I just opened a Discover CC 3 months ago....recieved a 9100
credit limit.....0% for 6 months on transfers...
so I transfered ALL my CC debt to that card...5K...
went to set up a payment today..they've reduced my limit to
6100...I called to ask why...they've reviewed my credit report and
have seen too many app's for credit?? All I did was buy a new
car, from BMW...financed by BMW financial
there are a lot of US consumers getting screw jobs right
now...If you guys vote for any US Senator or Rep...with over 10
years of service your nuts...
Dylan I had a free and clear 30K credit line with B of A -
something I used ONCE in 18 months and paid off the month after I
used it. I have 3 credit cards to my name and only one even has a
balance - a small one. So in June, I was checking something about
how the credit line worked. That was on June 3. The other day I
went online to pay my bill (cc bill) and noticed the CL was not
showing up on my account. So last night I called them. On June 4 -
the day AFTER I spoke to them - they closed the 30K LOC - their
words - Lack of activity. They said I could reapply - what a bunch
of horseshit. The line had no activity for 15 months so they just
CLOSED it. Never even gave me the courtesy of a letter either.
My brother has a neighbor that for years had a LOC with his home
as collateral - home is fully paid for. He finally went to use the
LOC for a business venture. Discovered it had been reduced from
$250,000 to $2,500.
The banks are supposed to be lending - they are not. I posed
that point to the BAC person I was talking with and they said they
are supposed to make NEW LOANS not keep old loans open.
Posted by kingpin777 on 8th of Jul 2009 at 06:21 pm
They should have notified you before making any changes.
But from a business perspective its not profitable to have LOC's
out that they don't collect interest from. They reduce the capital
available for new loans and they do not generate revenue for the
bank. Its dead money.
That's the rationale (no I'm not a banker) but I can't imagine
how they can change your loan without proper notification.
You're suffering from one of the consequences of the free
market.
Are you saying that we should throw out the entire Congress
because they haven't imposed enough restrictions on the banks?
In a socialist society B of A couldn't do what they did to
you. In a free market they can and did.
Algyros - the problem is - as a taxpayer I am now supporting
their poor business model. To take away credit from those that are
responsible with it and give out "new credit" (their words not
mine) is just wrong. If we had a FREE market and these banks could
not be bailed out - they likely would keep taking the risk and just
raise everyone's rates. But instead, they have taxpayer money
propping up their balance sheets and at the same time screwing the
very people that have kept them afloat. It is not a free
market.
I agree about the injustice of using taxpayer money to support a
bad business model. My point is simply that the bad business
model itself will not be fixed by a lack of gov't
intervention. And the market itself won't cure it either, at
least not in a time frame that would be any solace to you.
Perhaps a free economy would have fixed the bad business model of
the old mining companies in time, but generations of miners would
have been screwed in the process. In my view,
intelligent and informed gov't intervention can speed up positive
market forces as well as lubricate them.
So if the government is stepping in with taxpayer money, why are
they allowing an even WORSE business model to be developed and
executed? The market needs to be free of intervention. Regulations
can and should be put in place to protect the masses, but once
someone decides to ignore the rules, or in the case of our
financial system, go beyond any reasonable man's concept of safe
and sound business practices, they are supposed to be allowed to
fail. If the government is going to use my money, my children's
money, and my grandchildren's money to support the bad decisions
rather than prosecute for breaking laws or ignoring rules, then
they ALSO need to be directing proper, fair, and equitable ways to
execute the use of the taxpayer funds.
Algyros - I don't know if well regulated state control is better
or Free Market. But there is a fallacy that I need to point out. If
there truly was a free market, there would have been no BAC left to
give out any loans or cancel credits. Its valuable assets would
have been auctioned off to the highest bidder long ago at pennies
on the dollar, and some other entity would have taken over its
depositors and customers.
Also if there was a true free market, we probably would have
gone through a very sever deflationary depression where millions
more would have lost their jobs, homes etc. as well as thousands of
financial institutions would have been bankrupt by now and would
have disappeared. We may even have had some substantial social
unrest and possibly literally blood on the streets. But we probably
would have seen some signs of innovation and hope right about
now.
Are we going to avoid any of the pain the way we are going now?
I don't know, and I don't pretend to have the answer. Only time
will tell.
if there had been a Free Market all along there would not
have been the political muscle to have everybody that wants to get
an affordable housing to begin with, regardless if they can afford
it or not. In a Free Market you get what you can afford and not
what you want.The so-called "Free Market" has been using Big
Government to have there cake and eat it too.
What we have is not a Free Market but a Mixed Economy, which
brings out the worst kind and this is the outcome.
if there had been a Free Market all along there would not
have been the political muscle to have everybody that wants to get
an affordable housing to begin with, regardless if they can afford
it or not. In a Free Market you get what you can afford and not
what you want.The so-called "Free Market" has been using Big
Government to have there cake and eat it too.
What we have is not a Free Market but a Mixed Economy, which
brings out the worst kind and this is the outcome.
How about Laissez-fair-Capitalism?
PS:Its the old head trick: Blame the Free Market when there
never was a truly Free Market in the first place, and then what
caused it all is giving us more of it to solve the problem. Sad
thing is that they are getting away with it.
I'm saying they sold us a bill of goods....and having guys like
Barney Frank, Harry Reid, Arlen Spector and Nancy Peolsi in places
of power with no term limits is just plain dumb...(and I do blame
the idiots that vote for them every year)
IMHO their policies have run the US into the ground,,,and the
more they "try" to help with the banks lending...the more they
hurt...this is just the banks trying to get out in front of
impending legislation and assure themselves of profits an
bonuses
In my view, blaming impending legislation for sleazy bank
practices is like blaming office theft on an impending office
restructuring.
But, again, why are you complaining about the gov't when you're
a victim of the free market? Do you really think that if there were
no government intervention, the banks would treat you more justly
than they do today? Do you think that with no regulations B
of A would be fair to you because Adam Smith's invisible hand would
smack it in the toches if it didn't?
Again, in my view, if people want a free market they ought to
accept the consequences of a free market.
Posted by billrosen on 8th of Jul 2009 at 04:44 pm
Dylan this just happened to me recently, about 1
year ago...I got a letter from Bank of America offering a 1
year cash advance at 0%, I had a 69k limit and took the deal of
course, I used the 69k and paid down my HELOC which was at 4%, (I
don't have a mortgage), thus making 4% on 69k in a year...$2760 in
free money. I paid off the credit card in month 12, thus not
incurring the jump in rates up from the 0% promotion. In month 13
Bank of America sends me a letter stating do to the high risk of my
use of my credit card my available credit was lowered from 69k
to $500, yes $500!!! I called B of A thinking there must be a
mistake, was told it was correct , then spoke to senior mgt and got
nowhere. I told them to take my now $500 credit card, close it out
and shove it up their ass. My fico is 780 and I never paid late
with any credit card or bill in my life and had been there customer
for something like 8 years. No wonder our banks are in
trouble...
It's getting to the point where I really want to start punching
some congress people...I don't ever hit women, but Barney Frank
better run if I see him..
Just an OT rant
Posted by dylan398 on 8th of Jul 2009 at 04:20 pm
I just opened a Discover CC 3 months ago....recieved a 9100 credit limit.....0% for 6 months on transfers...
so I transfered ALL my CC debt to that card...5K...
went to set up a payment today..they've reduced my limit to 6100...I called to ask why...they've reviewed my credit report and have seen too many app's for credit?? All I did was buy a new car, from BMW...financed by BMW financial
there are a lot of US consumers getting screw jobs right now...If you guys vote for any US Senator or Rep...with over 10 years of service your nuts...
throw them all out..I need a tea party
BAC Experience
Posted by rgoodwin on 8th of Jul 2009 at 05:17 pm
Dylan I had a free and clear 30K credit line with B of A - something I used ONCE in 18 months and paid off the month after I used it. I have 3 credit cards to my name and only one even has a balance - a small one. So in June, I was checking something about how the credit line worked. That was on June 3. The other day I went online to pay my bill (cc bill) and noticed the CL was not showing up on my account. So last night I called them. On June 4 - the day AFTER I spoke to them - they closed the 30K LOC - their words - Lack of activity. They said I could reapply - what a bunch of horseshit. The line had no activity for 15 months so they just CLOSED it. Never even gave me the courtesy of a letter either.
My brother has a neighbor that for years had a LOC with his home as collateral - home is fully paid for. He finally went to use the LOC for a business venture. Discovered it had been reduced from $250,000 to $2,500.
The banks are supposed to be lending - they are not. I posed that point to the BAC person I was talking with and they said they are supposed to make NEW LOANS not keep old loans open.
We're screwed indeed.
They should have notified you
Posted by kingpin777 on 8th of Jul 2009 at 06:21 pm
They should have notified you before making any changes.
But from a business perspective its not profitable to have LOC's out that they don't collect interest from. They reduce the capital available for new loans and they do not generate revenue for the bank. Its dead money.
That's the rationale (no I'm not a banker) but I can't imagine how they can change your loan without proper notification.
You're suffering from one of
Posted by algyros on 8th of Jul 2009 at 04:51 pm
You're suffering from one of the consequences of the free market.
Are you saying that we should throw out the entire Congress because they haven't imposed enough restrictions on the banks? In a socialist society B of A couldn't do what they did to you. In a free market they can and did.
Algyros - the problem is
Posted by rgoodwin on 8th of Jul 2009 at 05:25 pm
Algyros - the problem is - as a taxpayer I am now supporting their poor business model. To take away credit from those that are responsible with it and give out "new credit" (their words not mine) is just wrong. If we had a FREE market and these banks could not be bailed out - they likely would keep taking the risk and just raise everyone's rates. But instead, they have taxpayer money propping up their balance sheets and at the same time screwing the very people that have kept them afloat. It is not a free market.
I agree about the injustice
Posted by algyros on 8th of Jul 2009 at 05:35 pm
I agree about the injustice of using taxpayer money to support a bad business model. My point is simply that the bad business model itself will not be fixed by a lack of gov't intervention. And the market itself won't cure it either, at least not in a time frame that would be any solace to you. Perhaps a free economy would have fixed the bad business model of the old mining companies in time, but generations of miners would have been screwed in the process. In my view, intelligent and informed gov't intervention can speed up positive market forces as well as lubricate them.
So if the government is
Posted by rgoodwin on 8th of Jul 2009 at 06:07 pm
So if the government is stepping in with taxpayer money, why are they allowing an even WORSE business model to be developed and executed? The market needs to be free of intervention. Regulations can and should be put in place to protect the masses, but once someone decides to ignore the rules, or in the case of our financial system, go beyond any reasonable man's concept of safe and sound business practices, they are supposed to be allowed to fail. If the government is going to use my money, my children's money, and my grandchildren's money to support the bad decisions rather than prosecute for breaking laws or ignoring rules, then they ALSO need to be directing proper, fair, and equitable ways to execute the use of the taxpayer funds.
Agreed. My only point is that
Posted by algyros on 8th of Jul 2009 at 06:13 pm
Agreed.
My only point is that unfettered market forces are no more the answer than pure state control.
Free market or not
Posted by mamaduck on 8th of Jul 2009 at 07:34 pm
Algyros - I don't know if well regulated state control is better or Free Market. But there is a fallacy that I need to point out. If there truly was a free market, there would have been no BAC left to give out any loans or cancel credits. Its valuable assets would have been auctioned off to the highest bidder long ago at pennies on the dollar, and some other entity would have taken over its depositors and customers.
Also if there was a true free market, we probably would have gone through a very sever deflationary depression where millions more would have lost their jobs, homes etc. as well as thousands of financial institutions would have been bankrupt by now and would have disappeared. We may even have had some substantial social unrest and possibly literally blood on the streets. But we probably would have seen some signs of innovation and hope right about now.
Are we going to avoid any of the pain the way we are going now? I don't know, and I don't pretend to have the answer. Only time will tell.
How about laissez fair capitalism?
Posted by erikwil on 8th of Jul 2009 at 10:36 pm
in answer to your "Free Market":
if there had been a Free Market all along there would not have been the political muscle to have everybody that wants to get an affordable housing to begin with, regardless if they can afford it or not. In a Free Market you get what you can afford and not what you want.The so-called "Free Market" has been using Big Government to have there cake and eat it too.
What we have is not a Free Market but a Mixed Economy, which brings out the worst kind and this is the outcome.
How about Laissez-fair-Capitalism?
How about laissez fair capitalism?
Posted by erikwil on 8th of Jul 2009 at 10:46 pm
in answer to your "Free Market":
if there had been a Free Market all along there would not have been the political muscle to have everybody that wants to get an affordable housing to begin with, regardless if they can afford it or not. In a Free Market you get what you can afford and not what you want.The so-called "Free Market" has been using Big Government to have there cake and eat it too.
What we have is not a Free Market but a Mixed Economy, which brings out the worst kind and this is the outcome.
How about Laissez-fair-Capitalism?
PS:Its the old head trick: Blame the Free Market when there never was a truly Free Market in the first place, and then what caused it all is giving us more of it to solve the problem. Sad thing is that they are getting away with it.
Title: OT I'm saying they sold
Posted by dylan398 on 8th of Jul 2009 at 05:00 pm
I'm saying they sold us a bill of goods....and having guys like Barney Frank, Harry Reid, Arlen Spector and Nancy Peolsi in places of power with no term limits is just plain dumb...(and I do blame the idiots that vote for them every year)
IMHO their policies have run the US into the ground,,,and the more they "try" to help with the banks lending...the more they hurt...this is just the banks trying to get out in front of impending legislation and assure themselves of profits an bonuses
JMHO
In my view, blaming impending
Posted by algyros on 8th of Jul 2009 at 05:14 pm
In my view, blaming impending legislation for sleazy bank practices is like blaming office theft on an impending office restructuring.
But, again, why are you complaining about the gov't when you're a victim of the free market? Do you really think that if there were no government intervention, the banks would treat you more justly than they do today? Do you think that with no regulations B of A would be fair to you because Adam Smith's invisible hand would smack it in the toches if it didn't?
Again, in my view, if people want a free market they ought to accept the consequences of a free market.
Dylan this just happened to
Posted by billrosen on 8th of Jul 2009 at 04:44 pm
Dylan this just happened to me recently, about 1 year ago...I got a letter from Bank of America offering a 1 year cash advance at 0%, I had a 69k limit and took the deal of course, I used the 69k and paid down my HELOC which was at 4%, (I don't have a mortgage), thus making 4% on 69k in a year...$2760 in free money. I paid off the credit card in month 12, thus not incurring the jump in rates up from the 0% promotion. In month 13 Bank of America sends me a letter stating do to the high risk of my use of my credit card my available credit was lowered from 69k to $500, yes $500!!! I called B of A thinking there must be a mistake, was told it was correct , then spoke to senior mgt and got nowhere. I told them to take my now $500 credit card, close it out and shove it up their ass. My fico is 780 and I never paid late with any credit card or bill in my life and had been there customer for something like 8 years. No wonder our banks are in trouble...
It's getting to the point
Posted by dylan398 on 8th of Jul 2009 at 04:46 pm
It's getting to the point where I really want to start punching some congress people...I don't ever hit women, but Barney Frank better run if I see him..
Barney
Posted by rgoodwin on 8th of Jul 2009 at 05:21 pm
Dylan - his nose is big enough - so just make sure you give him a black eye or something! LOLOL! Post is hysterical!