hdporter

The "hardship" arrangement I spoke of was extended specifically by Chase. It wasn't part of a larger debt management (DM) program, involving additional creditors. (General CB consensus appears to be that it's best to avoid DM programs, if possible.) I'll reply with some observations re the Barclays offer: Details are a tad sketchy, but if I understand correctly, they're permitting you to repay the balance owed over 5 years, at an APR of 5.9%. A fixed monthly payment set at approximately 2% of the current balance outstanding would be sufficient to service the finance charge and leave you with no balance at the end of 5 years. (If your budget simply can't accommodate this payment amount, you might briefly explain and ask if they can extend repayment over a longer term initially, such as over 8 years (which should cut the payment amount by 1/3), with an eye to accelerate to a shorter period after you've got your financial situation more firmly grounded. No promises.) It's important you realize just how golden these terms are. They keep you out of collections and you're unlikely to substitute them with anything nearly as attractive outside of this agreement. Bottom line, it's well worth your while to restructure your finances in whatever means necessary to accept these terms and submit timely payments. A hardship program, on the other hand, typically is extended for only 6 months at a time, renewed upon review. The intent is to permit you to recover from a temporary hardship and ultimately renew payments under the standard account terms. There can be room to set payments under a hardship program at relatively nominal amounts. Once standard terms are re-established, your finance cost will be a multiple of that under the deal they've extended to you above. Each program has a specific focus. The offer they've extended presents easier permanent terms that they look for you to accommodate, if possible. A hardship agreement, on the other hand, extends a lifeline for you to resolve your current financial challenge and set things back on a steadier course. You need to assess which option (where available) best serves your needs and interests.

It's fair to say that Synchrony (or most any other issuer, for that matter) doesn't obsess over our credit scores. "Average age" isn't on their radar. So, from their perspective, it's likely that they see nothing amiss in closing an inactive account, even if it means that someone has to re-apply once they are interested in a new purchase from a co-branded retailer. Those of us who've been "credit impaired" at some point tend to want to do what we can to "tip the scale" going forward. So we bristle at an unanticipated account closure and engage in behavior that's a tad over the edge in the interest of keeping accounts open.

Any credit line not in use is at risk for closure. General wisdom is to make at least a modest charge once a year to any card you wish to retain. Many advise doing so at least once every 6 mo to "play it safe".

I'll toss in my 2 cents based upon an experience with Chase some 20+ years ago. I had 2 credit lines with a balance for which I sought hardship terms. The accounts were closed (or may already have been closed for delinquency). The credit lines were set to 0. The accounts continued to report as revolving. The monthly payment field agreed to the payment amount that had been arranged. I don't see any reason that Barclays would reclassify these accounts as installment accounts. So long as payments are made as agreed, the accounts will report with a current status. (These are not collection accounts.) There will be a score hit associated with reporting a balance on a closed line. However, so long as these were in repayment, I would not actively be looking for new credit, so the score impact would be of secondary importance. At such time as these accounts are paid in full, the past reported balances will have a nominal impact, at most. FWIW, I don't expect that Barclays will consider reopening the accounts at a later date (such as when they're PIF). As with most issuers, once these are closed Barclays won't reopen. I consider the terms extended by Barclays to be your best option to keep these balances in active repayment. A better option might be if you could roll them to another credit line via bt, however, that would not remedy the current excessive monthly payment requirement.

I read this as an EWS of a pending asset bubble burst ...

Yeah ... but they wished me "Happy Birthday!" earlier this month. Also, you have 1 week to get that Board Member app in. 😝

Should one of us clue him in on BA Cash +, with 3% on online purchases (up to $2500/qtr)?

Just to add some perspective (for those not familiar with CU Shared Branch services) Northeast CU is talking about reciprocal service arrangements with other CU's otherwise unaffiliated with Northeast. So, this is akin to regional banks SunTrust / BB&T (recently merged under the lackluster name "Truist") saying that they have a services relationship with Citi. If you're in an area not serviced by Truist, you can walk into Citi and access your account ... and, by the way, when you do, these are some of the fees Citi "may" charge you. CU Shared Branching "is what it is". It is the key factor that has permitted me to continue using my checking account at a former employer's CU in PA, even though I lived 60 mi from it for 20+ years in Philly, and have continued to do so in my 9 years in GA.

I suspect most people find that the more trying periods of their life are intertwined with the defining music of those times. (I'll add, as an aside, music associations tend to rule the roost for me. When I think about some of my more involved reads, I can't do so without the music I was actively listening to at the time being swept up in the thought. Perhaps the oddest such association that persists to date [daring to yet date myself again] is between Asimov's "The Gods Themselves" and Wings' "Live and Let Die ) At any rate, hardly a "curse". Your narrative resonates and suggests I might do myself a favor by sampling more of Decemberists sporadically over the next few months. The recommendations are much appreciated. Oh, and as far as "maudlin" goes ... I find maudlin to be a superficial label applied by others for a rather complex and intimate process each must delve in, with the aim that painful experience finds ultimate constructive expression through the refinement and tempering of our psyche. (And if that expression is unduly convoluted, suffice it to say that what may appear maudlin can be curative, once you successfully grapple with the distress.) btw, I'll suggest my mental link between Decemberists and R.E.M. was largely superficial. More evocative is a similarity I find between Colin Meloy and Natalie Merchant. The raw expression in either case can tear a path to the soul like a jagged piece of glass.

on that tangent ... I've been stuck on the observation that "Decemberists" is your favorite band, off and on, for 2 days now ... In another dimension, I've no doubt that Decemberists would be a huge fave of mine. Unfortunately, every time I hear one of their songs I have this knee-jerk response: "Oh ... so that's what R.E.M. might sound like if they'd gone with Natalie Merchant as their lead singer" ;). Now, I can imagine no one else get's that at all. But most of the full catalog of R.E.M. and Natalie Merchant are both engraved in my brain (now you know a couple of my "faves"). Every single second a Decemberists song is playing my neurons fire up with some similar tone, lyric, instrumental riff, etc from one of those two artists. I honestly can say I haven't been able to give a Decemberists song a "true" listen. Maybe this is only to be expected ... the Decemberists playbook may be the lovechild of the bandmembers' romance with the early R.E.M./10000 Maniacs catalogs. (on a whim, just did a search for mention of "Decemberists" juxtaposed with these two artists. I'm not the first to note R.E.M. similarities ...) But please don't misunderstand ... I'm not saying that the Decemberists are "derivative" in the least! Just listening to them ends up setting off a long familiar playlist in my head.

Assuming what you write is accurate, it should be understand that TD Bank still owns the debt and has merely placed it for collection with Jefferson. The "component" being handled by Jefferson is the collection activity, with proceeds returned to TD Bank after taking a cut. From what others have posted, it appears that TD Bank isn't likely amenable to your "pay for delete" request. TD Bank is within its rights to refuse, if so inclined. Still it's worth inquiring. A phone call might be your best contact method. Typically, any type of mortgage loan will require that outstanding collection balances be paid. The relatively modest amount of this debt (though hardly inconsequential) makes it a good candidate on which to hone your negotiation skills and see if you can talk your way into their hearts and getting them to remove the tradeline in the bargain.

My bad. No TJ delivery here as well. (Juxtaposing them with Publix/Kroger/Whole Foods/Instacart/Prime Delivery in my mind ... it's a free-associatin' mess up there these days!)

Can't recall specific past threads on "Boost". But I would swear that it's just the thing you'd take for a ride, cv! (There's no one here who would do so with a more caustic wit! Of course, if your EXP FICO 8 is surfin' at 850, the exercise wouldn't be very telling ...)

I assume TJ is happy with Instacart filling that service. I swear our cats instinctively scramble and hide every time an Instacart delivery is dropped on our doorstep ... it's only a matter of minutes subsequent that Bev lets loose a blue streak over unwanted/illogical "substitutions" to her order. Or, if not that, it's warranted by some item that ends up looking like it had a 5 lb sack of flour dropped on it. (like the raspberries that were "bleeding" all over the bag ...) Since she's now toiling away telecommuting, and my time is my own, you'd think I'd help out with the groceries. But my track record was only slightly better than Instacart (at least without resorting to 4-6 calls to clarify her wants ). I found the best contribution I could make is "go-for" in the store.

Your post prompted me to finally browse the article. I suspect this "senior money writer" has taken a lump or two over a mistake not even worthy of a rookie. The "25%" conclusion should have seemed "wrong" to anyone effectively interpreting the data. Statistics are dangerous when it comes to someone who simply sees "numbers". What's truly disturbing is that I digested the "25%" statement as a reasonable one. It reinforced a perception that people were crawling over one another to sign up for hardship programs being freely extended by lenders, whether needed or not.