With the congress getting ready to mandate how credit cards are to be used, everyone get ready to have their credit scores screwed and pay higher rates:
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Politics/story?id=7625749&page=1
Banks will:
1. Do away with 'no annual fee' cards (according to ABC News).
2. Do away with the 30-day grace period on purchases. Interest will be charged starting on the purchase date (according to ABC News).
3. Credit cards will lower your available credit on your card. Lower credit means lower credit scores. Lower credit scores mean high rates on insurance, mortgages, credit cards, ....... (according to Clark Howard).
I guess I'm going back to the check book for everything.
Leave it to the feds.
Congress sucks. How can they do away with the 30-day grace period on purchases when the article states: "Card issuers would be prohibited from imposing finance charges on balances repaid during the grace period. This billing process right now is hidden from consumers and difficult to understand."
Can't strong banks offer a more competitive card?
"Ladies and gentlemen, when you receive your next change of term letters raising your rates and your fees during the next nine months, from the companies that took your money for their bailout, you will know whom to thank.
Shame, shame, shame."
http://pundits.thehill.com/2009/05/19/obama-democrats-republicans-support-credit-card-rip-offs-and-rate-hikes/
Buy American Express stock.....
Wow, that bill is weak sauce. It doesn't even do what they originally set out to do. Eliminate ratejacking without cause. Despite that, the bankers are screaming?
Don't they make enough on interchange fees and the current interest rate spread?
Don't have a credit card and don't ever want to have one. I do quite well without them.
Quote from: FOTD on May 19, 2009, 08:05:54 PM
Congress sucks. How can they do away with the 30-day grace period on purchases when the article states: "Card issuers would be prohibited from imposing finance charges on balances repaid during the grace period. This billing process right now is hidden from consumers and difficult to understand."
To be clear (and I wasn't in my first post), congress isn't taking away the 30-day grace period, it is believed the banks will do this to make up for the loss of revenue that IS being imposed by congress.
Congress again coddles an industry with obscene profits which finds itself in trouble once again due to their own stupidity. After the royal screwing Congress gave consumers on bankruptcy reform in 2005 (Thanks Joe Biden D-MBNA), no one should be surprised that Congress would have only the best interests of the credit card issuers at heart and make it sound like they are helping the consumer.
I can't say I've never used credit cards like Artist, but I've not used a personal CC in about 6-7 years now and never will again. F*&K the slimy bastards.
If you think you hate CC companies as a consumer, open a merchant account then try and get them to do something about fraud at some point. I had a major go 'round with MBNA on about an $800 charge-back due to fraud when I had my own business. Somehow, someone was getting information from the inside on brand-new cards being issued and was using them with on-line merchants. They did not even offer a toll-free line to report fraud. I waited for over an hour to get someone on the line.
Their line about losing billions to fraud each year is total bullshit. They charge back the merchant every penny so long as the merchant is still in business.
Quote from: Conan71 on May 20, 2009, 08:21:12 AM
Congress again coddles an industry with obscene profits which finds itself in trouble once again due to their own stupidity. After the royal screwing Congress gave consumers on bankruptcy reform in 2005 (Thanks Joe Biden D-MBNA), no one should be surprised that Congress would have only the best interests of the credit card issuers at heart and make it sound like they are helping the consumer.
I can't say I've never used credit cards like Artist, but I've not used a personal CC in about 6-7 years now and never will again. F*&K the slimy bastards.
If you think you hate CC companies as a consumer, open a merchant account then try and get them to do something about fraud at some point. I had a major go 'round with MBNA on about an $800 charge-back due to fraud when I had my own business. Somehow, someone was getting information from the inside on brand-new cards being issued and was using them with on-line merchants. They did not even offer a toll-free line to report fraud. I waited for over an hour to get someone on the line.
Their line about losing billions to fraud each year is total bullshit. They charge back the merchant every penny so long as the merchant is still in business.
I can sympathize with you Conan, except my fraud case involved my Debit Card (which at the time was BoA) and someone charging up domain site registrations on it. It took me several weeks to get that straightened out, and was ultimately the reason I left BoA for BoK. Now I'm thinking about leaving BoK for Arvest.
Does anyone have any insight about Arvest? Are they OK to deal with? What I did miss in my change from BoA to BoK was the eBill. BoK is SORELY lacking in this department.
PM me if you wish; I don't wish to threadjack.
Quote from: Hoss on May 20, 2009, 09:41:43 AM
Does anyone have any insight about Arvest? Are they OK to deal with? What I did miss in my change from BoA to BoK was the eBill. BoK is SORELY lacking in this department.
eBill? They have an online site where you can pay bills, transfer money between accounts, and whatever else, if that's what you're talking about. It isn't the prettiest thing in the world, but it's functional enough.
I think Arvest is great. Their fees are generally low or nonexistent, and they are one of the few banks that credits deposits before debits. Most banks do it the other way around, processing all charges against your account before the deposits, and worse, run the checks and electronic transactions in whatever way generates the most fees. (Usually starting with the largest transaction and moving on to the smallest)
http://www.arvestblog.com/blog/2009/3/6/adsfasd.aspx
Quote from: nathanm on May 20, 2009, 09:53:45 AM
eBill? They have an online site where you can pay bills, transfer money between accounts, and whatever else, if that's what you're talking about. It isn't the prettiest thing in the world, but it's functional enough.
I think Arvest is great. Their fees are generally low or nonexistent, and they are one of the few banks that credits deposits before debits. Most banks do it the other way around, processing all charges against your account before the deposits, and worse, run the checks and electronic transactions in whatever way generates the most fees. (Usually starting with the largest transaction and moving on to the smallest)
http://www.arvestblog.com/blog/2009/3/6/adsfasd.aspx
I should elaborate. I'm talking about eBill initiated payments. I got spoiled using BoA and having this feature. BoK does NOT have it. You can make payments online electronically, but you have to manually initiate it, even if it's recurring you may have to tweak it.
What I liked about BoA's ebill was it was pretty much 'set and forget'. Guess I'm a little lazy in that aspect. I had email notifications telling me when an Ebill was about to initiate a payment, or when an ebill was late (which did happen on occasion).
Quote from: Hoss on May 20, 2009, 10:04:07 AM
I should elaborate. I'm talking about eBill initiated payments. I got spoiled using BoA and having this feature. BoK does NOT have it. You can make payments online electronically, but you have to manually initiate it, even if it's recurring you may have to tweak it.
What I liked about BoA's ebill was it was pretty much 'set and forget'. Guess I'm a little lazy in that aspect. I had email notifications telling me when an Ebill was about to initiate a payment, or when an ebill was late (which did happen on occasion).
Arvest uses checkfree for their online payments now. I don't use it for much (mainly just the alarm system, which a recurring monthly payment is good enough for), so I can't really say how or if it works with a biller who can bill through checkfree.
I've been an IBC customer for something like 15 years now and am very happy with them. I'm not sure about e-bill capability, I manually input for their online bill-pay. The tellers remember my name and they don't engage in sneaky BS on crediting deposits. I refuse to deal with Chase, or BOA.
I use a credit card for every single transaction, no matter how small or how large. I only use cards with no annual fee, and I only use cards that pay cash back (Amex Blue is the best). I pay off the balance every month in full, and once a year, I get a big fat check from the credit card companies for my cash back. I anticipate most of this going away with the passage of this new bill, not to mention the other problems already mentioned.
Quote from: Wilbur on May 20, 2009, 01:10:33 PM
I use a credit card for every single transaction, no matter how small or how large. I only use cards with no annual fee, and I only use cards that pay cash back (Amex Blue is the best). I pay off the balance every month in full, and once a year, I get a big fat check from the credit card companies for my cash back. I anticipate most of this going away with the passage of this new bill, not to mention the other problems already mentioned.
I used to use a countrywide card and got 2% back on all purchases towards a mortgage payment.
Some nice provisions
_Requires that gift cards remain valid for five years. (I think this still allows the monthly service charge BS)
_Bans "pay-to-pay" fees, which are charged when someone pays the bill by phone or on the Internet.
_Prohibits retroactive rate increases unless the cardholder is at least 60 days behind in paying the bill.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090519/ap_on_go_co/us_congress_credit_cards_glance_1 (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090519/ap_on_go_co/us_congress_credit_cards_glance_1)
Quote from: Wilbur on May 19, 2009, 07:32:34 PM
With the congress getting ready to mandate how credit cards are to be used, everyone get ready to have their credit scores screwed and pay higher rates:
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Politics/story?id=7625749&page=1
Banks will:
1. Do away with 'no annual fee' cards (according to ABC News).
2. Do away with the 30-day grace period on purchases. Interest will be charged starting on the purchase date (according to ABC News).
3. Credit cards will lower your available credit on your card. Lower credit means lower credit scores. Lower credit scores mean high rates on insurance, mortgages, credit cards, ....... (according to Clark Howard).
I guess I'm going back to the check book for everything.
Leave it to the feds.
1&2 are just credit card companies trying to get you scared so you would tell your congressperson to vote against.
#3 they've been doing already all year.
Quote from: Wilbur on May 20, 2009, 01:10:33 PM
I use a credit card for every single transaction, no matter how small or how large. I only use cards with no annual fee, and I only use cards that pay cash back (Amex Blue is the best). I pay off the balance every month in full, and once a year, I get a big fat check from the credit card companies for my cash back. I anticipate most of this going away with the passage of this new bill, not to mention the other problems already mentioned.
As I think I mentioned earlier, it's doubtful that anything will go away. The interchange percentage is higher on rewards cards and people with rewards cards tend to spend more. They're making a killing (especially Amex, have you ever seen their merchant fees?!) even if you pay off the balance every month. Interest is just gravy.
So long as they are not giving them a bailout . . .
I will not use a card with a fee on it unless some reward is guaranteed to over compensate me. I will not use a card with less than a $5,000 limit. I will not pay interest on a credit card (no grace period). If those terms change, I will simply use my debit card and risk more fraud (which the banks pay for from the consumer side).
There are two things going on here:
1) An industry that set up its own rules is now complaining because those rules allowed them to take too much risk and they got burned.
2) Congress is again "protecting" the American people, who have apparently becomes so stupid they don't understand credit cards. Every college kid since 1990 has been told that credit cards can be trouble and you need to pay attention. Suddenly no one knows this. Because of YOUR stupidity my good credit will be punished.
Which is nice.
Quote from: cannon_fodder on May 21, 2009, 08:36:29 AM
So long as they are not giving them a bailout . . .
I will not use a card with a fee on it unless some reward is guaranteed to over compensate me. I will not use a card with less than a $5,000 limit. I will not pay interest on a credit card (no grace period). If those terms change, I will simply use my debit card and risk more fraud (which the banks pay for from the consumer side).
There are two things going on here:
1) An industry that set up its own rules is now complaining because those rules allowed them to take too much risk and they got burned.
2) Congress is again "protecting" the American people, who have apparently becomes so stupid they don't understand credit cards. Every college kid since 1990 has been told that credit cards can be trouble and you need to pay attention. Suddenly no one knows this. Because of YOUR stupidity my good credit will be punished.
Which is nice.
Your point of "every college kid since 1990..." brings to mind an important point. These credit crises are cyclical. Banks get permissive in their lending. They get hosed with a lot of foreclosures or credit card defaults, they tighten up their policies, run to the government for protection and remuneration, then they are encouraged to start lending more liberally again, they get greedy, ask the gov't to back off regs or turn a blind-eye and the cycle repeats. Rinse, spit, repeat.
The difference this time is that Wall Street set up a huge casino for insurance companies and other large investors to go gamble on whether debt would be re-paid or not.
How was the fishing?
I was listening to the Clark Howard Show last night, and it was pretty remarkable what he had to say.
He called the legislation an "overwhelming victory for the American consumer." Clark describes himself as a "dyed-in-the-wool capitalist" and espouses the self-corrective nature of capitalism.
However, Clark said the banking industry has "lost its moral compass" and that Congress had essentially left it with no choice but to intervene and stop the industry's shenanigans. He said that credit cards are profitable enough that if you run them ethically, you still will make a big pile of money. But, instead, credit card companies jacked up interest rates without notice on an existing balance, set payment due dates on a Sunday, sent out billing statements two days before a payment was due, etc., etc., etc.
Clark is no bleeding-heart liberal. But it was obvious he was disgusted with the credit-card industry, and the new laws were a punishment it deserved. And having known a few people who encountered the sort of sleazy tactics I described above, I'm inclined to agree.
Quote from: rwarn17588 on May 21, 2009, 10:51:21 AM
I was listening to the Clark Howard Show last night, and it was pretty remarkable what he had to say.
He called the legislation an "overwhelming victory for the American consumer." Clark describes himself as a "dyed-in-the-wool capitalist" and espouses the self-corrective nature of capitalism.
However, Clark said the banking industry has "lost its moral compass" and that Congress had essentially left it with no choice but to intervene and stop the industry's shenanigans. He said that credit cards are profitable enough that if you run them ethically, you still will make a big pile of money. But, instead, credit card companies jacked up interest rates without notice on an existing balance, set payment due dates on a Sunday, sent out billing statements two days before a payment was due, etc., etc., etc.
Clark is no bleeding-heart liberal. But it was obvious he was disgusted with the credit-card industry, and the new laws were a punishment it deserved. And having known a few people who encountered the sort of sleazy tactics I described above, I'm inclined to agree.
Other analysis of this legislation suggests that there are many card-holders who may now be deemed uncreditworthy and their cards will be cut-off. Remains to be seen.
I can't remember who the company was now, but about 10 years ago, Clark helped lead the charge on a company which was purposely holding onto payments and posting them after due dates. I had one of those cards and I would send in my payment 5 to 10 days prior to the due date. I started getting hit with late charges and/or interest even paying the balance in full. I called customer service and was told it was not their fault if the mail service was slow. That was total BS, it takes 2-3 days max. for first class mail to make it to either coast or anywhere in between. I cut the card up after four or five months of their behavior.
At any rate, there was eventually a class-action suit. I don't recall how much I got back out of it, but I don't think I was completely compensated. I'm sure the class attornies got millions and I probably got a gift certificate to Steak & Ale.
Quote from: Conan71 on May 21, 2009, 10:59:21 AM
Other analysis of this legislation suggests that there are many card-holders who may now be deemed uncreditworthy and their cards will be cut-off. Remains to be seen.
Howard talked about this, too. He thinks it'll be a wash.
He says the people who will get cut off from credit cards had highly dubious ability to pay on their debts anyway. Banks lending to people with a poor ability to repay is one of the big reasons the world financial system is in big trouble. Banks being careful of who they lend to is a good thing.
Quote from: rwarn17588 on May 21, 2009, 11:15:03 AM
Howard talked about this, too. He thinks it'll be a wash.
He says the people who will get cut off from credit cards had highly dubious ability to pay on their debts anyway. Banks lending to people with a poor ability to repay is one of the big reasons the world financial system is in big trouble. Banks being careful of who they lend to is a good thing.
Yep, that would have averted this disaster in the first place. Just wait though, the discrimination crowd will start bellowing once credit starts getting cut off. Just the man standing on the heads of the poor folk once again.
Hey wait, I thought the MAN was being mean to the poor folks and keeping them down by allowing easy access to credit?
Damned if you do . . .
Who is the MAN?
Started as a broad term for "the white man."
Evolved during the 60s and 70s into a term for anyone that imposes rules or laws upon a person or group of people: "I'm being hassled by the MAN". Also used to address friends: "Hey man" (not to be confused with "Hay Man" who was just off to see the Wiz).
Became a complementary term in the 80s for anyone that was of great assistance: "you Da' Man."
In the entitlement drive during the 90s it morphed back into a derogatory term for someone who won't give you something you want: "I'm being held down by the MAN" or "Can't get nuthin from the MAN".
In the 2K era the MAN has retired for the most part. We haven't heard that term frequently used. Bush became emblematic as a symbol for liberal hatred and a need for ambiguous terminology was lost.
Who is the MAN?
(http://www.crossingwallstreet.com/archives/grrrr.jpg)
No, he's "The Man"
(http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/ap/nyet68209071300.hmedium.jpg)
(http://img127.imageshack.us/img127/3589/empirerecords3qb5.png)
"Damn the man."
Quote from: cannon_fodder on May 21, 2009, 02:55:47 PM
(http://img127.imageshack.us/img127/3589/empirerecords3qb5.png)
"Damn the man."
Kudos for "Empire Records" reference. Those are rare.
Pretty good article from the Economist regarding the bailouts. http://www.economist.com/printedition/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=13648968
At some point, it seems to me that our economy went from innovation and delivering quality products and services to simply gambling. True, there is always risk is business, but it seems like so much of the windfall profits and the mess that followed were simply a result of legalized gambling on a macro-scale. I don't like that.