By Edward Jamison, Esq.
We’re officially four months away from the Credit Card Holder’s Bill of Rights going into effect. And, if certain Democrats have their way, we’re only thirty days away. But, for the sake of argument let’s assume that the CARD Act provisions will wait until February 2010 to become enforceable law.
During these last few days of the credit card world’s version of the Wild Wild West we should continue to see credit card issuers behaving badly, very badly in fact. The mega-credit card issuers have a shrinking window of opportunity to finish remolding their cardholder base to look more like what they will finally deem as being to their liking. This means consumers will continue to suffer the at the hands of their credit card companies, that is of course unless they employ one or more of the following strategies.
1. Don’t Not Use Your Card – Ok, the poor grammar was intentional and corny but I think I’ve made my point. Credit card issuers are in busy to make money and make a profit. They can’t do either unless you are using your credit card. And, the best news is that you do not have to carry a balance from one month to the next in order to drop a few dimes in your credit card issuers pockets. Each time you use your credit card the merchant (aka the place you used the card) has to pay the bank a fee. This fee is called interchange. It technically comes out of your pocket because many retailers will build the assumed fee into the price of the merchandise but it sure doesn’t feel that way when we buy stuff with our credit cards. So, knock the dust off your cards and use them for modest purchases. Don’t revolve a balance and don’t get into a position where your balances spiral out of control and you’ll be fine.
2. Shut Up! – In the past a viable strategy to get fees waived and interest rates lowered was to call your credit card issuer and complain or otherwise plead your case. That’s still a decent strategy but beware. Your credit card issuer might turn the tables and start asking YOU questions in order to determine whether or not they still want to do business with you. If you call them and THEY start asking questions about your job status and salary then end the convo and hang up or you might just end up with a closed credit card.
3. Open Another Card, NOW – One of the worst strategies I see people employing today is the 1-card strategy. This is a consumer who has swallowed the Dave Ramsey gospel hook, line and sinker. The problem is that it’s unrealistic and appealing only to the lowest common credit denominator. You should have MORE cards, not fewer cards. Clearly this is a credit score play as well since having more available and unused credit limits are always good for your credit scores. So, if you have one or two credit cards right now, think about opening at least one more. This gives you options in case one of your credit card issuers starts behaving badly towards you. Nothing is more empowering than saying “I’ll take my business elsewhere” and then actually doing it.
4. Don’t Hide Behind Great FICO Scores – FICO published a study earlier this year and the findings showed that the median FICO score for a consumer who has seem his or her credit limit reduced was 770. A 770 FICO score is fantastic in any lender’s book and especially in this credit environment where lenders are gravitating to stronger borrowers. What this means is that just because you have great FICOs it doesn’t fully shield you from adverse treatment from lenders.
5. Go Small and Go Local – I was interviewing John Ulzheimer, founder of http://www.creditexpertwitness.com/ and a nationally recognized credit expert and he made an interesting point. He said that we, as consumers and watchdogs, tend to focus on the largest 5-10 banks and tend to forget about the thousands of lenders who are NOT treating their customers poorly. Credit unions are a great example of these lenders. If you are sick of how you’re being treated by your Manhattan bank then perhaps you need a local credit union or local bank on your side.
6. Don’t Exit The System – The blogs are on fire with angry consumers who are claiming to have sworn off credit for the foreseeable future because of how they are being treated by their lenders. “From now on if I can’t pay cash for it I won’t buy it.” Eh, that plays well on the big screen but it’s not realistic. Carrying around cash to pay for things is a bad idea. And good luck using debit cards for things like business travel and European vacations. Stay in the system, please.
7. If All Else Fails, Litigate – If you’re finding yourself saddled with a garbage credit report because of errors and you can’t the credit bureaus or lenders to correct your files then think about filing a lawsuit. You certainly wouldn’t be alone. There will be over 8,500 credit related lawsuits filed this year. Collections agencies are the targets in most of them but certainly the credit bureaus and lenders are in the cross hairs a fair amount too. Just be sure to hire a lawyer who knows what he’s doing.
So there you have it, seven solid strategies to hopefully minimize your chances of being treated poorly by your creditors. And while there are certainly no guarantees that you’ll exit this credit environment without a few scars, you can certainly make yourself as immune as possible by doing a few easy and inexpensive things. Good luck!!
Showing posts with label Credit Cards. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Credit Cards. Show all posts
Friday, November 13, 2009
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
CARD Act Signed Into Law, What Happens and When?
By Edward Jamison, Esq.
On Friday May 22 President Obama signed the landmark Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act, or better known as the CARD Act. The CARD Act is meant to protect consumer from the abusive acts of credit card issuers. It becomes enforceable law at the end of February 2010, a full five months earlier than similar protections adopted by the Federal Reserve, which would have gone into effect in July 2010.
A highlight of the new law and its provisions is as follows:
Gift Card Longevity – Today gift cards have descending value, meaning that as the gift card remains unused the balance can be reduced a few percentage points each year. This self-reducing balance is important to the card issuer, especially if they are publicly traded because of current accounting rules that prevent a company from claiming the revenue until the card is actually redeemed.
What this means is that if you buy a $500 gift card from an Apple Store and never use it, Apple cannot claim that $500 as revenue despite having the $500 in the bank. This is why many companies reduce the value of unredeemed gift cards over time. Under the new CARD Act a gift card cannot be reduced in value for a full five years.
There are studies that have shown that the longer the “safe harbor” period for gift cards the less likely they are to be redeemed. So, it seems as if the lawmakers may have gone the wrong way with this provision. Think about it from a consumer perspective. If you have a gift card that expires in 7 days aren’t you more likely to use it quickly rather than a card that retains its full value for five years?
Under 21 Marketing Restrictions – Today you just have to be over the age of 18 in order to obligate yourself to a credit card agreement. That will change under the CARD Act. In fact, you will now have to be 21 years old starting next March if you want to apply for a credit card. An exception will be made for those who can prove that they have the capacity to make credit card payments and for those who can convince a parent to co-sign for them.
This is a “good news/bad news” provision in that it prevents consumers from establishing credit at 18. This costs you a full three years of credit history and credit experience, both of which are essential to someone who wants to build up his or her credit scores. Now someone who can’t find a parent willing to co-sign will have to wait until they turn 21 before they can get their credit career started. An obvious question to ask would be “exactly what happens between the ages of 18 and 21 that all of a sudden indicates that a consumer has learned the value of proper credit management?”
The good news is that many students who would have ended their college career with a nice degree and a ton of credit card debt will now end their career with just the degree. According to a study performed by Sallie Mae in 2008 found that 84% of college undergraduates had a credit card. And, the same study found that the average senior carried more than $4,100 after graduation. Both of these numbers will surely decrease with the new law.
Prevents Double Cycle Billing – Most credit card issuers have scrapped this practice voluntarily but the new law makes it official. Double cycle billing is the practice of using your average daily balance for the current and most recent past billing cycle and use that figure to determine finance charges. It’s complicated but safe to say that if you carry a balance from one month to the next then this method costs you more interest.
Longer Guaranteed Grace Period – Today many issuers are reducing grace periods, which is the number of days after your bill is mailed before it is due. This is the “free loan” period. If you pay your balance in full before the grace period ends then you’ve just enjoyed a free short-term loan.
Many issuers were reducing this grace period to 14 days, which caused many consumers to miss payments because their due date would fall between paychecks. The longer grace period guarantees that you will be paid at least once before their bill comes due, assuming you’re employed.
Prevents Universal Default – Universal Default is the practice whereby a credit card issuer adversely changes the terms of your credit card account because of your actions with another lender. Today credit card issuers practice universal default and then publicly decry the practice, depending on which way the wind is blowing.
Allows Consumers To Control Over-Limit Spending – This provision allows consumers to avoid over-limit fees. In fact, a consumer would have to contact a credit card issuer and proactively opt in to allow over limit transaction approval. Otherwise the issuer will decline the transaction while you’re standing at the register or waiting for the waiter to return with the bill. Fees represent a multi-billion dollar revenue stream for credit card issuers. This provision will cost them big time.
Allows Consumer to Earn Back Lower Rates – Consumers who have gone 60-days past due can still see their credit card interest rates increased. This act, according to the American Banker’s Association, is meant to punish a consumer for doing something that they didn’t want them to do, which is the pay late. This allows credit card companies to still punish the delinquent consumer but it also allows the consumer to earn back their lower rate if they can make their payments on time for six months. Today all you can do is ask for your rate to be returned to its lower baseline.
This provision also guarantees that your rate will not increase for the first year after you’ve opened a credit card account. And, if also guarantees that promotional rates have to last at least six months. This provision is neutral and doesn’t benefit either side.
So there you have it, the CARD Act. Still the best way to not have to concern yourself with legislative protections is to not have credit card debt. Doing so makes many of these provisions interesting but not applicable.
On Friday May 22 President Obama signed the landmark Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act, or better known as the CARD Act. The CARD Act is meant to protect consumer from the abusive acts of credit card issuers. It becomes enforceable law at the end of February 2010, a full five months earlier than similar protections adopted by the Federal Reserve, which would have gone into effect in July 2010.
A highlight of the new law and its provisions is as follows:
Gift Card Longevity – Today gift cards have descending value, meaning that as the gift card remains unused the balance can be reduced a few percentage points each year. This self-reducing balance is important to the card issuer, especially if they are publicly traded because of current accounting rules that prevent a company from claiming the revenue until the card is actually redeemed.
What this means is that if you buy a $500 gift card from an Apple Store and never use it, Apple cannot claim that $500 as revenue despite having the $500 in the bank. This is why many companies reduce the value of unredeemed gift cards over time. Under the new CARD Act a gift card cannot be reduced in value for a full five years.
There are studies that have shown that the longer the “safe harbor” period for gift cards the less likely they are to be redeemed. So, it seems as if the lawmakers may have gone the wrong way with this provision. Think about it from a consumer perspective. If you have a gift card that expires in 7 days aren’t you more likely to use it quickly rather than a card that retains its full value for five years?
Under 21 Marketing Restrictions – Today you just have to be over the age of 18 in order to obligate yourself to a credit card agreement. That will change under the CARD Act. In fact, you will now have to be 21 years old starting next March if you want to apply for a credit card. An exception will be made for those who can prove that they have the capacity to make credit card payments and for those who can convince a parent to co-sign for them.
This is a “good news/bad news” provision in that it prevents consumers from establishing credit at 18. This costs you a full three years of credit history and credit experience, both of which are essential to someone who wants to build up his or her credit scores. Now someone who can’t find a parent willing to co-sign will have to wait until they turn 21 before they can get their credit career started. An obvious question to ask would be “exactly what happens between the ages of 18 and 21 that all of a sudden indicates that a consumer has learned the value of proper credit management?”
The good news is that many students who would have ended their college career with a nice degree and a ton of credit card debt will now end their career with just the degree. According to a study performed by Sallie Mae in 2008 found that 84% of college undergraduates had a credit card. And, the same study found that the average senior carried more than $4,100 after graduation. Both of these numbers will surely decrease with the new law.
Prevents Double Cycle Billing – Most credit card issuers have scrapped this practice voluntarily but the new law makes it official. Double cycle billing is the practice of using your average daily balance for the current and most recent past billing cycle and use that figure to determine finance charges. It’s complicated but safe to say that if you carry a balance from one month to the next then this method costs you more interest.
Longer Guaranteed Grace Period – Today many issuers are reducing grace periods, which is the number of days after your bill is mailed before it is due. This is the “free loan” period. If you pay your balance in full before the grace period ends then you’ve just enjoyed a free short-term loan.
Many issuers were reducing this grace period to 14 days, which caused many consumers to miss payments because their due date would fall between paychecks. The longer grace period guarantees that you will be paid at least once before their bill comes due, assuming you’re employed.
Prevents Universal Default – Universal Default is the practice whereby a credit card issuer adversely changes the terms of your credit card account because of your actions with another lender. Today credit card issuers practice universal default and then publicly decry the practice, depending on which way the wind is blowing.
Allows Consumers To Control Over-Limit Spending – This provision allows consumers to avoid over-limit fees. In fact, a consumer would have to contact a credit card issuer and proactively opt in to allow over limit transaction approval. Otherwise the issuer will decline the transaction while you’re standing at the register or waiting for the waiter to return with the bill. Fees represent a multi-billion dollar revenue stream for credit card issuers. This provision will cost them big time.
Allows Consumer to Earn Back Lower Rates – Consumers who have gone 60-days past due can still see their credit card interest rates increased. This act, according to the American Banker’s Association, is meant to punish a consumer for doing something that they didn’t want them to do, which is the pay late. This allows credit card companies to still punish the delinquent consumer but it also allows the consumer to earn back their lower rate if they can make their payments on time for six months. Today all you can do is ask for your rate to be returned to its lower baseline.
This provision also guarantees that your rate will not increase for the first year after you’ve opened a credit card account. And, if also guarantees that promotional rates have to last at least six months. This provision is neutral and doesn’t benefit either side.
So there you have it, the CARD Act. Still the best way to not have to concern yourself with legislative protections is to not have credit card debt. Doing so makes many of these provisions interesting but not applicable.
Monday, May 4, 2009
Credit Card Issuers Behaving Badly
by Edward Jamison, Esq.
Over the past 12-18 months most of the large credit card issuers have been changing the terms of some of their customer’s accounts. The reason they’ve been doing so is because of a general lack of comfort for credit risk as well as the slumping economy. Changing the terms is usually allowed under almost any circumstance, depending on the cardholder agreement.
Some of the more common actions being taken by credit card issuers, and the reasons why, are as follows;
Credit Limit Reductions – This is being done on a very large scale. In fact, Fair Isaac published the results of a study that measured the breadth of credit limit reductions during a 7-month period in 2008. Their findings show that 16% of cardholders saw their credit limits reduced in 2008, which translates to roughly 32 million consumers. Out of the 32 million, 22 million had a median FICO score of 770. This means that their credit limits were reduced for a reason other than poor credit or elevated credit risk. For these people it was because of inactivity, under-usage, or general lack of profitability. The remaining 11 million did have some sort of credit problem such as late payments, collections or adverse public records hitting their credit files so the reduction in credit limits wasn’t a surprise. What is important to remember is this study took place over a 7-month period from April through October 2008. Credit card issuers have been lowering credit limits since October 2008 and were doing so well before April 2008. What this means is the FICO numbers, while very accurate, are likely to underplay the true amount of consumers who have seen their credit limits reduced.
Increased Interest Rates – There are no numbers to quantify the breadth of rate increases but we know it’s significant. The excuse being given by some banking industry leaders is that a rate increase is meant to be both punitive and motivational. It’s punitive in order to punish cardholders who have done something wrong, like miss a payment due date. And it’s motivational because the logic is if your debt is more expensive then you’ll be more likely to pay it off faster. And while both are certainly true in some circumstances it’s hard to honestly argue that increasing an interest rate always leads to a consumer accelerating their payments. In fact, an alternative and much more damaging result is more likely which is to push an already struggling consumer over the edge into default. This doesn’t do the consumer or the creditor any good because of the damage it does to the consumer’s credit files and credit scores and it could motivate the consumer to seek the services of a debt settlement company or even a bankruptcy attorney. In either of the latter cases the lender gets much less, if any, of the money they are owed.
Increased Minimum Payment Requirements – The amount of money you are required to pay your credit card issuer each month is referred to as the “minimum payment required.” This amount is a percentage of the overall balance. Normally it’s 2% of the outstanding balance. But, in recent months some credit card issuers have increased that minimum requirement to 5% from 2%. This means if you were normally making a $350 minimum payment now you are required to make a $875 minimum payment. Don’t misinterpret this as them gouging you, like when they increase your interest rate. In this case they simply want back more of their money instead of less of their money. But, this also can lead to consumers defaulting on loans because they simply don’t have the capacity to make the larger monthly payment.
Reduction in Grace Period – The grace period is an often misunderstood component of a credit card account. The grace period is the amount of time between when the statement billing period has closed and the date when your payment is due. A simpler way to define the grace period is the period of time before interest begins to accrue on the balance. Some people incorrectly define the grace period as being the amount of time AFTER the due date a payment can be made before the credit card issuer starts to report your account to the credit bureaus as being past due. That’s incorrect. Grace period has nothing to do with credit reporting. The reason a grace period would be reduced is all about cash flow for the bank. If you never revolving a balance from one month to the next then you’re not going to earn the bank any interest income. As such, it would be reasonable for the bank to want their money back faster since it’s not earning for them. This allows them to lend it out to other people who are going to generate more income.
As of today every single one of these practices is perfectly legal, as long as the action doesn’t breach your contract with the creditor. However, many of them will be much more difficult to apply to your account as of July 2010, when a new set of credit card rules goes into effect. As of today the best way to avoid the negative ramifications of these actions is to only charge what you can afford to pay off at the end of the month. And, it would be in your best interest to pay off credit card debt as quickly as you can. This way things like interest rates, grace periods or minimum payments don’t matter to you.
Over the past 12-18 months most of the large credit card issuers have been changing the terms of some of their customer’s accounts. The reason they’ve been doing so is because of a general lack of comfort for credit risk as well as the slumping economy. Changing the terms is usually allowed under almost any circumstance, depending on the cardholder agreement.
Some of the more common actions being taken by credit card issuers, and the reasons why, are as follows;
Credit Limit Reductions – This is being done on a very large scale. In fact, Fair Isaac published the results of a study that measured the breadth of credit limit reductions during a 7-month period in 2008. Their findings show that 16% of cardholders saw their credit limits reduced in 2008, which translates to roughly 32 million consumers. Out of the 32 million, 22 million had a median FICO score of 770. This means that their credit limits were reduced for a reason other than poor credit or elevated credit risk. For these people it was because of inactivity, under-usage, or general lack of profitability. The remaining 11 million did have some sort of credit problem such as late payments, collections or adverse public records hitting their credit files so the reduction in credit limits wasn’t a surprise. What is important to remember is this study took place over a 7-month period from April through October 2008. Credit card issuers have been lowering credit limits since October 2008 and were doing so well before April 2008. What this means is the FICO numbers, while very accurate, are likely to underplay the true amount of consumers who have seen their credit limits reduced.
Increased Interest Rates – There are no numbers to quantify the breadth of rate increases but we know it’s significant. The excuse being given by some banking industry leaders is that a rate increase is meant to be both punitive and motivational. It’s punitive in order to punish cardholders who have done something wrong, like miss a payment due date. And it’s motivational because the logic is if your debt is more expensive then you’ll be more likely to pay it off faster. And while both are certainly true in some circumstances it’s hard to honestly argue that increasing an interest rate always leads to a consumer accelerating their payments. In fact, an alternative and much more damaging result is more likely which is to push an already struggling consumer over the edge into default. This doesn’t do the consumer or the creditor any good because of the damage it does to the consumer’s credit files and credit scores and it could motivate the consumer to seek the services of a debt settlement company or even a bankruptcy attorney. In either of the latter cases the lender gets much less, if any, of the money they are owed.
Increased Minimum Payment Requirements – The amount of money you are required to pay your credit card issuer each month is referred to as the “minimum payment required.” This amount is a percentage of the overall balance. Normally it’s 2% of the outstanding balance. But, in recent months some credit card issuers have increased that minimum requirement to 5% from 2%. This means if you were normally making a $350 minimum payment now you are required to make a $875 minimum payment. Don’t misinterpret this as them gouging you, like when they increase your interest rate. In this case they simply want back more of their money instead of less of their money. But, this also can lead to consumers defaulting on loans because they simply don’t have the capacity to make the larger monthly payment.
Reduction in Grace Period – The grace period is an often misunderstood component of a credit card account. The grace period is the amount of time between when the statement billing period has closed and the date when your payment is due. A simpler way to define the grace period is the period of time before interest begins to accrue on the balance. Some people incorrectly define the grace period as being the amount of time AFTER the due date a payment can be made before the credit card issuer starts to report your account to the credit bureaus as being past due. That’s incorrect. Grace period has nothing to do with credit reporting. The reason a grace period would be reduced is all about cash flow for the bank. If you never revolving a balance from one month to the next then you’re not going to earn the bank any interest income. As such, it would be reasonable for the bank to want their money back faster since it’s not earning for them. This allows them to lend it out to other people who are going to generate more income.
As of today every single one of these practices is perfectly legal, as long as the action doesn’t breach your contract with the creditor. However, many of them will be much more difficult to apply to your account as of July 2010, when a new set of credit card rules goes into effect. As of today the best way to avoid the negative ramifications of these actions is to only charge what you can afford to pay off at the end of the month. And, it would be in your best interest to pay off credit card debt as quickly as you can. This way things like interest rates, grace periods or minimum payments don’t matter to you.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Time to Sue
Is Litigation for You if You Can’t Get the Errors Corrected on Your Credit Report?
January 22, 2009
by Edward Jamison, Esq.
January 22, 2009
by Edward Jamison, Esq.
Imagine this scenario... You discover errors on your credit reports by one or more of your lenders. You challenge them and ask the credit bureaus to correct or remove them. Thirty days later the credit bureaus send you a reply confirming that what they have on file is accurate and it will not be removed or changed. They also direct you to contact your lender if you have any further questions regarding that allegedly incorrect credit reporting. You take the same course of action with the lenders reporting the incorrect information and, again, you are unsuccessful in getting the items corrected.
The scenario just described happens thousands of times every week. And while the Fair Credit Reporting Act is designed to protect consumers from credit bureau and lender negligence, the number of valid challenges to credit report data is not decreasing. Unfortunately, the number of challenges that result in credit reporting data being amended in favor of the consumer pale in comparison to the number that remain the same.
At this point the consumer has two very simple options; they can either live with the erroneous information until the state or Federal credit reporting statute of limitations expires, normally seven years, or they can escalate their efforts to have their credit reports corrected by filing a lawsuit.
Many experts are predicting that 2009 will yield an increase in consumer credit lawsuits due, in part, to consumers feeling the sting of increasingly difficult access to credit because of the credit crunch and a willingness to incur the costs of litigation to restore their good credit standing. "To some people it's an investment, do the math. If it costs you $20,000 in legal costs to force a lender or credit bureau to remove an inaccurate collection and the removal allows you to qualify for a mortgage interest rate that saves you $100,000, you tell me, was that a wise investment?
In fact, it's possible that you'll recover all of your legal costs as part of a settlement if your case is strong. It seems logical that the credit bureaus would not prefer a jury determine punitive damages in a case where they have sold credit reports to a lender that contained inaccurate information, but there is also a risk that the judge will grant only a portion or none of your Attorneys fees and then you're out that part of the money. The trade off for the credit reporting industry is legal fees and a controlled settlement amount, versus the unknown of taking the case to trial where the odds are not certain that at least one of the members of the jury has not had a similar experience with a credit bureau or lender.
The credit bureaus are sued hundreds of times each year with the majority of those lawsuits being filed in Georgia, California and Illinois. "It's not a coincidence that the filings are disproportionate to those states given that's where the three national credit reporting agencies are based", says John Ulzheimer, President of Consumer Education at Credit.com and the Owner of www.CreditExpertWitness.com, a consumer credit expert witness referral service. The credit bureaus also maintain insurance against such lawsuits so the costs can be limited to premiums and deductibles in many cases. Having said that, it's certainly not a comfortable feeling knowing that you're about to go to war with a company large enough to easily absorb the cost of litigation. "It's a rounding error to them and you better be prepared", states Ulzheimer.
So how do you know if you're prepared to sue your lender or one of the credit bureaus? Here's a checklist. If you can't answer yes to each of these then litigation may not be for you.
1. Have you documented all of your calls with the lender and credit bureau? This means every conversation you've had with them since you started your attempts to have the errors corrected. This can be as simple as a handwritten summary of the conversation with dates and names.
2. Have you attempted to have the item corrected using the standard protocols? You can't simply file a lawsuit against the credit bureau without giving them the opportunity to correct their error. Be sure that you've exhausted your rights to challenge credit report items as defined in the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
3. Have you suffered any damages due to the incorrect item? If not, then think twice about filing a lawsuit. Damages can be credit declinations, credit approvals with disadvantaged rates, higher insurance premiums, or the loss of a job due to credit report pre-employment screening. Can you document these things?
4. Can you tie the damages to the incorrect item? Are there other seriously negative items on your credit reports that are completely accurate that can be blamed for your damages?
5. Do you have copies of your credit reports and FICO scores and can you put together a chronology of credit reports and scores? If you can't, then you can subpoena the credit bureaus for archived credit reports and scores, although they will object profusely.
6. Are you absolutely certain that what's being reported is incorrect? Before you file a lawsuit you need to do a reality check. If the items are accurate but simply not to your liking, save your money.
7. Does your case have a chance? An expert witness can assess this for you before you spend a dime on a lawyer and can give you an honest assessment of your chances for success and ways to better prepare for litigation.
Monday, August 11, 2008
Credit Alert
August 11, 2008
by Edward Jamison, Esq.
Most people have never checked their credit score. They have always used credit wisely and have probably never been denied a loan. Long story short, they have never really had a good reason to worry about their credit score.
They do now.
Why? Because banks are systematically lowering credit limits on credit cards and HELOCS, even for borrowers with spotless credit records.
So when they receive notification from their bank of a drop in their available credit, they usually don't think too much about it at first. They say to themselves that they had no plans to max out their credit cards anyway. And besides, they just got their HELOC as a financial safety net or they only used it to finance a new car at better rates with a nice tax deduction.
But what the banks aren't telling them is the negative impact lowering their credit limits will have on their credit score.
As soon as a borrower's credit limit is lowered, it changes their Credit Utilization Rate, (CUR), which is a major component of their credit score. Credit Utilization Rates are calculated by dividing outstanding loan balances by the amount of credit available.
Click Here to Read On....
by Edward Jamison, Esq.
Most people have never checked their credit score. They have always used credit wisely and have probably never been denied a loan. Long story short, they have never really had a good reason to worry about their credit score.
They do now.
Why? Because banks are systematically lowering credit limits on credit cards and HELOCS, even for borrowers with spotless credit records.
So when they receive notification from their bank of a drop in their available credit, they usually don't think too much about it at first. They say to themselves that they had no plans to max out their credit cards anyway. And besides, they just got their HELOC as a financial safety net or they only used it to finance a new car at better rates with a nice tax deduction.
But what the banks aren't telling them is the negative impact lowering their credit limits will have on their credit score.
As soon as a borrower's credit limit is lowered, it changes their Credit Utilization Rate, (CUR), which is a major component of their credit score. Credit Utilization Rates are calculated by dividing outstanding loan balances by the amount of credit available.
Click Here to Read On....
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Big Brother is Watching
July 31, 2008
by Edward Jamison, Esq.
If you've been following the financial news over the past couple of weeks, chances are you've heard about the CompuCredit lawsuit and the potential impact on credit scores.
On June 10th, the Federal Trade Commission filed a lawsuit against CompuCredit, for the deceptive marketing of their Aspire Visa card to sub-prime borrowers. According to the lawsuit disclosures, CompuCredit was penalizing their customers for using their Aspire Visa cards with certain merchants.
A few examples that were given were massage parlors, bars, tire companies and even marriage counselors.
They were using a scoring model that helped to predict their customers' risk based on where they shopped. How in the world does buying tires or going to marriage counseling impact credit scores?
You can imagine the frenzy this piece of information is causing. Furious consumers and media outlets were demanding to know why "where" you shopped could negatively impact your FICO scores. Well, therein lies the problem... unfortunately, the media lumped these scores with FICO scores and simply put - these aren't FICO scores, folks.
This caused an awful lot of confusion and in an effort to set the record straight, here's some additional context that should help shed some light on this touchy subject:
Click Here to Read On...
by Edward Jamison, Esq.
If you've been following the financial news over the past couple of weeks, chances are you've heard about the CompuCredit lawsuit and the potential impact on credit scores.
On June 10th, the Federal Trade Commission filed a lawsuit against CompuCredit, for the deceptive marketing of their Aspire Visa card to sub-prime borrowers. According to the lawsuit disclosures, CompuCredit was penalizing their customers for using their Aspire Visa cards with certain merchants.
A few examples that were given were massage parlors, bars, tire companies and even marriage counselors.
They were using a scoring model that helped to predict their customers' risk based on where they shopped. How in the world does buying tires or going to marriage counseling impact credit scores?
You can imagine the frenzy this piece of information is causing. Furious consumers and media outlets were demanding to know why "where" you shopped could negatively impact your FICO scores. Well, therein lies the problem... unfortunately, the media lumped these scores with FICO scores and simply put - these aren't FICO scores, folks.
This caused an awful lot of confusion and in an effort to set the record straight, here's some additional context that should help shed some light on this touchy subject:
Click Here to Read On...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
