk about this a little bit more, I think, uh, in the context of ECOA when we get there, but it's important for us in this fair lending discussion to remember that there's three different types of risk. And compliance risk, if you will, is probably the smallest of the three. And legal risk and reputation risk being significantly more problematic.

SPEAKER_03 19:04

Okay. Yeah. And I I I now have a a third question, but you know, you know, we and I guess this is a good question asked really at the end of every single one of the points that we're gonna discuss, but kind of going back to disparate impact, right? Obviously, there's disparate impact, there's disparate treatment, but then there's also the flip side of that, which is overt, right? Yep. Risks. Impact and treatment. The overt side that wasn't impact of what's or change whatsoever, right?

SPEAKER_05 19:37

Yeah, you're right. And you know, I mean, can we sit here and say that there's no credit unions engaged in overt discrimination? No, of course we can't say that, but I think you and I know credit unions well enough to know we we don't do business like that, right? I mean, we're not we're not we're not telling somebody, hey, we don't make loans to your kind, so don't bother applying. So, you know, it's gotta stay part of the discussion, yes. But I really think for our purposes, where we need to focus, where we can get the most in trouble, are those two that you outlined, impact and and um treatment.

unknown 20:23

Okay.

SPEAKER_03 20:23

This the the the sparr side, right?

SPEAKER_06 20:25

Yeah, right, exactly.

SPEAKER_03 20:28

All right, so you know if you you know it i if if I was a credit union and you you were on the phone with me or you're meeting with me about this exact topic, and again, this is really that question that I'm that that really could apply to all three of these. You know, you know, obviously two of them are fair lending related. But how how does some how does someone comply, stay compliant, stay diligent when right now there's so much uncertainty about you know the sparrowed impact?

SPEAKER_05 21:04

You know, if if if I were talking to one of my credit union clients, I would say put all this noise aside, if you will, coming from the executive talking about how you know we're going to eliminate disparate impact liability and you're gonna be off the hook. Okay, fine. Maybe from a compliance perspective, you are, right? Maybe the CFP is not gonna look at that. Maybe HUD is not gonna look at that, but keep doing what you've been doing to ensure that you protect yourself both from a legal and a reputational standpoint.

SPEAKER_03 21:56

Alright, let's let's again, same thing, really fair lending related. It and you know, fair lending is such a broad term, but you know, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, you know, obviously there there's been some movement on that side. Kind of walk us through that.

SPEAKER_05 22:13

So here's what's interesting about um ECOA. Um so you you probably remember um 2010. No, I'm 2010, not that long ago. 2020. 2020, there was a case, um CFPB versus Townstone Financial, which is a uh non-bank mortgage lender based in Chicago.

SPEAKER_03 22:41

Is this the radio show?

SPEAKER_05 22:43

Yeah, that's exactly you're exactly right. That's the radio show, yeah. So CFPB in 2020 comes out and says that this Townstone Financial that's hosting this radio show in Chicago talking about geographic geographically the best areas to buy a house in Chicago. The CFPB asserted, if you will, that some of the commentary made in this radio show had the effect of redlining, or in other words, discouraging African American applicants from applying for real estate loan. And so as this case progressed, it started in, you know, Illinois district court. Counstone's first argument or first defense, if you will, was look, Equal Credit Opportunity Act doesn't protect prospective applicants, it only protects an applicant once you've put pen to paper or once you've actually borrowed money. Well, the district court surprisingly agreed with Townstone. CPV rightfully appealed, Seventh Circuit said, You gotta be kidding me. That's not what the ECO ECOA says.

SPEAKER_06 24:16

In fact, if you go into the text of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B specifically, prospective applicants are mentioned eleven times. So I think it's fair to say that the Equal Credit Opportunity Act does protect prospective applicants.

SPEAKER_05 24:46

So, anyway, Circuit Court overturns the district court, we've got the change in administration, right? The C the new CFPB, if you will, under the Trump administration, drops the case.

SPEAKER_06 25:01

Done. We're not, we don't believe in it.

SPEAKER_05 25:06

We're we're just we're not gonna we're not gonna prosecute it anymore. They even took it as far as in November of last year, they said, you know what, we're gonna go in and we're gonna play around with some of that wording in rate B that talks about discouragement. And we're going to say that really, in order for you to bring a cause of action under ECOA from a discrimination perspective, it's got to be premised on overt discrimination, if you will. That specific actions were being taken. So, you know, going back in the context of that Townstone discussion under this new theory, if you will, they would have to prove that who the those people that were speaking in the radio program on behalf of Townstone were purposely doing or making those comments in order to in fact discourage African Americans from applying for loans. Well, how do you prove what's in somebody's mind? I don't know. I I I I don't know the time. Well, I know I'm not personally a good enough lawyer to do that. To prove what's in somebody's mind, right? But again, Peter, here's what we've regardless of what the CFPB does here. Let's say that they eliminate or they change this definition of discouragement under rate B. Which basically similar to what we talked about under fair housing, moves us more towards an overt discrimination or a disparate treatment and moves us away from disparate impact. I return you to our previously litigated conversation where the legal risk and the reputation risk are going nowhere. And, you know, let's let's talk about that reputation risk for a minute, right? So maybe the CFPB is not gonna measure for disparate impact. And let's say, you know, to follow your hypothetical that another case goes up before SCOTUS and they reverse the 2015 decision, and they say, No, we don't legally recognize disparate impact either. Well, neither of those things eliminate reputation risk, right? And so here's the other thing that I tell my credit union clients and I would tell every optimum member. Do you want to be known on Facebook or X or Insta or whatever the heck else is out there?

SPEAKER_06 28:33

Do you want to be known as the credit union that treats applicants, prospective applicants, borrowers of a different ethnicity, race, gender differently?

SPEAKER_03 28:47

I don't think you do it it it's the funny thing. I I was I was just thinking about that, right? Like exactly what you said, right? And and I'm I'm and I guess that the question I asked earlier, you know, uh how do you instruct these credit unions maintain the status quo, don't change anything, right? But uh as you were going through this, I was just thinking to myself from a lending perspective, uh the the you know the the the 20 plus year lender in me uh I was just thinking why why target or why uh why did the administration pick out these this thing fair lending, fair housing, eco op, right? The things that really impact these things. Because as a lender, uh you really you have uh all you have to worry about is the consumer, right? Uh uh and uh as far as your your your clientele, right? And so uh you said it exactly right. If you start getting uh this reputation within your communities, that not just credit unions, it can be banks, it can be commun, you know, large banks, community banks, you know, IMBs. But if you start getting this reputation within your community that, hey, uh you discriminate, uh you lose a lot of business, right? Yeah. So it almost seems like why pick this out because no lender in their right mind, at least in my opinion, is gonna follow suit with this. They're still gonna play on the conservative route because their livelihoods base off it, right? Lending to everybody.

SPEAKER_05 30:35

Yeah, I mean, I you know, I gotta agree with you. Um I I don't I can't tell you for sure why they picked it out. My hypothesis, if you will, is that it was an overcorrection. They were so upset with Chopra thinking that uh, you know, the CFPB under Chopra's leadership was um beyond out of control, which that's a discussion for another podcast, right?

SPEAKER_03 31:08

But I think it was it's neither here nor there on this podcast.

SPEAKER_05 31:11

Yeah. I mean, I think it was maybe a um it was maybe their gut reaction to, hey, we gotta try and peel back some of the quote unquote damage uh that they feel uh had previously been done. And let me just make one additional quick point here, going back to, you know, you and I talking about why the status quo makes so much sense. Don't forget at some point in the future, the pendulum will swing back the other direction. We'll have a democratic president, democratic administration, and a much more fierce, if you will, CFB. So why why why why put yourself as a as a credit union through that back and forth, right?

SPEAKER_03 32:16

Right. Okay. So last topic, you know, we're we're approaching time, but I definitely want to hit this topic.

unknown 32:23

Yeah.

SPEAKER_03 32:24

Because it's it's I feel like in the past few months it's been popping up a lot. Yep.

SPEAKER_05 32:31

Respo yeah, so you know, nothing really has changed with RISP, and what we're talking about here specifically is Section 8, right? Which basically says that you cannot exchange anything of value for the referral of settlement service business. Now, the previous CFPB was very active in this space, did a lot of enforcement when it comes to Section 8. The CFPV under the Trump administration basically has kind of backed off. Well, here's a classic example of regardless of what your compliance risk is, your legal risk is still there. You've probably heard of this little ma and pa shop uh called Rocket Companies, right? Uh Rocket Homes.

SPEAKER_03 33:26

Really small window. Really small window.

SPEAKER_05 33:28

Yeah. I mean, you know, they don't do business in too many places, but anyway, um they just got hit uh last month with a class action from a firm, I believe, out of Michigan, that has been previously referred to as the most feared plaintiff's firm in the country. And this class action alleges that Rocket Home's real estate that worked with prospective home buyers essentially steered those prospective buyers to their sister company, Rocket Mortgage, for purposes of obtaining their financing. Well, here's the problem with that, right? Section 8 exists, so we don't unnecessarily inflate settlement costs associated with mortgages. So what happens if there's 20 other lenders out there aside from Rocket Mortgage that can do financing for these prospective home buyers in a lot cheaper fashion, whether that be by interest rates, closing costs, or whatever. But they never even have the opportunity to shop because Rockets already steered them and said, No, you really gotta go with them. You know, credit unions, look again, keep doing what you've been doing. Nothing has changed when it comes to Section 8. Put the noise to the side. Stop worrying about what, oh, the CFPB is not doing this, the CFPB is not doing that. Do business the way you've done it.

SPEAKER_06 35:22

That, my friends, is the best way to protect yourself.

SPEAKER_03 35:28

I appreciate that. Thank you so much. You know, and really that your last statement was is kind of summarizes any type of last final question I would have. It's the moral story is, you know. Administration has changed, uh regulators changed, you know, the lending environment changes, but as long as you maintain the status quo of what you know to be right, you should be fine. Um Michael, thank you very much for walking us through that.

unknown 36:02

Of course.

SPEAKER_03 36:03

But now it's time to start transitioning to the second segment of our podcast. Now, Michael, you've been on the podcast before. And I think last time you were here, you did that joke, right?

SPEAKER_04 36:15

We did. Yes, dad jokes.

SPEAKER_03 36:16

We did, put it. And you, my friend, are the lucky person who gets to do Jeopardy. So as I pull the Jeopardy board onto the screen, and I'm gonna describe it. I'm gonna describe it. Uh on my screen, even though no one else can see it except for Justin, uh, Michael, and I, is your standard Jeopardy board ranging from one to five hundred, except for one category. I'll get 400 for some strange reasons again. I think 80. But the points range again again from 100 to 500 with categories that are fact, vocabulary, company pranks, and main idea in history. Now, Michael, your episode just so happened to release around this this holiday called April Fool's Day. So I was like, why not have an April Fool's Jeopardy? Again, I didn't create this, I don't know what it's about, but it's gonna be fun all the same. So, Michael, here's what we're gonna do. You are team one, Justin's team two, you do not have to answer who is, what is, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. When you when you pick a question, it's your question to answer. Now, if you if Justin feels like stealing, he he can say, I want to steal, especially if he knows that your answer is wrong. Now, if he gets that if he gets hit steal wrong, I also deduct points, just so you know. You can pass and I won't take out points, but that's no fun. Um But anyway, you get it. So, Michael, you are our honored guest. You get to go first, again, one to five hundred facts, vocabulary, company pranks, main idea, and history.

SPEAKER_05 38:11

Uh Alex, I will take uh history for 200, please.

SPEAKER_03 38:15

History for 200. An early American prank involved the printing of a story in the New York graphic newspaper about this famous inventory stating that he created a machine, uh inventor, that should be inventor, created a machine that could turn stereo into water.

SPEAKER_06 38:42

Inventor. Wow. Um who is Eli Whitney?

SPEAKER_05 38:54

Justin, you want steel?

SPEAKER_06 38:55

No.

SPEAKER_03 38:56

All right, the correct answer is who is Thomas Edison? Okay, sorry, Michael. I'm gonna deduct points. And we're off and running. Yeah.

SPEAKER_05 39:10

The moral of the story here should be if I don't know, keep my mouth shut.

SPEAKER_03 39:16

Oh no, you still lose points. Oh, yeah. New nice repeater, new year, new Peter. Nice Peter doesn't deduct points if you pass.

SPEAKER_02 39:26

Yet to see that happen, just so you know. Yet to see that happen with you, Justin. Exactly. Um I'm gonna go with company pranks for 200.

SPEAKER_03 39:35

Company pranks 200. Google has played many April Fool's pranks, but one year they said they would strap cameras to the heads of these animals in Australia. So I guess the researchers could see beyond the road. Or starting to what's a kangaroo? The correct answer is what is a kangaroo. Do you know any other animals in in Australia?

SPEAKER_06 40:13

Sure.

SPEAKER_03 40:13

I don't know. I don't know. I mean koala, right? Okay, I could have gone that route too. All right, Michael.

SPEAKER_05 40:23

All right, I gotta make up some ground here.

SPEAKER_06 40:25

Let's do um facts for 400.

SPEAKER_03 40:31

I think I actually looked at this question earlier. The king, and that's in bunny ears, the king who passed a law calling for absurdity on April 1st in a fake story made up by a professor in Boston to explain April Fool's Day. So what's the name of that king? Bath Wow, Justin? No. All right, the correct answer is who is King Google?

SPEAKER_04 41:08

I don't even know that name.

SPEAKER_02 41:10

Yeah. It's a made-up name. He's the king who passed the law calling for observation yelling. I figured that's the case.

SPEAKER_03 41:16

It's a mate it's a made-up name. Peter, where did you get these? I Googlized it. All right.

SPEAKER_02 41:25

I'm gonna go with uh Company Pranks for 300. Company pranks 300.

SPEAKER_03 41:32

As a prank. As a prank one year, this online company offered instant meals that could be made using a coffee maker.

SPEAKER_06 41:46

Okay, Quaker Oats.

SPEAKER_03 41:49

Michael, you want to steal?

SPEAKER_02 41:50

I don't think that's right. It says it's an online company. That's wrong.

SPEAKER_03 41:54

You already answered it. I know. Michael, you want to steal? Quaker Oats would have been a good answer. Correct answer is Think Geek. That was pretty close. So close.

SPEAKER_05 42:08

I think one bought the other, right?

unknown 42:10

Yeah.

SPEAKER_02 42:10

Yeah, yeah. Quaker Oats did buy Think Geek. I'm just saying Quaker Oats would have been a pretty good ad for that.

SPEAKER_03 42:19

Yeah, but Quaker Oats isn't the online company. It doesn't matter. It literally asked for what online company.

SPEAKER_02 42:26

Okay. So it also asked what animal, and I could have said a crocodile.

SPEAKER_03 42:31

You most certainly could have. You you could you could have said emo. I think there are emus in uh Australia. I don't know. All right. Michael.

SPEAKER_05 42:41

Let's do uh main idea for a hundred.

SPEAKER_03 42:44

Main idea for one hundred. Jesus. There are many different kinds of bears in the world. Black bears live in North America. Grizzly bears also live in North America. They're they are very dangerous. The white polar bear lives in the Arctic. The biggest bear is the Kodiak bear that is found in Alaska. What is the main idea of this text passage? A. Bears live in North America. B. Bears are dangerous. Or C, there are many kinds of bears.

SPEAKER_05 43:20

I feel like I'm sitting for the law school entrance exam again. Um I'm gonna go with C. There are many kinds of bears.

SPEAKER_03 43:35

Justin, you will steal. No. The correct answer is there are many kinds of bears. Nicely done. Look at me. Nicely done. All right. Justin.

SPEAKER_02 43:55

All right, I'm just gonna go with the main idea for 300.

SPEAKER_03 44:00

Please be this really stupid. Throughout history there have been celebrations to mark the beginning of this season, many including days of fun and pranks. Spring. Spring? It's a season, so spring. Okay. Michael, what do you want to steal? I don't. Okay. Correct answer is. What is spring? Look at you. Just nailed it.

unknown 44:27

Wow.

SPEAKER_03 44:28

All right. Well, at the end of however many rounds we've just done, we have Michael with negative 100 and Justin with a positive 200. Look at that. Alright, let's do one more round and we'll wrap up. Michael.

SPEAKER_06 44:46

Um let's do vocabulary for 400.

SPEAKER_03 44:56

A person whose job was to entertain royalty by dressing up in funny clothes and making everyone laugh.

SPEAKER_06 45:04

What is a jester?

SPEAKER_03 45:07

Justin with Steel? No, thank you. The correct answer is. What is a court jester? You know what? I'm gonna take it. I'm gonna take it. You didn't say the word court, but I'm gonna take it. Nicely done. You're currently in the lead. Oh man.

SPEAKER_05 45:22

Justin.

SPEAKER_06 45:25

We're gonna go with uh main idea for 200.

SPEAKER_03 45:29

Main idea 200. April Fools can hopefully cause a lot of laugh. This chemical is a natural painkiller that a body produces when a person laughs a lot.

SPEAKER_06 45:46

Oh Why? This is how you know this game is rigged, by the way.

SPEAKER_02 45:56

How is it rigged? No, this is how you know you rigged the game. Chemical isn't it?

SPEAKER_03 46:02

Dude, you you were like a medic, you should know this.

SPEAKER_06 46:05

Nobody would know this. Um chemical Do you know the answer? Yeah. I think I don't know that I don't know. Michael Massel. So if he passes points.

SPEAKER_05 46:37

Do I have to answer it? No, you don't have to answer it.

SPEAKER_06 46:39

That should be the rule.

SPEAKER_05 46:41

So I'm not gonna answer because you're not gonna take points away, right? But can I still try and answer after the game's over? Well, I'm gonna show it. No.

SPEAKER_03 46:52

I'm gonna show the answer.

SPEAKER_05 46:54

Well, can we just say the game's over and I won and then I can take a guess?

SPEAKER_03 47:00

Alright, Michael, Michael, for you. Absolutely.

SPEAKER_05 47:02

No, no, no, no, no. Here, hold on. Oh, I don't have a pen. I was gonna write my write down my answer, but okay. Go ahead.

SPEAKER_03 47:10

The correct answer is.

SPEAKER_05 47:13

What is endorphin? I knew that's what it was, too. Good thing you didn't let me answer, because that's not what I would have said. What were you gonna say? I was gonna say dopamine.

SPEAKER_03 47:25

I was thinking dopamine too.

SPEAKER_06 47:27

Yeah.

SPEAKER_03 47:30

Yeah, that makes sense. That makes sense.

SPEAKER_05 47:35

This might be the worst Jeopardy um board I've ever seen.

SPEAKER_02 47:41

Yeah, but hey, guess what? No, there's one that uh all the answers included the word etc. I got every question right that game.

SPEAKER_05 47:52

Hey, maybe I should do a uh maybe I should do a compliance jeopardy at uh the workshop in San Diego.

SPEAKER_02 47:59

Oh my gosh, how much fun would that be?

SPEAKER_03 48:01

We should. And by the way, this website that I use, you can actually build your own Jeppy boards.

SPEAKER_05 48:06

That would be pretty awesome.

SPEAKER_03 48:08

Yeah, you're welcome. That'd be awesome. Once that comes in a cahoot, you do a cahoot. Yeah, just just don't get uh Nicole Herrick to answer any of the questions.

SPEAKER_04 48:20

Trust me, she she would not be successful.

SPEAKER_03 48:27

Uh I think my favorite my favorite one of my favorite memories is that we are at the uh Dallas workshop, and she was there. I think she had just started with Homebot. You were presenting, and the level of banter that you had back and forth with her, and you were just making fun of her nonstop about how bad she was at compliance. It was brilliant.

SPEAKER_05 48:54

So Nicole and I used to work together many, many years ago, and she gave me a lot of crap for a lot of years.

SPEAKER_06 49:02

So it's uh it's payback time.

SPEAKER_03 49:07

Well, oh Michael, thank you very much. That wraps up this episode's version of Jeopardy. Congratulations on your win with a score of 300 to 200. Well done, my friend. And by the way, thank you for everything that you do for Acima, our community, our members. You're you're you're one of the best out there.

SPEAKER_05 49:26

Guys, thank you. That was fun. Um, I uh always enjoy being with you both, and uh we'll see you in San Diego.

SPEAKER_03 49:34

Absolutely. And Justin, thank you. Of course, it is my pleasure. Of course. And to close out, thank you again to Rocket Pro for sponsoring today's episode. And to all of you, we know your time is valuable. Thanks for tuning in to the latest episode of Acuma's On Point Podcast. We hope you enjoyed it. Until next time, be well, my friend.

Marker 09

SPEAKER_01 49:53

Thanks for listening. We'll see you next time at the Acuma on Point Podcast. If not already, be sure to subscribe and give us the five star rating. For more great episodes and information, be sure to visit us online at Acuma.org. And to get the latest updates, head over to our LinkedIn page.