Jump to content

Revike

Members
  • Content Count

    1,340
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0
  1. No. Once Chase (or whatever bank) accepts/approves the application, the CRAs are notified and the account is open. It's up to the bank if they want to do anything other than close the account when asked to "cancel" ...
  2. Everyone is giving BOA too much credit (no pun intended). They are not "driving" their customers anywhere. Their decision-makers have reason to believe (or are guessing/praying) that the additional $5/month profit from (1) those who can afford it and don't care and (2) those who are captive (too lazy or busy or whatever to change banks) will more than compensate for the lost profit of those who do leave. That's all this is - just a numbers game. Like any company deciding on a price increase, determining how much retained customers can be squeezed before the scale tips. And along the way, BOA (like all the rest of the big banks) will try to deflect blame by saying that legislation "forced" them to do it ...
  3. After reading the Dave Ramsey Kool-Aid thread, it's refreshing to read a thread like this. Yes, DR, not everyone needs their mittens tied to their jackets and their name written on their underwear. Some people can earn and maintain credit because they use self-control and common sense ...
  4. As many have said, the original expected utilization on this card would have been high enough for the card to be considered maxed-out. Basically, anything close to 80% will cause the maximum point deduction for the individual-account utilization. Personally, I don't think I would take a salesman's verbal assurance regarding credit card terms. He has a motivation to maximize his sale and, at best, he could easily explain the policy inaccurately. He may not understand it correctly himself. Someone planning to make a major purchase (house or auto) and who wants to maximize their score for the best chance at qualification and/or the best interest rate, would generally want to hold off on doing anything that could impact their score until after the major purchase is complete ...
  5. I kinda doubt that rebucketing is the reason (it's funny how "new bucket" so often seems to be the default answer when a score change happens with a less-than-obvious cause). Rebucketing would be more likely to happen with a credit file that had a significant change, and OP's was supposedly fairly steady before the 530 kicked in. I'd suspect a reporting error from a creditor - a regular CC reported as a Visa Signature in error or vice versa, a wrong opening date on an old account, or some other blatant coding error. The fact that the score suddenly snapped back to 680 makes it appear that such an error was caught, or the source account(s) started being reported correctly again ...
  6. You can't convert apples into oranges, you can't convert a Fako score into a Fico score. Factors from your credit report are weighted differently by the two scoring systems. Two people can have identical Plus scores and significantly different Fico scores, and vice versa. Changes to the credit report can even make one score increase while the other score decreases ...
  7. The Card Act requires penalty rate accounts to be reviewed after 6 months, and the rates rolled back if the customer has generally been timely with payments, although the specifics of what reason would or wouldn't allow a bank to maintain the penalty rate are a bit vague. I think BofA's use of the word "indefinitely" is intentionally harsh, designed to scare their customers a bit. It's not the first time they have used misleading language. When the deadline passed for the rule requiring banks to apply payment amounts above the minimum to higher-APR balances first, BOA customers were still receiving offers which stated the opposite (that payments would go toward lower-APR balances first). The offers had been prepared and supposedly mailed just before the deadline, although customers continued to receive those offers for weeks afterward. BofA had plenty of time to update their offer language before the deadline, but they chose not to ...
  8. +1 For the same reasons (control and flexibility) I always push payments, and then go online a day or two later to confirm that those payments were posted. There have been too many reports of banks or other institutions/companies screwing up autopay payments. And when it does happens, it always requires an excessive amount of the customer's time and energy to ensure that late fees are canceled, because the institution/company invariably argues that it wasn't their fault and they take their time setting things straight again ...
  9. As one of the comments on the original story said, better to use billpay rather than an automatic draft. There are a zillion ways for banks, cable companies, whoever, to screw up auto-payments, and whenever they do, the customer is inconvenienced (or worse) and rarely even gets an apology. I have an auto loan with WFDS also. I schedule my monthly payment from my CU billpay - funds deducted in the wee hours of the morning, posted and credited on the WFDS site later the same day. If my last payment is $6.34, the only way the payment will be wrong will be if I make a typo in the amount field ...
  10. One of those Equifax scores had to be based on a slightly older report - those EQ scores should have matched exactly. Seen a few mentions of EQ reports pulled through MyFico not being completely up-to-date, and also some inexplicably "old" reports furnished by tri-merge resellers (such as rapid rescore not showing differently than original report/score). Not sure who'd be the more likely culprit ...
  11. What is the credit limit on your line of credit with the 7K/8K balance? Do your EQ and TU credit reports show exactly the same accounts? Do you have any negatives on either/both reports, such as late payments? Are any of the five smaller-limit accounts Visa Signature-type accounts? Utilization change from 97% to 45% should improve your score slightly, but not as much as you expected. Five accounts going from maxed-out to $0 should also improve your score somewhat. It would seem that something else has negated those improvements on the EQ report. It also seems that there should be something obviously different between the EQ and TU reports to cause an 80-point difference, although the difference between EQ's formula and the TU-98 formula could account for some of that 80 points ...
  12. The Realtor group could lobby the banks instead of Fico. A bank (or credit union) who approves an equity line of credit has the ability to restrict or prohibit further draws without officially reducing the credit limit. Of course, the banks are trying to make their balance sheets look slightly less ugly by chopping their overall CL, so they probably won't do that. Or Fico could amend its formulas for Experian and Equifax and drop their "cutoff" for disregarding high-limit accounts to $30K like the TransUnion formula. Something the Fico rep neglected to mention when defending the importance of the utilization factor ...
  13. I don't think this thread needed to reach the argumentative level it did - demanding story details, and counter-demanding apologies. Anyone who has been around here any length of time knows that Hegemony doesn't like Discover and enjoys starting anti-Discover threads. One missing piece of information was whether the "brother" had another card (Visa, MC, or AmEx) in his wallet, which I'm guessing was probable. The bill was settled while he was in the restroom, otherwise he undoubtedly could have paid his half with a different card. But then, there would be no "story". There are also endless reports about people making a purchase at a business which accepts AmEx, Visa, and MasterCard, only to have the charge declined due to any number of bizarre "reasons" or error on the part of the issuing bank. Anything can happen at any time, which is why everyone who visits this board certainly knows to carry one or more backup CCs. Y'know, this "my card network is better than your card network" debating (as if they were rival football teams) gets a bit silly at times ...
  14. If the merchant is out the $4500, that merchant's customers will pay the $4500 through higher prices. If Visa is out the $4500, that $4500 will be repaid through higher interchange/merchant fees paid by the merchants who, again, pass on those costs to their customers. Thanks to the shift to online banking (and in part to the bad economy), more people are checking their activity more often, and noticing odd transactions and reductions in available credit due to pending transactions, and catching fraud attempts earlier in the process. Banks should encourage such vigilance, and should also hone their fraud-detection systems to be more efficient, less disruptive, and to produce fewer false alarms ...
  15. Personally, I think the extra 30 seconds to pull out a backup CC for a purchase is much less of a hassle than the time required to notify the bank, fill out a fraud report, etc. when a bank's anti-fraud system/algorithm fails to prevent a suspect transaction. It is an absolute must to carry a backup card or alternate method of payment these days. Every bank has quirks in policy or poorly-thought-out risk pattern algorithms, even AmEx (talk to people who have had accounts suspended for no reason on a honeymoon or vacation, with reinstatement dependent on submitting income or tax documents). And in addition to flagging a purchase, issuers may need to decline a swipe due to blocks of account numbers being replaced because of data breaches at credit card processors or merchants, something which happens far too often. And actual fraud isn't just (or mostly) the issuer's headache - every penny of loss covered by Visa/MC/AmEx/Discover will eventually be passed down to merchants and ultimately consumers, so I don't mind when banks are too careful on occasion. Finally, I do not get the frequent reference to "embarrassment" when people report about being declined. My credit cards do not reflect my integrity or represent me, and if I am declined it will be 100% due to a bank action that is out of my control and not my fault. Just because banks put these "oh my I'm so ashamed" scenarios in their commercials doesn't mean people should buy into it. I couldn't care less if a complete stranger in line behind me, or a sales clerk, or a cab driver, makes a false assumption about the reason my card is declined - that's their problem ...

About Us

Since 2003, creditboards.com has helped thousands of people repair their credit, force abusive collection agents to follow the law, ensure proper reporting by credit reporting agencies, and provided financial education to help avoid the pitfalls that can lead to negative tradelines.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines