var json_comments = new Array("
\"user-pic\"
pythonkid
May 11, 2009 8:31 PM
Moderate | Flag for review

I hope credit cards get taken care of soon. Things are a real mess.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
May 11, 2009 8:36 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Can you ask if they can make Wanda Sykes the new press secretary?
Not much to do about credit cards, but BOY would it make the White House press conferences more watchable!

PS: most impressive, Consumerististas, most impressive!

Reply
6 replies
\"user-pic\"
Chris Walters
May 11, 2009 10:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Trai_Dep: Anyone who will throw out \"mulatto\" as a punch line gets extra points from me. Well, maybe not anyone. I don't really think Limbaugh could pull it off, for example.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Trai_Dep
May 12, 2009 12:24 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Chris Walters: ...Unless the mulatto was unusually happy.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Bryan Fernandez
May 11, 2009 9:44 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Trai_Dep: She really should be the next press secretary. It'd be a brilliant move. You can never have too many 9/11 jokes and have them be repeated at press conferences.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ExtraCelestial
May 11, 2009 8:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Trai_Dep: Yes! I wasn't expecting much since NO ONE can top Colbert's performance at the conference a couple of years ago (especially when he was performing to a Republican majority-yikes!) but I nearly fell out of my chair with that Oxycotin joke!


On topic, I sent an article in to the tip line concerning the credit card reform. I hope someone read it. At least I thought it was insightful :o(

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Where The Mild Things Are
May 11, 2009 8:41 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Trai_Dep: Aaaaaaand cue angry comments on how her Oxycontin and kidney failure jokes were \"ZOMG Completely NOT Funny and WAAAY Over-The-Line!!!!1\".

But yay Consumerist for getting the chance to do this!

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ExtraCelestial
May 11, 2009 8:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Where The Mild Things Are: Oh the best comments so far have been the ones where they feign shock and awe over the traitor comment.


Really? REALLY?? I guess they never once watched Fox during the entire Bush reign.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Knippschild
May 11, 2009 8:44 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I saw the adorable Meg on the cover picture of this article. my hopes were up.

I feel so betrayed. :[

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
WiglyWorm must cease and decist
May 11, 2009 9:01 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Knippschild: Damn, I guess you'll just have to go outside and hit on real women rather than obsessing over people who shall only ever exist to you on the internet.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Applekid
May 11, 2009 9:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@WiglyWorm: \"only ever exist ... on the internet\"? That's not what the restraining order filed against me says.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Jim Fletcher
May 11, 2009 8:46 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

On a kind-of-related-but-only-because-it's-about-a-credit-card note... is it normal for a bank to suddenly just double your credit limit? I follow my balance religiously (because I accrue points and pay it off as soon as there's a balance), and today the limit is 2x what it was on Friday. No letter or notification, just *poof* extra credit is suddenly available. Not complaining, because I'm not gonna go crazy and go run up a bill I can't afford, but this is actually my first (and only) credit card... had it for approximately a year.

Reply
3 replies
\"user-pic\"
Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!)
May 11, 2009 11:47 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Jim Fletcher: Yes. It was more normal in boom times, but last time I called to check something unrelated and had to listen to the soul-killing spiel where they recite all current data on my credit card before letting me push buttons to talk to someone, I noticed my limit had gone up about $3000 since I last checked.

I checked my backup card just now, which I got in college with I think a $300 limit? It has a $9500 limit. (Though I've had it for 10 years now.) And I don't actually USE that card ... I charge lunch on it twice a month to keep it active. So it'd still be okay with the $300 limit. :)

(I'd check my other cards but one came with a ridiculously high limit so I've always just ignored it and the other my husband opened before we were married so I don't know what it started at, but that's the one that just mysterious went up another $3000.)

Reply
\"user-pic\"
ExtraCelestial
May 11, 2009 8:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Jim Fletcher: Definitely. Citi does it to mine about every 6 months.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Jim Fletcher
May 11, 2009 8:52 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@TinkishDelight: K... it just seemed odd having that happen after reading about everyone whose limits were chopped.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 11, 2009 8:48 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

PBS Frontline series questions are all unanswered during Bush 2:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/credit/

In this report, how do we outlaw people like the evil credit card corporate lobbyist?

Reply
","","","","
\"user-pic\"
humphrmi
May 11, 2009 8:54 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'd like to know if they understand the impact that credit card companies are having on the recovery.

We hear all the time that people like Bernanke say that the recovery will be driven by the recovery of the housing market.

The Fed and Treasury lower rates and pump money into the economy, in theory to provide more capital and incentive to borrow.

But then credit card companies lower the credit lines of even their best, highest rated customers, lowering their FICO scores by increasing their debt to available credit ratio. FICO scores go down for the most credit worth, and the cheap money that the Fed and Treasury have worked so hard (and spent so much of our taxpayer dollars) to generate sit idle because folks can't qualify for loans at rates that they can afford.

I have no suggestions to solve this. I'd like to know if our lawmakers and leaders (1) understand this problem, and (2) have any ideas.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
wcnghj
May 11, 2009 10:10 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@humphrmi:

If they pay in full each month before the card reports to the credit bureaus, then they will always have 0% utilization.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
humphrmi
May 11, 2009 11:10 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@wcnghj: That's not the point. And zero utilization is worse.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
wcnghj
May 12, 2009 1:43 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@humphrmi: Some have claimed that 1 percent is better than 0. Just let a small % in the single digits report.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 11, 2009 8:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Are you going to post a video of the interview?

Reply
1 replies
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Matt_SF
May 11, 2009 9:01 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Ask why it is reasonable, or ethical, to allow an industry to make a sizable portion of it's profits from fleecing it's customers with a growing list of ridiculous fees.

It's one thing to make money, but to have a significant portion of credit card lender profits coming from the fine print is a little ridiculous.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Con Seannery '09: Illegal in 1 Giz
May 11, 2009 9:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Way to go, guys! Now that you're famous, are you going to sell out to those mainstream guys? Just remember, you were Consumerists before it was cool!

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
starrion
May 11, 2009 9:10 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Vastly increasing interest rates:
Bad- People who can pay their bills at a reasonable rate go into default because of the action of the CC company itself.


Solution: Interest rates increases only apply to new purchases


Fees: $39 for a day late, especially if it's late because they sat on it until it was late?
How about NO.


Solution: Postmark date. When they sent it is when it was paid. Or the transfer date if doing direct billpay.


Universal Default: no
Interest on fees or interest: no


The companies can decide what your limit is, as long as they don't set your limit below your balance.

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 12, 2009 6:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@starrion: @starrion: Amen! Increases only apply to new balances!

Several of my credit cards sent me notices at the beginning of the year increasing my rate by anywhere from 5% - 10%. I hadn't made a late payment, gone over my credit limit, or anything. When I called them for answers, they simply said \"the cost of credit had gone up\" for them. There was no recourse. I either had to close my account to avoid the increase, or eat it the new APR costs. And they can do this at any time??? How is that a contract when they can change the terms at any time, but we cannot?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Stephen Cox
May 12, 2009 1:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"Solution: Interest rates increases only apply to new purchases\"

Amen to that. I got screwed by Bank of America when they bait and switched me from a 9.9% life-of-the balance transfer and then jacked it to 24.4% two months later, just because \"they could\" (paid on time and more than minimum). There was nothing I could do about it. Isn't that illegal? Now I just have to pay that card off and tell them where they can stick that little piece of plastic of theirs...

Reply
\"user-pic\"
aerick79
May 12, 2009 2:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Stephen Cox: Did your Balance Transfer post as a Cash adv or a purchase? It sounds like you had a promo apr, for the 9.9 then after the promo you got hit with the reg cash adv apr.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Eyebrows McGee (now with more baby!)
May 12, 2009 10:59 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@starrion: \"Solution: Postmark date.\"

Which is the rule in like every other realm of life, oddly. :)

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
HRHKingFridayXX
May 11, 2009 9:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

How about this- are there any plans to tie savings rates to credit card rates? Seeing as most major CC comps are banks as well, I find it offensive that they can charge upwards of 20pc for my irresponsible neighbor, but I, with no CC debt have no incentive to put my money away. A possible solution could be to increase incentives for reserves by subsidizing savings account interest.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 12, 2009 6:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@HRHKingFridayXX: Agreed! At the same time I was getting notices of APR increases of 5% - 10% on my credit cards, I went to purchase a CD. A national bank was offering 0.80% interest. Are you kidding?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
econobiker
May 12, 2009 2:37 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@HRHKingFridayXX: 20% is a GOOD rate now- when they jack people's cards to 27.99% for no good reason....

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Shoelace
May 11, 2009 9:35 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Ask why the credit card companies won't stop sending those infernal blank checks that they beg you to use. There should be an opt-out. They're an additional risk if your bill is stolen before arriving, you can't just throw them out (you need to shred) since they have your account info on them, and killing those trees is environmentally unfriendly. Of course they hope a few suckers will actually use them and pay dearly for the privilege, but if someone hasn't used a single one in the last 15 years I'd say it's pretty clear they're not going to. I once asked a CSR if they could stop sending me them. He laughed and said they'll NEVER stop sending them.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 12, 2009 11:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Shoelace: Actuaslly, the blank checks should be an opt-IN,not an opt-out. You shouldn't get them at all unless you ask for them.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
the_gank
May 11, 2009 9:44 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Pls. ask them to STOP all the CC companies to STOOOOOP increasing APR just because they *beep* can just to milk more $ from the taxpayers.

Thanks

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
NF-Wolf Pryde
May 11, 2009 9:53 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I want to know HOW MY CREDIT IS DETERMINED. Some clearly published \"rubric\" to determine your \"grade.\" These companies get to judge me to see if I'm a good credit risk, I at least want to see how they're coming to X or Y conclusion, especially since it's such an important number now that I'm looking to buy a house. I remember growing up (which officially ended yesterday (kind of), so yay college graduation) and having debates with my folks over how to build my credit. Nobody knew exactly HOW it worked. Some people even told me I should rack up a credit card and just keep paying the minimum so that it'd \"build my credit and it looks like they'll make money on me.\" Thank god I avoided that advice. Who else gets stuck with advice like that?

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
wcnghj
May 11, 2009 10:03 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@NF-Wolf Pryde: myfico.com , click on education

==

If you get a CC and pay it in full each month, that will be better than just paying the minimum.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
parkavery
May 12, 2009 7:10 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@wcnghj: I think NF-Wolf Pryde is asking - and I would agree - for the specific formula. Sure it's \"35% payment history\" and all that jazz but what is that? It turns out to be a number at the end, but there must be a formula that gets you there.

I would like the Consumerists to ask about credit score transparency (above) and, as a follow-up, also ask why it isn't readily accessible. Seeing my credit report once a year doesn't help me. If I'm being judged by it, I want access to it all the time. You wouldn't apply to college without knowing your SAT scores and your high school grades, would you?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 11, 2009 10:01 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Shouldn't you be interviewing Joe Biden instead? He's kinda the guy who made all this possible...

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Hemlock26
May 11, 2009 10:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

On the subject of universal default, some of the companies have since discontinued that practice. Great for those who weren't affected by it, but I have yet to hear about any compensation/reparation/atonement for those of us who were.

Quick case in point, three years ago, BOA slashed my limit from $20,400 to $10,800, putting me near my limit. A couple of months after that, Chase began charging me default interest \"upon a review of my credit.\" BOA followed suit with the default interest soon after. I had never gone over my limit, ever, was never late with Chase, was late with MBNA (now BOA) only once almost a full year before my limit was cut by BOA, and was never late with any other creditor. I worked my rear off for a year to pay those cards down and transfer their balances to other cards. Sorry, I guess the case wasn't so quick in point.


These companies have ceased using universal default because they had their arms twisted by the public and Congress, but I believe they should also be made to refund that interest to their comsumers. Otherwise, it seems to me that we are condoning they're robbery of us.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Jason Rose
May 11, 2009 10:27 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

My Question: Why can banks be allowed to change APR's on existing balances, shouldn't the new APR only be applied to purchases and balances move forward from the date of change?

Case in point, Chase buys WAMU and jacks APR up 3 points, no particular reason other than: \"we can\".

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
aerick79
May 12, 2009 2:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@Jason Rose: Whats great about that is, The CC company is change your agreement, and if you don't like U can close your acct with the Lower APR.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 11, 2009 10:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Given the importance of credit scores, I think both of the following should be required:

1) Yearly free access to your FICO score(s). This should be the same as the free once-a-year access to the underlying reports. You shouldn't have to pay to see what other companies will see about you.

2) Credit card companies should not be able to decide what they will/will not post about an account to your credit history. Citibank posts the amount owed, but refuses to post credit limits. This means that any amount owed can look like 100% utilization of available credit, hurting a user's credit score unfairly.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
PopulistOutrage
May 11, 2009 10:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I know Consumerist wouldn't ask this - why is the administration so determined to punish responsible consumers and help irresponsible consumers? Credit card \"reforms\" only help those incapable of paying their bills on time and not buying things they cannot afford, while hurting those who can pay their bills on time and stay in budget. Why is Consumerist even supporting this, does the blog only support dead beat consumers now?

Reply
4 replies
\"user-pic\"
hegemonyhog
May 13, 2009 11:50 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

@PopulistOutrage: I've never had a late payment, never gone over the limit on a single credit card, and I've had credit for nine years.

Every card I currently use has had one of two things happen - the limit's been arbitrarily lowered or the APR's been arbitrarily raised. I receive no explanation other than \"a thorough review\" having been conducted.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Justin Harper
May 12, 2009 5:50 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@PopulistOutrage: No, the *country* only supports dead-beat consumers now. Duh.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
vladthepaler
May 12, 2009 3:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@PopulistOutrage:

There are certainly cases in which that's a good question, but I don't understand it in the context of credit card reform. How does requiring statements and policies to be written in plain English hurt people who pay their bills on time?

Reply
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 12, 2009 2:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@PopulistOutrage:

Because they are abusing good customers too! My co-worker had her cc cancelled because she hadn't used it, and Chase customer service told her \"they didn't need her business\" when she called to question it. Now her credit score is effected.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
TorrentFreak
May 11, 2009 11:14 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

If I fail to pay on a credit contract the entity I am in debt to has all the power to do what they want to my credit report. Further, they can screw it up and I must prove myself innocent.

The system is unfair. If they screw up or fail to meet their contractual obligations I as a consumer have no recourse to fight back against them in the same way they can fight back against me.

So my question would be what will you as the President do to make it fair?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
sspeedracer
May 11, 2009 11:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Who fucking cares? Credit cards are a vehicle to transfer money between debtor and creditor. Its a contract. A legally binding contract. Tough shit if the debtor didn't read it. Tough shit if the creditor can't collect. Let them both LEARN from their mistakes and take responsibility.
I should not have to bail out anymore assholes that don't know how to manage their money. We all will just crash harder, the US consumption is not sustainable no matter how many dollars the Fed creates.

Moreover, what is credit? An imaginary ability to generate more pretend money backed by nothing other than the US Govt pretending US currency has some intrinsic value. The joke is on us. China already figured it out. Which country produces? Which country consumes? Pretty fucking obvious where things are headed.

Stop subjugating the issues! This is all about how corporations can cover their asses via government transfer of wealth from the common tax payer to the elite sitting on the board of directors. It ain't socialism, its called FASCISM!

This \"progressive with libertarian leanings\" wants you to ask the WH Admin, if they could go FUCK THEMSELVES?

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
TorrentFreak
May 11, 2009 11:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@sspeedracer: I agree 100%. I don't have a credit card and with the way things are going I never will. The Fed printing money won't help a damn thing. 1. The dollar is based on nothing and 2. Inflation that follows large money infusions is hidden tax that hits us ALL later on down the road.The government should encourage people to no longer use Credit Cards and getting into mountains of debt. I bet the Credit industry would take notice when no one wants their mafioso loans.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
sanjsrik
May 12, 2009 12:19 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I just recently canceled my PAID OFF Chase card. I had NEVER been late on a payment, NEVER been behind in any way AND was early paying off the balance by 2 months. Yet, when I asked the CSR if closing the account would be detrimental to my credit rating she transferred me to some other brain trust member who said categorically that it WOULD negatively impact my credit rating.

How about we ask the administration to have the FICO organizations PUBLISH how they come up with our credit ratings? I am tired of it being \"ask the expert\" and see if this one agrees with that one. How come there are no published parameters about how credit scores are calculated? Everyone you ask has a different \"method\" they \"think\" the credit card morons are using.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
sanjsrik
May 12, 2009 12:27 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Does it bother ANYONE else that the Fico people posted a cash dividend when the rest of the market is tanking?

[www.fico.com]

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
sanjsrik
May 12, 2009 12:32 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Last post, I want consumerist to ask Fico to open their software. Decisions that affect millions should not be made by a private company.

This should be in the hands of a non-profit or government institution, NOT a privately held company. The numbers that FICO produces affect everyone, therefore, it should be public knowledge HOW our numbers are calculated. Who knows, maybe the geniuses got it wrong and they don't know it.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
Underpants Gnome
May 12, 2009 1:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@sanjsrik: Yes! This is what I came here to ask as well.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
silyolpooh
May 12, 2009 1:07 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

If my tax dollars paid to bail out my creditors, why am I the one being penalized with out-of-nowhere increases in APR? If the government had just given me my share of the bailout instead, I would have paid off the cards.


Now it seems like these creditors have the government money (my tax money) AND my payment money. And that ain't right.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
econobiker
May 12, 2009 2:48 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@silyolpooh: Seconded, please ask this question.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
silyolpooh
May 12, 2009 1:12 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

It seems to me that credit (FICO) score should NOT go down if a credit line is paid in full and closed by the consumer. If anything, it has shown that you can be responsible with money, and in control of your available credit.


On the other hand it does nothing to benefit the economy or lenders when consumers are strongarmed into keeping open credit lines because of the veiled threat of a FICO adjustment.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Robert Burke
May 12, 2009 3:20 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Dear Consumerist,

As you know, JP Morgan Chase Bank a/k/a \"Chase Bank USA, N.A.\" took $25 Billion (thats with a B) in TARP money, and went out and purchased Washington Mutual (in addition to other things like outsource U.S. call center jobs).

In October, I decided it was time to get a credit card so that I could do things like rent cars without hassles (and other types of interstate commerce activities that we just aren't able to carry out freely without credit cards - where's that commerce clause when you need it?) when I travel to Miami to visit my girlfriend, who is down there for a year pursuing a Master of Law degree. Well, WaMu came through and extended me a Credit Card with a $2300 limit and a 14 month promotional APR of 0% (dubbed the WaMu Real Values Program). And then, their toxic assets were called, and WaMu came crashing down.

So Chase, now all leveraged up with TARP money buys WaMu and begins controlling my account at some point in January. They give me this lovely message in my Jan 23rd Statement:

Your account is now owned by Chase Bank USA,N.A. See enclosed Privacy Policy. If you are a new Chase customer you need to contact us to exercise your privacy preferences.
PLEASE NOTE: Effective February 1, 2009, we will no longer offer the WaMu Real Values discount program.

As you guessed it, my Effective APR went 0.00% to 23.96%. They even took extra care to make sure this new APR was applied to my previous cycle's average daily balance. Gee, thanks Chase!

So, I'm taking Chase up on their offer and I'm exercising my privacy preferences by forwarding my Nov08 , Dec08, and Jan09, statements to The Consumerist. U.S. consumers shouldn't be forced to pay off your bad bets through these devious practices.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
okrick
May 12, 2009 4:19 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Ask them why why not make the companies comply with the usury law of the state of residence of the individual receiving the loan instead of the lender's state.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
ShadowFalls
May 12, 2009 5:12 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I think the credit card company shouldn't be allowed to modify your agreement after it has been decided on. Those clauses should not be allowed. Arbitration should also be not allowed.

If you sign up for a credit card, they shouldn't be able to reduce your credit limit or change your APR without realistic just cause. Their reasoning should be reliant on your business transactions with them and them alone.

I had a case of a credit card where they reduced the limit and never even notified me, I found out on my own. Given I had not used it in awhile, but they reduced it to a limit making that \"awhile\" be forever.

Also, no stores promotions with the \"No Interest, No payments till so and so\". Sure people should read the fine print which says you must pay it off entirely by that date or they charge the full accumulated amount. When you read the big, bold text that says \"No interest\" to you, to most everyone it logically translates into \"No interest\" till that period, not it accumulates till that period if you didn't pay it off.

There is some sneaky advertising with credit cards, that itself should see much more scrutiny.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
RoosterCockburn
May 12, 2009 5:22 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

My first question would be, do you think Meg is as cute as everyone else does? Depending on the answer, the followup question should either be \"All right my man!\" or \"What the fuck is wrong with you? This chick is beautiful.\"

That is all.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
tz
May 12, 2009 11:54 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

For a practical question - why aren't credit card interest and student loan interest (which are hard or impossible to discharge in bankruptcy) tax-deductible like mortgage interest? I think the rule should be anything that is restricted in bankruptcy should be deductible.

(Bonus OT question, why can I only deduct $3000 in capital losses per year even after the market dump).

Why to fill the positions in your administration did you just change which Goldman Sachs insiders are in charge instead of finding people who aren't just Wall street lobbyist tax cheats who continue to soak the taxpayer and send cash back to the rich on wall street?

How can I have any hope when you and congress are owned by the banksters:
[marketplace.publicradio.org]
The bill will likely make things worse, not better after the lobbyists are through and you will sign it.

If the ABS/CDO/whatever backing up my credit card debt is selling at $0.20 on the dollar, why can't I just buy the note and cancel my debt at $0.20 on the dollar? It is probably in the Federal Reserve Toxic Waste Superfund account, so you might have it. (Same with mortgages - the debt is selling at $0.25, which would avoid foreclosure, but for some reason we still must foreclose and turn cities into war zones of abandoned houses)

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
evilluckycharms
May 12, 2009 12:34 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

here's my question: are there any intentions of penalizing the companies that have underhandedly begun abusing the time they have left to take advantage of their customers? for example, the infamous no-notice, no-reason credit limit reductions to the tens of thousands of good-standing amex customers. tens of thousands of people have taken an undeserved hit to their credit score just because amex tried to bait people into spending more than they could afford. now they're rescinding their offers because they will no longer have legal avenues to exploit the fees and interest loopholes to drain the suffering consumer of every last penny.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
econobiker
May 12, 2009 2:51 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@evilluckycharms: And this credit report (score) is more important due to its use in employment, insurance rates, etc

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
dwhuntley
May 12, 2009 12:40 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Here's a good question....When will Earth Wind and Fire be playing at the whitehouse again, and when do tickets go on sale? Personally, I'm holding out for the George Clinton and the Parliament Funkadelics.

Who needs good governing when you've George Clinton bee-a-tch!

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
aerick79
May 12, 2009 2:24 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Hi Everyone, I'm a CSR for a CC company. What I love about CC is that, if times are hard and you can't make your payment. You the Cardholder, wants the CC company to setup a payment plan, or lower your APR. It's funny because the CC company didn't make you spend all of that money.


The other cool thing is that the CC company will let you settle your accout. SO, If you own 20k and could easly settle for like 10 or 12k. That's like free Plasma. NO wonder they are going under.

Reply
2 replies
\"user-pic\"
hegemonyhog
May 13, 2009 12:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@aerick79: \"What I love about CC is that, if times are hard and you can't make your payment. You the Cardholder, wants the CC company to setup a payment plan, or lower your APR. It's funny because the CC company didn't make you spend all of that money.\"

How about when I owe $1,000 on a $4,000 card at 11.99% APR in March and then I all of a sudden owe $1,000 on a $2,000 card at 20.99% APR? It's funny because I didn't make the CC company hurt my credit rating.

Reply
\"user-pic\"
du2vye
May 12, 2009 5:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

\"The other cool thing is that the CC company will let you settle your accout. SO, If you own 20k and could easly settle for like 10 or 12k. That's like free Plasma. NO wonder they are going under.\"

No it's not. They are collecting interest for taking the risk of allowing me to use their money. All the fees are gravy. When an account is settled usually by that time the customer is paying both interest and fees. The fees can easily add up to 3/4th's of the amount owed.

After the bankruptcy act, credit cards have seemed very unmotivated to settle. They are unmotivated to reward even good customers - just read complaints about lowering limits for no reason or canceling cards that haven't been used.

Their actions felt like a backlash as a way to undercut Obama's stimulus plan. Credit cards have not been acting like responsible institutions that people are able to trust. They have been acting more like pay-day lenders with hidden fees at every turn. Often they do hit the person who is struggling and make it impossible for them to pay off. It's a form of servitude which is not reasonable or responsible.

As it is, they get away with charging interest on interest. That's enough profit for a king right there.

Reply
","","","","","","","
\"user-pic\"
vladthepaler
May 12, 2009 3:03 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Ask about ending mandatory binding arbitration. I know that's not just a credit card issue, but credit cards are a good place to start.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 12, 2009 3:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Why should a bank be allowed to change terms on an account that you have agreed to close out and not use. The terms of my account were changed the first time allowing me to opt out and close the account which I did. After this my payments were increased again and I had no option to remain with the same payment schedule. If you are not using the card and have closed the account it only seems right to me that the terms cannot be changed whenever the bank chooses to do so. I have made all payments on time and have never been late and pay well above the minimum payment. The card was only carrying a large balance due to emergency circumstances for which I had no option but to use my line of credit.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 12, 2009 3:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Why is the FICA score so important?The other day I applied for a American Express Card but was denied because I had no credit!

I have $250000:- in the Bank, I have two houses paid in full, 3 cars and one Harley paid in full!

And no debt what so ever!

Everything I buy I pay cash!

This only shows that the Credit Cards Company's has to much power!

I think this system is very bad! They don't promote people living without debt!

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
MrFalcon
May 12, 2009 3:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Hey, how about a reader meet-up if you're going to be down this way? I know there isn't a product draw like when the Giz has had their reader meets, but plenty of people around the beltway here have learned a great deal from this site. When will y'all be around? What kind of time will you have?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 12, 2009 3:32 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

B of A urged me to pay my taxes with their friggling card all Spring long. So, on April 14 I checked my available balance — nearly $4800. So, I paid my taxes online. I checked my balance with them on April 16 and discovered that I was $1300 over limit! They reduced my available credit on — ready for this — April 15th. Shysters!!!! How can anyone expect our credit based economy to recover when the American consumer can't trust his bank, his mortgage company and especially his credit card companies! These bastards have turned me into a Bolshevik. I'd happily stand them up in front of a brick wall and put a bullet through their hearts!

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 12, 2009 3:40 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I had charge cards TURN PREDETORY you know like Sears,Chase plus all that outsourcing ,downsizing right sizing an Older Women paid like crap and treated worse I played by the rules and i am not a spendthrift ,I was a target for Bullies,mobbing and you know the saying you wouldn't eat in that resturant if you saw the kitchen ---you would bank at those banks if you saw the back room. Such a BIG PROBLEMthose predetory lenders need reform. I want MY MONEY BACK You tell your HIGH PAID LAWYERS most people are cuaght in the middle of Financial Hell. NO RAISES,NO PROMOTION NO PROTECTION from workplace violence and treat yourself to predetory lending JUST TRYING TO SURVIVE in low pay crap jobs ----I am more ethical ,hard work and financial savvy than most I had NO CONTROL OF THIS FIASCO

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 12, 2009 3:46 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

1) I can put stop payment on one check, why can't I stop one charge on my card? The bank told me the only way to do this was to put a hold on my account.2) Why do charges show up the same day they are made and it takes credits three days to show up on my account?I think both of these things need to be fixed. Thanks for the forum and the work you are doing.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 12, 2009 3:48 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I am OUTRAGED by what is going on w/ the banks. FIRST they get BILLIONS of dollars to bail them out of the mess THEY created themselves ( and we taxpayers have to pay for it) and then they have the audacity to increase interest rates on customers like myself who were never late on a payment, always pay more than minimum balance and are geting away with it!!!! My interest rate went from 9.9 to 21% and I didn't do ANYTHING wrong! THERE HAS TO BE SOMETHING DONE ABOUT THIS!!!! How is this anything less than pure theft. Once again, middle America is getting screwed. If you're not rich or poor...you get shafted on a daily basis.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Pat Navadomskis
May 12, 2009 3:49 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I wrote to Jamie Diamon, Hilary clinton OWL
AARP NOW WOMEN FOR HIRE, BULLY BUSTERS
MY ATTORNEY GENERAL LISA MADIGAN


I WANT MY MONEY BACK FROM 1994
YOU TURNED PREDETORY AS A PUNISHMENT FOR THE BILLS NOT BEING PAID AND SCREWED UP PAPERWORK--YOU PITTED EVERYONE AGAIST EACH OTHER WHILE YOU PARTIED ON RIPPING OFF THE ENTIRE AMERICAN WORKFORCE.
LOW PAY JOBS,NO RAISE AS A PUNISHMENT
SCREW YOU WE ARE NOT INCOMPETANT LITTLE KIDS
THE RUINNING OF PEOPLE'S CREDIT, PREDETORY LENDING
YOU NEED TO FIX IT I CAN NOT REACH IN THOSE COMPUTERS AND DO REVISIONS BUT YOU CAN AND YOU BETTER.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 12, 2009 4:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Isn't it time the American consumer got a break? The Big Dudes have been piling on outrageously, from every direction. Can't we get a fair shake just this once? Regardless of whether we can afford huge campaign contributions and expensive lobbyists?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 12, 2009 4:07 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Iwanna know why even thow i've payed my balences down I keep getting these letters asking if I wanna cancel my cards and pay off the balence or,take interest hike exsplain that one to me please?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 12, 2009 4:23 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

We could afford our Credit Cards till the congress let the oil Co. charge us up to 4.00 per gall. My husband was spending 600.00 a month just to go to work. Now the banks are surviving on our tax $'s and up our rates on all of our cards. Why does this congress care more about the Banks and Corp. of this country then the peolple who pay them?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 12, 2009 5:12 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

My first experience with the \"new credit card companies\" was to have one of my BOA cards decreased by $10,000. I am one of those people that usually pays off their credit card on a monthly basis. I also refinanced my home recently and had a credit score of 803. I called BOA and was told that they did this because I rarely used the card and I had \"enough\" credit. I did use Consumerist to find BOA email addresses. I did get a response and was reinstated to my original amount. Again, it needs to be stressed that the act of cutting my line would have detrimentally affected by credit score. The second event was with Discover. They raised by interest rate by 3 points. There was no debating with them. I do not want to cancel the card as I have had that card the longest. I have now put Discover in the drawer. I think the banks and credit card companies really need to decide who they want to keep as customers.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
du2vye
May 12, 2009 6:08 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I had an old debt re-aged. This is illegal. I discovered complaining to the credit reporting agency was a rubber-stamping process and it did little. I have not kept records that are 20 years old (the age of the original debt). I also discovered I have very little right of personal action against the company that re-aged the debt. The company has a p.o. box so I can't even contact them by return receipt. Standard mail is returned and they have never made an attempt to contact me. The debt just sits on my account and they duplicated it twice.

According to fair debt collections act, the only action I can take is against the credit reporting agencies and as far as they are concerned, they are doing their part to \"validate the debt\". Well of course these guys are going to say it's valid. They are just verifying social security number, name, address and that's it.

Upon research I discovered junk debt buyers have increased by 500% since the bankruptcy act limited consumer protections. A good share of the debt these buyers are involved with are debts that have already been paid off, re-aging debt and debts that are illegal to collect.

Why not restore consumer protections before the bankruptcy act to prevent this type of activity?

I should be able to directly contact creditors that are able to put something on my credit report without depending on the credit reporting agency to do it for me.

I should be able to take individual action against junk debt if I can't get results any other way. The current protections offer very little in the way of enforcement against debt that is not yours.

The burden of proof should be on them to prove, not me that it's not mine - how would I have proof I never owed something if I never owed it?

2) Mandatory arbitration should be abolished if someone wants to opt out.

3) Changes in terms should not be retro-active on past debt. I can understand new charges (maybe), but not charges I have already made. I have a hard time with cards that I've signed up with offering a fixed rate charge and then switching to an adjustable rate a few months after I've used the card. I am constantly looking for a new card.

4) Universal default is a just wrong. I had a hospital bill go into collections by err (I was in the hospital at the time and they couldn't contact me?) They removed the collections off my credit report - but it was too late and I had other accounts say that was the reason for raising my rates. They didn't care if it was an error.

5) I recently had a card limit reduced by over 50%. I had never been late. The reason? \"No open real estate accounts\". I own my own home. No threat of foreclosure. And they have a problem with that? I got no notice and suddenly my card was at limit. I carry a card for emergencies. What if I was out of town and suddenly had no credit?

6) The only good thing about the previous card was that they were the worst credit card I've ever had. They'd change dates for payments due constantly, used bad methods of computing finance charges that are illegal now and if there was a devious practice, they'd do it. I needed to get rid of them and did.

But if they are now crying about business being bad, after pulling stupid, dump and predatory tricks - well then, they deserve to go out of business. It has nothing to do with the industry has a whole.

7) Not all business deserve consideration when they say \"business is bad\". Sometimes a lot of the big companies have adopted such anti-consumer practices that they created their own results. No one wants to do business with them. I see that more and more in heavily monopolized industries. Banking is no exception.

8) Reinforce local credit unions.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
PhiTauBill
May 12, 2009 6:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Just got an credit card offer in the mail and I couldn't believe the fine print on the \"0% fixed* for the first six billing cycles\" financing offer.


At first, it seemed like a typical offer, but the fine print denoted by the asterisk(*) revealed the following astonishing statement:


*During the first six billing cycles, 3% of the amount of each trasfer or check, with a minimum fee of $5 and a maximum fee of $50.


Wow, 3% of the transfer for EACH of six months?!?!? Hello, 36% for that six month period, boys and girls (on each balance transfers of $1,500 or less).


The bank in question was www.barclaycardus.com.

Reply
1 replies
\"user-pic\"
consumerfan
May 12, 2009 8:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

@PhiTauBill: Actually, that means you're are charged between $5 and $50 for each balance transfer done during your first six months.

So two transfers of $1,500 costs you $45 each ($90 total).

So basically, that's the equivalent of 12.5% APR for the first 3 months... hmm...that sucks. Less than you thought, though.

Reply
","","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 12, 2009 7:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I have good credit, I always pay over what I am supposed to each month, but they raised my interest anyway. How come they can do this? I feel like I am being penalized for being a good customer.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 12, 2009 8:05 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Please ask what protection does the spouse of a credit-card abuser have after the death of that spouse? I'm an authorized user on some accounts, not involved with other accounts at all. If he dies early there is no way I can pay those bills. I've begged him to stop spending, but he won't. I don't use the accounts as I can't afford to, but my name is attached to those accounts as an \"authorized user\". What options do I have upon my notifying creditors of his death?

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 12, 2009 8:30 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I believe we now have the technology available to address Credit Card fraud. The use of either or both voice or fingerprint ID would eliminate all the intermediate companies wanting to \"insure you\" from someone getting your credit card, SS#, Drivers license to \"take this identity\" to create their thievery.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 12, 2009 9:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I am a small business owner and use my credit cards to pay for trade shows, materials, etc. Suddenly my credit line was cut and the apr went sky high! I am trying to resolve this matter with the bank .I have good credit and have paid down, loans, lines of credit and have a good history. How can the economy recover if banks are putting on the squeeze to small businesses like me.?I wouyld like to see a reasonable fixed rate of rwevolving crecit that you could actually pay down. I was a victim of the 3.99% for the life of the balence, except the due date was changed and was latre by a day. I would like to see a rate that would be fair(so you can actually pay it down, not teaser rates and then rates that go sky high to keep everyone in debt.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
curthibbs
May 12, 2009 10:09 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I have a small business (one person business) and I have a business credit card from Bank of America. BofA recently raised the interest rate on this card from 9.99% to 19.99%.

I called them to opt-out of the rate increase and close the account, but they told that was only allowed for personal accounts, not business accounts.

So, I would like to make sure that these reforms apply to small business credit card aacounts as well as personal credit card accounts (big businesses probably have the clout to get good terms already).

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 12, 2009 10:55 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Why are the credit card companies allowed, when they close your account, allowed to register that as a negative on our credit score?Why are they allowed to penalize you when you close an account? this is pertinent because w/ identity theft you are penalized for unauthorized use so way not close them down?

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 13, 2009 12:16 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Why the hell did Bank of America tell their customers that they were raising their interest rate unless they called in before May 1? If you use your CC after that time it defaults to the higher rate!Correct me if I am wrong but didn't we just bail there ass out to the tune of a billion plus dollars?That is some kind of logic!WH from CO

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 13, 2009 3:38 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I have sent this comment to you via e-mail at tips@consumerist.com, but I thought to post it here because the may be many others who've had this experience with the card companies.

On two of my credit cards I noticed that I was being charged for late fees. Now, in order to make sure I paid them on time I had called both card companies and requested that I have my due date set to the 25th of the month. They agreed and it was that way for many years. Every month I paid them on the 15th or the month and I was never late. So how was it that suddenly I was late and was getting charged late fees. Oh, and by the way, by the time I discovered this, they had also raised my interest rate from 11% to 24 %. So I did some back tracking looking closely at my statements for the past 6 months. What was happening is that each month they were moving my due date to an earlier date. Because I didn't catch this I wound up paying late two months in a row, was charged late fees for 2 months ($39 each time) and my interest rate was more than doubled.

I called both companies and told them that I was going to file a complaint with the State of New York. Citibank who I've done business with since the early 80's agreed to rescind the late fees, return my interest rate to what it was before they changed it and fix my due date on the 25th of the month. They did everything I requested and I continue to do business with them. They made some weak attempt to tell me that they did this because I was such a good customer and moving the due date was somehow a reward for being such a good customer? I told them that was garbage and not to insult my intelligence.

The other company: which I can't remember at the moment, offered to rescind the late fees but refused to lower the interest rate. I didn't even get around to discussing fixing the due date problem. I cut up the card and told them to close the account immediately. I had done business with them for close to 20 years.

Now, for everyone like me who knows that credit card companies are in a competitive environment and since my credit is good, I have lots of alternatives and if they treat me unfairly, I can do business with someone else. Many people do not have this option and are unaware of what their options are with the credit card companies. I hope a regulation effectively stopping this practice can be enacted.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
BrooklynGuy
May 13, 2009 4:07 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Three words: class action waivers. Huge issue with credit card companies right now.

You may not realize this, but when you sign a cardmember agreement, buried in the fine print is something called a \"class action waiver.\" It is language that says that, should the customer decide to sue the credit card company, he/she cannot sue as part of a class action but must submit to individualized arbitration. Two problems: first, the credit card companies almost always win in arbitration. Secondly, what if the customer has only been screwed out of 2 dollars? The customer won't have the incentive to sue in the first place. If the credit card company screws one million customers out of 2 dollars each, no individual consumer has the incentive to sue. The only solution is a class action lawsuit.

Now, courts in some states have rules that these \"class action waivers\" are \"unconscionable\" and may not be inserted in agreements, because consumers don't realize what they're signing away and these waivers basically immunize credit card companies from liability if they screw over consumers. But some pro-business courts in some states have allowed these provisions to be inserted into cardmember agreements. We need federal legislation banning \"class action\" waivers. Customers must have some legal avenue of redress if they are being taken advantage of.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 13, 2009 5:00 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

I recently had a car repair.I took the car to Firestone was offered a Firestone credit card. No intrest for three months.Needless to a\\say they were not able to fix my car.I was charged for their efforts nearly five hundred dollars.The first bill came and I was two days late with the payment.I went into the store paid the entire bill.Two weeks later I received a bill 35 dollars interest and 17 dollars late fee.I won't buy anything from firestone anymore.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
sleze69
May 13, 2009 10:54 AM
Moderate |Flag for review

Ask him if he has ever read Atlas Shrugged and, if so, please explain how the government's bailing out of failing businesses is any different than what plays out during the book.


Ask him if big businesses are having their bad decisions forgiven in the form of bailouts, what incentives do big businesses in the future have against taking undue risks?

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
hegemonyhog
May 13, 2009 12:02 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

My question: can there be a move to make receipt and explanation of your credit score an automatic condition of receiving credit?

I'm opted in to so many things I don't want as a result of having a credit card, from ads to various forms of \"protection\" to arbitration clauses, yet I have to take affirmative and sometimes onerous steps to figure out the foundation score that affects all the credit I have.

Reply
","","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 13, 2009 1:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Given its monopoly position in credit scoring, should Fair Isaac be a regulated utility?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 13, 2009 1:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I have a question - what is going to be done to stop credit card companies from jacking up rates in anticipation of the credit card legislation passing? I got a letter from my card last month telling me they were doubling my interest rate. I have never made a late payment and my credit score is over 800. The only reason they are doing it is because this legislation will prevent them from doing it in the future. But something has to be done to prevent them from raising rates across the board before the bill is passed.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
tworld
May 13, 2009 1:38 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

Why does it take Congress to FORCE credit card companies to do the right thing? Main Street is their bread and butter, so why rape and pillage the very same Main Street customers that keep them in business? We do not begrudge them a profit, but they are sneaky and dishonest to reap the billions in profits they make each year.

I closed my American Express account years ago because I didn't see any reason for ME to pay THEM for the \"privilege\" of using their card. My husband and I have one Chase credit card that we use for everything, we pay the total amount due every month and never pay interest charges.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 13, 2009 1:59 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

When I call the credit card company and ask them \"How much do I have to pay today to stop interest charges from accruing\" they can never tell me an exact amount.Why is this?

Also one of my cc's bills are often postmarked one week after the statement date. Is this legal?

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 13, 2009 2:03 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I'm one of the people who never made a late payment, always paid more than the minimum due if there was a balance and still had my terms changed from 8.9 to 20%. I had the option of closing the account and keeping the old terms or keeping the account open and accepting usurous rates. I chose to close the account rather than let them take advantage of me. The downside? I will experience a drop in my FICO score for closing out my oldest account.

Are the legislators considering anything retroactive that would allow customers like myself to go back to the old terms and have their accounts reinstated?????

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 13, 2009 2:26 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

QUESTIONS TO ASK:

1. Europe, rather than using credit cards, instead mostly uses debit cards, which have no default problem. Shouldn't U.S. laws encourage the credit card industry to offer debit cards, not credit cards?
[banks hinder debit card use in various ways; eg,
by default the debit account is also the checking account, leading to more check bounces]

2. Should over-the-limit fees be forbidden,
since the credit card user should instead be refused the credit card transaction?
[yes, there are monthly fees that move the account
over the limit, but nonetheless over-the-limit fees should be disallowed]

3. Can/should the Federal Government return/allow state oversight over credit cards, including various caps states placed on interest rates?
[For the past few years, many credit industry problems were identified by the states,
which were then forbidden from acting against those industry problems.]

4. Are some credit card interest rates usurious?
Years ago, didn't criminal organizations charge those interest rates? [this is the street lore]

5. Should credit card companies be supported by law for debt collection? [In the past, credit card debts were considered unsecured loans, but recent laws seem to have more-or-less securetized those loans with the user's assets and salary; credit card companies' gain benefit by giving large credit to everybody, then having/asking the Federal Government to enforce the credit companies' wishes]

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 13, 2009 2:28 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

My daughter turned 18 in March 08. She is a full-time college student and has taken out student direct loans. We received a collections call regarding a credit card debt, that was for a credit card purchased by someone else, before my daughter was 18, i.e. before she was able to legally enter into a contract. After we did a little research we found about 20 other credit accounts, all in default that were on my daughters credit report, from all 3 agencies. None of them were hers. I have been trying to get them removed for six months. Some have been closed by the issuer, but not removed. She is likely to have massive problems borrowing non-student loans, if she ever wants to, because of these bogus reports.

Proposal - Credit reporting agencies must be forced to remove any item they can not prove is valid! It is a form of libel, to falsely report that someone defaults on credit. Today their defense is that they only report what is sent to them. However, the information is used to increase the cost of borrowing for the consumer, the user is hurt financially. Victims of false reporting should be able to sue the agencies for damages.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 13, 2009 2:33 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I am a senior citizen, newly retired trying to pay off my credit cards. I am never late and always pay more than the minimun due. I almost cried when i saw that some of the credits that had come way down skyrocketed when high interest rates were added to my balance. This is just too much. I made the credit and I intend to pay, but this is just totally unfair. Why am I being punished for paying on time and at higher than requested payments. I'm treated no better than the people who don't take their committment to payback seriously.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 13, 2009 3:42 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I recently had Citibank close an account because of suspected fraud while I was traveling abroad (I had told them I was going so that they wouldn't stop my card, but they stopped it anyway--they couldn't or wouldn't tell me what had made them suspect it had been compromised, and there were no fraudulent charges made). When I got the new card and was able to set up online payments again on the new account, I paid the card (late); I requested that they rescind the late fee because the new card hadn't arrived before the payment was due, and they did so. But then I noticed that my APR had increased to 19.99%. (On the old account I had a small balance at an APR of 13.99% and a larger balance at an APR of 3.99% that was supposed to remain in effect until I paid it off or defaulted.) I asked Citibank to return the interest rates to what they had been before the erroneous late charge, and I was told that the late charge had nothing to do with the change in my account terms. They said, and I quote, \"Our recent actions are based on the significant changes in the financial markets. Our costs in borrowing money we lend to customers have gone up significantly and we are seeing dramatically higher loan losses and delinquencies for many of our customers....The change in the credit and funding markets has raised our costs significantly. This is vey similar to the changes we have seen with rising cost [sic] of energy. Increasing energy costs have lead [sic] to an increase in the cost of producing and transporting goods Accordingly the costs of basic goods have increased as well.\"

Aside from \"How stupid do you think I am to give me this bogus energy analogy,\" I would like to ask Mr. Goolsbee why this sort of bait and switch of APRs is legal, why astronomical late fees are legal (even if the online payment is made on the same day with many companies--as if online transactions can't happen unless you make the payment a day in advance!), why paying one day late on one card can affect the APR on other cards, and lots of other questions. I pay considerably more than the minimum due on every card every month, on time. I am outraged that these companies can change the rules on a whim and penalize customers who are *not* defaulting on loans or delinquent in payments.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Dboza
May 13, 2009 4:46 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

My husband and I own a restaurant. An average meal at our restaurant would range about $45.00 a meal for two and a little wine. We are a family owned business, so we try to tightly control our costs. About 80% of our sales are with credit cards. We are charged a percentage from our sales and transaction fees in order to process our credit card payments. This adds up to tens of thousands of dollars a year I pay out to accept credit cards. We do not have a choice, we have to accept credit cards. I am not talking big expensive meals of hundreds of dollars, more like $20.00 for take out. I am very fearful, banks will pass on revenue losses from the consumers to the merchants i.e.the banks will raise percentage and fees for processing payments. I cannot do anything about fees being raised. I cannot just switch merchant banks easily. It takes time to change processors and involves buying or renting new terminals etc.. ( did you know those stupid little terminals cost about $800.00 each?). Believe me, it would be easier to just pay by cash, but that is not going to happen. Credit cards are here to stay and the banks know that.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 13, 2009 5:44 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

One trick credit card companies are pulling is this: They have given good customers \"preferrencial\" low rates, like 4.99% for YEARS. Right after they got billions of our tax dollars, they tripled these rates up to the standard rate FOR NO REASON AT ALL.

I know it seems churlish to complain about losing such a low rate but tripling the interest rate of a 15 year customer with a perfect record, right after you have received that customer's tax dollars seems worse than churlish.

Rather than a \"cap\" on interest rates, how about a \"cap\" on how many points a bank may RAISE a card's interest rate in a year -- when the customer has done absolutely NOTHING to deserve having their interest rate raised. Even a \"promotional\" rate.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Sidecutter
May 13, 2009 6:15 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

This is not a direct credit card question, but it certainly can affect credit cards for people.


Why are companies allowed to pull your credit in a hard check, extend you credit for services on a monthly basis (think your cell phone, rent, etc.), and damage your credit record for nonpayment, when they are not required to *help* your credit record when you do live up to the agreements?


No one should be able to harm your credit for nonpayment if they do not provide positive input for payment.

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 13, 2009 7:22 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I am irate at the credit card companies (Bank of America & Capital One) that recently raised my interest rate & lowered my credit limit. My FICO score is 800+ and I have played by all of the rules (never a late payment, always pay entire balance, never exceed credit limit, etc.)

Reply
","
\"user-pic\"
Anonymous
May 13, 2009 11:13 PM
Moderate |Flag for review

I would like to ask about whether there is any hope to review the entire concept of 'credit score'. As it is applied today, it has become a huge industry that is more often than not a terrible burden on the consumer. What was not very long ago a mostly secret tool used only by banks is now used for everything from car insurance rates to employment applications. Think of the awful 'free credit report.com' commercials, that inform us that no matter what your qualifications, a bad credit score bars you from a decent job, and no matter what other redeeming characteristics a person has, they are not good to marry if their credit score is poor. A person might have gotten into a poor financial condition for any reason - health problems, divorce, job loss, you name it - and suddenly they have this enormous albatross around their neck and everything becomes more expensive or entirely inaccessible. This is seriously wrong.

Reply
");