PDA

View Full Version : Your Crooked CONGRESS Failed You ON CREDIT CARD "Reform!" RUSH ToRAISE RATES Beats New Rules!


John Fartlington Poopnagel
July 2nd 09, 09:59 PM
Your "lawmakers" fake shock -- SHOCK! -- that card companies would
raise interest rates and fees ahead of new rules implementation!

As if the LOBBYISTS didn't influence the rules kick-in date!

------------------------------
"Credit Card Issuers Raising Rates Ahead of New Law"

By Nancy Trejos
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, July 2, 2009


CREDIT CARD COMPANIES are raising interest rates and fees seven months
before new rules go into effect that will limit their ability to do
so, much to the irritation of Congress and consumer advocates.

Chase, for instance, will raise the minimum payment required of some
of its customers from 2 percent to 5 percent of the statement balance
starting in August. Chase and Discover have increased the maximum fee
charged for transferring a balance to the card to 5 percent of the
amount, up from 3 and 4 percent, respectively. Bank of America last
month raised the transaction fee for balance transfers and cash
advances from 3 to 4 percent. Card issuers including Bank of America
and Citi also continue to cut limits and hike up rates, which they
have been doing with more frequency since January.

"This is a common practice and will continue to be common, because
issuers can do these things for really no reason until February," said
John Ulzheimer, president of consumer education for Credit.com, which
tracks the industry. "It's what I call the Credit Card Trifecta --
lower limits, higher rates, higher minimum payments."

It's not just the top card issuers making changes. Atlanta-based
InfiBank, for example, will raise the minimum annual percentage rate
it charges nearly all of its customers in September "in order to more
effectively manage the profitability of our credit card account
portfolio in a very challenging economic environment," said spokesman
Kevin C. Langin.

The flurry of activity, which the banks say is necessary to shore up
their revenue losses, has irked members of Congress, who passed a new
credit card law, which was signed by President Obama in May. The law,
among other things, would prevent card companies from raising rates on
existing balances unless the borrower was at least 60 days late and
would require the original rate to be restored if payments are
received on time for six months. The law would also require banks to
get customers' permission before allowing them to go over their
limits, for which they would have to pay a fee.

Yesterday, Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) once again requested that
the Federal Reserve invoke its emergency powers to place a limit on
interest rate hikes.

"This is what many of us feared about a law that didn't take effect
right away," Schumer said. "It was never going to take this long for
the credit card companies to get ready for the new reforms. Instead,
issuers are using the delay in the effective date to wring more
dollars out of their customers. It is against the spirit of the law,
and it is just plain wrong."

Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.) said the recent rate and fee hikes
were "unfair and deceptive and must be stopped."

"Capricious actions like these are why Congress overwhelmingly passed,
and President Obama signed, my credit card reform bill: to level the
playing field on behalf of consumers," she said.

Bank executives had warned that the new law would force them to
increase rates and fees because it would keep them from properly
managing borrowers' risk. The argument is that if banks can't raise
rates on riskier customers, they will have to raise rates on all.

Scott Talbott, senior vice president of government affairs for the
Financial Services Roundtable, an industry group, said there are two
reasons for the rate increases. First, he said, consumer credit
scores, which banks use to determine if they should lend and at what
price, have decreased. Second, the cost of providing credit has
increased. "Once the new law is in effect, we anticipate a further
reduction in the availability of credit and additional increases in
the cost of credit," he said.

Banks have been hit with a record number of charge-offs, or debts they
give up on because the borrowers have no way of paying them back. In
June, credit card losses hit a record 10.44 percent, according to
Fitch Ratings.

Increasing rates and fees is one way they can make up for lost
revenue. Since January, of the six major card issuers, Citi has had
the largest increase in rates for purchases, according to a report by
Credit Suisse.

Samuel Wang, vice president for public affairs at Citi, would not
disclose details of the rate increase but said the company adjusts
pricing as part of a regular review of accounts. "These changes also
reflect the dramatically higher cost of doing business in our industry
as we work to preserve the broad availability of credit," he said.

Stephanie Jacobson, a spokeswoman for Chase Card Services, said fewer
than 1 percent of its customers will see a monthly minimum payment
increase. "Our desire is to have these balances paid back in a
reasonable period of time," she said.

Charles Chichester Jr., a 65-year-old retired U.S. Postal Service
employee who lives in Fairfax County, was trying to pay off his credit
card soon but now fears he will be unable to do so at all. He received
a letter from Chase, he said, notifying him that his $373 minimum
monthly payment would increase to more than $900. When he called to
say he could not afford that, a Chase representative told him to
consult with a credit counselor, he said. That's exactly what he plans
to do.

"The 900-something-dollar minimum monthly payment is just something I
cannot do," he said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/01/AR2009070103868.html

Bert Hyman
July 2nd 09, 10:04 PM
In

John Fartlington Poopnagel > wrote:

> Your "lawmakers"

Wait.

I thought they were ->your lawmakers.

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN

phil scott
July 2nd 09, 11:20 PM
On Jul 2, 12:59*pm, John Fartlington Poopnagel >
wrote:
> Your "lawmakers" fake shock -- SHOCK! -- that card companies would
> raise interest rates and fees ahead of new rules implementation!
>
> As if the LOBBYISTS didn't influence the rules kick-in date!
>
> ------------------------------
> "Credit Card Issuers Raising Rates Ahead of New Law"
>
> By Nancy Trejos
> Washington Post Staff Writer
> Thursday, July 2, 2009
>
> CREDIT CARD COMPANIES are raising interest rates and fees seven months
> before new rules go into effect that will limit their ability to do
> so, much to the irritation of Congress and consumer advocates.
>
> Chase, for instance, will raise the minimum payment required of some
> of its customers from 2 percent to 5 percent of the statement balance
> starting in August. Chase and Discover have increased the maximum fee
> charged for transferring a balance to the card to 5 percent of the
> amount, up from 3 and 4 percent, respectively. Bank of America last
> month raised the transaction fee for balance transfers and cash
> advances from 3 to 4 percent. Card issuers including Bank of America
> and Citi also continue to cut limits and hike up rates, which they
> have been doing with more frequency since January.
>
> "This is a common practice and will continue to be common, because
> issuers can do these things for really no reason until February," said
> John Ulzheimer, president of consumer education for Credit.com, which
> tracks the industry. "It's what I call the Credit Card Trifecta --
> lower limits, higher rates, higher minimum payments."
>
> It's not just the top card issuers making changes. Atlanta-based
> InfiBank, for example, will raise the minimum annual percentage rate
> it charges nearly all of its customers in September "in order to more
> effectively manage the profitability of our credit card account
> portfolio in a very challenging economic environment," said spokesman
> Kevin C. Langin.
>
> The flurry of activity, which the banks say is necessary to shore up
> their revenue losses, has irked members of Congress, who passed a new
> credit card law, which was signed by President Obama in May. The law,
> among other things, would prevent card companies from raising rates on
> existing balances unless the borrower was at least 60 days late and
> would require the original rate to be restored if payments are
> received on time for six months. The law would also require banks to
> get customers' permission before allowing them to go over their
> limits, for which they would have to pay a fee.
>
> Yesterday, Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) once again requested that
> the Federal Reserve invoke its emergency powers to place a limit on
> interest rate hikes.
>
> "This is what many of us feared about a law that didn't take effect
> right away," Schumer said. "It was never going to take this long for
> the credit card companies to get ready for the new reforms. Instead,
> issuers are using the delay in the effective date to wring more
> dollars out of their customers. It is against the spirit of the law,
> and it is just plain wrong."
>
> Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.) said the recent rate and fee hikes
> were "unfair and deceptive and must be stopped."
>
> "Capricious actions like these are why Congress overwhelmingly passed,
> and President Obama signed, my credit card reform bill: to level the
> playing field on behalf of consumers," she said.
>
> Bank executives had warned that the new law would force them to
> increase rates and fees because it would keep them from properly
> managing borrowers' risk. The argument is that if banks can't raise
> rates on riskier customers, they will have to raise rates on all.
>
> Scott Talbott, senior vice president of government affairs for the
> Financial Services Roundtable, an industry group, said there are two
> reasons for the rate increases. First, he said, consumer credit
> scores, which banks use to determine if they should lend and at what
> price, have decreased. Second, the cost of providing credit has
> increased. "Once the new law is in effect, we anticipate a further
> reduction in the availability of credit and additional increases in
> the cost of credit," he said.
>
> Banks have been hit with a record number of charge-offs, or debts they
> give up on because the borrowers have no way of paying them back. In
> June, credit card losses hit a record 10.44 percent, according to
> Fitch Ratings.
>
> Increasing rates and fees is one way they can make up for lost
> revenue. Since January, of the six major card issuers, Citi has had
> the largest increase in rates for purchases, according to a report by
> Credit Suisse.
>
> Samuel Wang, vice president for public affairs at Citi, would not
> disclose details of the rate increase but said the company adjusts
> pricing as part of a regular review of accounts. "These changes also
> reflect the dramatically higher cost of doing business in our industry
> as we work to preserve the broad availability of credit," he said.
>
> Stephanie Jacobson, a spokeswoman for Chase Card Services, said fewer
> than 1 percent of its customers will see a monthly minimum payment
> increase. "Our desire is to have these balances paid back in a
> reasonable period of time," she said.
>
> Charles Chichester Jr., a 65-year-old retired U.S. Postal Service
> employee who lives in Fairfax County, was trying to pay off his credit
> card soon but now fears he will be unable to do so at all. He received
> a letter from Chase, he said, notifying him that his $373 minimum
> monthly payment would increase to more than $900. When he called to
> say he could not afford that, a Chase representative told him to
> consult with a credit counselor, he said. That's exactly what he plans
> to do.
>
> "The 900-something-dollar minimum monthly payment is just something I
> cannot do," he said.
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/01/AR200...

Ive been refusing credit cards from banks for 4 years and even
checking accounts for the last 2...the banks
finagle those as well.. with me is all debit cards now...and the banks
want to add the 'convenience' of credit card funtion to it now.

I tell them that if they do i will cancell the card...the banks have
become anything but honorable.



Even having to drive to pay bills, or buy money orders to mail bills
is much more pleasant than having to deal with the bank on credit card
finagles, charges, and fees.


when i suffered my last rip off from BofA and cancelled my account i
told them....'keep this up for another year and your bank will go
under'

it did of course, about 8 months later.


Phil scott

The Real Bev[_7_]
July 4th 09, 01:41 AM
Scott in SoCal wrote:

> John Fartlington Poopnagel > wrote:
>
>>Charles Chichester Jr., a 65-year-old retired U.S. Postal Service
>>employee who lives in Fairfax County, was trying to pay off his credit
>>card soon but now fears he will be unable to do so at all. He received
>>a letter from Chase, he said, notifying him that his $373 minimum
>>monthly payment would increase to more than $900.
....
> Perhaps you should have thought of that before you started living
> beyond your means? Perhaps you should have planned your finances
> better and been out of debt BEFORE you retired?
>
> I guess personal responsibility is just too much to ask for...

You mean that postal workers on your planet are RESPONSIBLE? Wow.

--
Cheers, Bev
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Of course SoCal has four seasons:
Earthquake, Mudslide, Brushfire, and Riot

Clincher
July 4th 09, 05:38 PM
> CREDIT CARD COMPANIES are raising interest rates and fees seven months
> before new rules go into effect that will limit their ability to do
> so, much to the irritation of Congress and consumer advocates.
>
> Chase, for instance, will raise the minimum payment required of some
> of its customers from 2 percent to 5 percent of the statement balance
> starting in August.

Note the revealing mindset: paying back PRINCIPAL is now an "instance" of a
fee or interest rate.

Clincher
July 4th 09, 05:42 PM
"Scott in SoCal" > wrote in message
...
> In message
> >,
> John Fartlington Poopnagel > wrote:
>
>>CREDIT CARD COMPANIES are raising interest rates and fees seven months
>>before new rules go into effect that will limit their ability to do
>>so, much to the irritation of Congress and consumer advocates.
>>
>>Chase, for instance, will raise the minimum payment required of some
>>of its customers from 2 percent to 5 percent of the statement balance
>>starting in August.
>
> Now why, exactly, would Congress or consumer advocates be irritated by
> that? Raising the minimum payment will help these suckers get out of
> debt faster, paying less interest in the process. How can that
> possibly be bad?

Simple. In their mindset, credit cards should help consumers pay less
interest by not charging interest in the first place.

After that, their next agenda is to make it illegal for them to charge
principal as well.

And once they outlaw interest and demanding the repayment of principal,
they'll go after refusing to make the loan in the first place.

God's Debris
July 4th 09, 09:31 PM
On Thu, 2 Jul 2009 14:20:38 -0700 (PDT), phil scott
> wrote:

>On Jul 2, 12:59*pm, John Fartlington Poopnagel >
>wrote:
>> Your "lawmakers" fake shock -- SHOCK! -- that card companies would
>> raise interest rates and fees ahead of new rules implementation!
>>
>> As if the LOBBYISTS didn't influence the rules kick-in date!
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> "Credit Card Issuers Raising Rates Ahead of New Law"
>>
>> By Nancy Trejos
>> Washington Post Staff Writer
>> Thursday, July 2, 2009
>>
>> CREDIT CARD COMPANIES are raising interest rates and fees seven months
>> before new rules go into effect that will limit their ability to do
>> so, much to the irritation of Congress and consumer advocates.
>>
>> Chase, for instance, will raise the minimum payment required of some
>> of its customers from 2 percent to 5 percent of the statement balance
>> starting in August. Chase and Discover have increased the maximum fee
>> charged for transferring a balance to the card to 5 percent of the
>> amount, up from 3 and 4 percent, respectively. Bank of America last
>> month raised the transaction fee for balance transfers and cash
>> advances from 3 to 4 percent. Card issuers including Bank of America
>> and Citi also continue to cut limits and hike up rates, which they
>> have been doing with more frequency since January.
>>
>> "This is a common practice and will continue to be common, because
>> issuers can do these things for really no reason until February," said
>> John Ulzheimer, president of consumer education for Credit.com, which
>> tracks the industry. "It's what I call the Credit Card Trifecta --
>> lower limits, higher rates, higher minimum payments."
>>
>> It's not just the top card issuers making changes. Atlanta-based
>> InfiBank, for example, will raise the minimum annual percentage rate
>> it charges nearly all of its customers in September "in order to more
>> effectively manage the profitability of our credit card account
>> portfolio in a very challenging economic environment," said spokesman
>> Kevin C. Langin.
>>
>> The flurry of activity, which the banks say is necessary to shore up
>> their revenue losses, has irked members of Congress, who passed a new
>> credit card law, which was signed by President Obama in May. The law,
>> among other things, would prevent card companies from raising rates on
>> existing balances unless the borrower was at least 60 days late and
>> would require the original rate to be restored if payments are
>> received on time for six months. The law would also require banks to
>> get customers' permission before allowing them to go over their
>> limits, for which they would have to pay a fee.
>>
>> Yesterday, Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) once again requested that
>> the Federal Reserve invoke its emergency powers to place a limit on
>> interest rate hikes.
>>
>> "This is what many of us feared about a law that didn't take effect
>> right away," Schumer said. "It was never going to take this long for
>> the credit card companies to get ready for the new reforms. Instead,
>> issuers are using the delay in the effective date to wring more
>> dollars out of their customers. It is against the spirit of the law,
>> and it is just plain wrong."
>>
>> Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-N.Y.) said the recent rate and fee hikes
>> were "unfair and deceptive and must be stopped."
>>
>> "Capricious actions like these are why Congress overwhelmingly passed,
>> and President Obama signed, my credit card reform bill: to level the
>> playing field on behalf of consumers," she said.
>>
>> Bank executives had warned that the new law would force them to
>> increase rates and fees because it would keep them from properly
>> managing borrowers' risk. The argument is that if banks can't raise
>> rates on riskier customers, they will have to raise rates on all.
>>
>> Scott Talbott, senior vice president of government affairs for the
>> Financial Services Roundtable, an industry group, said there are two
>> reasons for the rate increases. First, he said, consumer credit
>> scores, which banks use to determine if they should lend and at what
>> price, have decreased. Second, the cost of providing credit has
>> increased. "Once the new law is in effect, we anticipate a further
>> reduction in the availability of credit and additional increases in
>> the cost of credit," he said.
>>
>> Banks have been hit with a record number of charge-offs, or debts they
>> give up on because the borrowers have no way of paying them back. In
>> June, credit card losses hit a record 10.44 percent, according to
>> Fitch Ratings.
>>
>> Increasing rates and fees is one way they can make up for lost
>> revenue. Since January, of the six major card issuers, Citi has had
>> the largest increase in rates for purchases, according to a report by
>> Credit Suisse.
>>
>> Samuel Wang, vice president for public affairs at Citi, would not
>> disclose details of the rate increase but said the company adjusts
>> pricing as part of a regular review of accounts. "These changes also
>> reflect the dramatically higher cost of doing business in our industry
>> as we work to preserve the broad availability of credit," he said.
>>
>> Stephanie Jacobson, a spokeswoman for Chase Card Services, said fewer
>> than 1 percent of its customers will see a monthly minimum payment
>> increase. "Our desire is to have these balances paid back in a
>> reasonable period of time," she said.
>>
>> Charles Chichester Jr., a 65-year-old retired U.S. Postal Service
>> employee who lives in Fairfax County, was trying to pay off his credit
>> card soon but now fears he will be unable to do so at all. He received
>> a letter from Chase, he said, notifying him that his $373 minimum
>> monthly payment would increase to more than $900. When he called to
>> say he could not afford that, a Chase representative told him to
>> consult with a credit counselor, he said. That's exactly what he plans
>> to do.
>>
>> "The 900-something-dollar minimum monthly payment is just something I
>> cannot do," he said.
>>
>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/01/AR200...
>
>Ive been refusing credit cards from banks for 4 years and even
>checking accounts for the last 2...the banks
>finagle those as well.. with me is all debit cards now...and the banks
>want to add the 'convenience' of credit card funtion to it now.
>
>I tell them that if they do i will cancell the card...the banks have
>become anything but honorable.
>
>
>
>Even having to drive to pay bills, or buy money orders to mail bills
>is much more pleasant than having to deal with the bank on credit card
>finagles, charges, and fees.
>
>
>when i suffered my last rip off from BofA and cancelled my account i
>told them....'keep this up for another year and your bank will go
>under'
>
>it did of course, about 8 months later.
>
>
>Phil scott


If you pay with a debit card then that means you have the money to
pay. So if you had any sense you would be using a dividend credit
card that gives you cash back. Most people could easily get 2% of
what they spend back in cash. I get hundreds of dollars back each
year by using credit cards - I pay the bill in full each month so
don't pay any interest or any other fees. Anyone who uses debit cards
could do the same. Plus, instead of having paid cash and having no
recourse against the merchant you would have the protection of the
credit card company to handle any disputes. If you buy something and
there is a problem you just call up the card company and file a
dispute claim. I've done that half a dozen times and won every time.
In my experience, most companies are so big they don't even bother
responding to the complaints. If you use a credit card you can also
extend the manufacturers warranty for up to one additional year. On
things like a Printer, that would cost you anywhere from $30 to $100+
if you bought the extended service contract from the store. It's free
with the credit card. Then there is the protection if your card is
lost. Lose your debit card and your account could be wiped out. Lose
your credit card and you are only liable for $50.

It's a real mystery to me that anyone would use a debit card when it
has so many drawbacks and when using a credit card has so many
advantages. The common thing people tell me when I ask them "why" is
that if they had a credit card they would spend money they don't have
but with a debit card they can't overspend. Well, if you are so weak
willed that such a claim is true I really feel sorry for you.

krw[_4_]
July 5th 09, 07:06 PM
On Sat, 04 Jul 2009 22:40:39 -0700, Scott in SoCal
> wrote:

>In message >, God's Debris
> wrote:
>
>>If you pay with a debit card then that means you have the money to
>>pay. So if you had any sense you would be using a dividend credit
>>card that gives you cash back. Most people could easily get 2% of
>>what they spend back in cash.
>
>In addition, if your credit card gets stolen, you're not liable for
>unauthorized purchaes beyond some token amount (and even that is often
>waived). With a VISA-logo debit card, a thief could clean out your
>bank account before you even noticed your card was missing, creating a
>cascade of bounced payments and the accompanying fees. You'll spend
>weeks of aggravation straightening that mess out.

With a VISA-logo debit card you're still not liable, after a token
amount (if that), but you will still spend the weeks of aggravation. A
check is really no different.

pbj
July 5th 09, 11:08 PM
On Sat, 04 Jul 2009 12:31:47 -0700, God's Debris wrote:

> It's a real mystery to me that anyone would use a debit card when it has
> so many drawbacks and when using a credit card has so many advantages.

Agreed. And even people with bad credit, or people like myself who
refuse to go into debt unless their life depends on it, can easily get a
secured credit card, enjoy the advantages, and yet owe no one.

> The common thing people tell me when I ask them "why" is that if they
> had a credit card they would spend money they don't have but with a
> debit card they can't overspend. Well, if you are so weak willed that
> such a claim is true I really feel sorry for you.

If such a claim is true then they're only human - and smart enough to
recognize it.

krw[_4_]
July 6th 09, 03:26 AM
On Sun, 05 Jul 2009 15:36:56 -0700, Scott in SoCal
> wrote:

>In message >, krw
> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 04 Jul 2009 22:40:39 -0700, Scott in SoCal
> wrote:
>>
>>>In message >, God's Debris
> wrote:
>>>
>>>>If you pay with a debit card then that means you have the money to
>>>>pay. So if you had any sense you would be using a dividend credit
>>>>card that gives you cash back. Most people could easily get 2% of
>>>>what they spend back in cash.
>>>
>>>In addition, if your credit card gets stolen, you're not liable for
>>>unauthorized purchaes beyond some token amount (and even that is often
>>>waived). With a VISA-logo debit card, a thief could clean out your
>>>bank account before you even noticed your card was missing, creating a
>>>cascade of bounced payments and the accompanying fees. You'll spend
>>>weeks of aggravation straightening that mess out.
>>
>>With a VISA-logo debit card you're still not liable, after a token
>>amount (if that), but you will still spend the weeks of aggravation.
>
>Which is, of course, the worst part.

Indeed. That's the part to concentrate on then.
>
>>A check is really no different.
>
>To me it seems a little harder to find someone to cash a forged check
>than it is to get someone to accept a stolen VISA check card. Also,
>unless they steal your entire checkbook, they only get one shot at
>cleaning you out; with the check card if one place rejects it they can
>keep trying.

With Check-21 (and in fact long before that) it's not hard at all, and
as many shots as needed.

Google