Sticker Shock

The forum for general posting. Come join the madness. :)
Message
Author
User avatar
mcd1400de
Posts: 541
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 11:01 am
Location: the Physics department

Re: Sticker Shock

#26 Post by mcd1400de » Thu Feb 26, 2009 3:01 pm

ghostjmf wrote:
OK: You agree with Barclay's that I'm over my limit (which I had had them set back to $2,500.00 after they initially set it at a much higher level).

Now: Do you agree that Barclay's should have

(a) rejected my purchases until they cashed my check they hadn't cashed yet

or

(b) let me continue to run up charges, then charged me a penalty for it

(which is what they did do, though upon discussion they removed it;
I wonder if that penalty, during the brief 2 days it was on my account, could have
triggered my other card, by an unrelated company, raising my rates)

I thought that limits were there to stop use of the card at the limit, not to be an opportunity for the card company to let whomever is using the card, presumably a crook in most cases, to keep spending, then charge the owner of the card penalty fees.

The limit, no matter who sets it, is not there to stop usage by anyone -- you or a crook. It merely indicates how much credit to which you are entitled without being charged a fee. Most of the time the limit is set by the company, based on risk modeling, but whoever sets it, it stil operates the same. You can charge all you want up that limit with no fee. If you go over, it's at the discretion of the company if they want to extend you the additional credit.

Unless the amount is wildly over the limit or the usage pattern is significantly different than usual (that's what curbs fraudlent spending, not the limit itself), they generally will do so -- for both customer convenience, as Cal noted, and so they can charge the fee. CC companies count on that sort of income.

As you said, you are not beholden for any more than $50 in fraud charges, and usually not even that. Any fees and finance charges resulting from the fraud, as well as negative credit impacts, are also reversed. So all you really did by lowering your line was to reduce the amount of credit YOU had available without a fee being imposed!


By the way, here are the two snippets of legalese from the Cardmember Agreement we issue, regarding credit limits and fees.

Credit Line: You are responsible for keeping track of your account balance, including any fees and finance charges, and making sure it remains below your credit line. If your account balance is over your credit line for any reason, we may charge you an overlimit fee as described in this agreement. We may, but are not required to, authorize charges that go over your credit line.

Overlimit Fee: If your account balance is over your credit line at any time during a billing cycle, even if only for a day, we may charge an overlimit fee. We may charge this fee even if your balance is over the credit line because of a finance charge or fee we imposed or a transaction we authorized.


Basically: it's up to YOU to keep track of how much you spend in relation to your limit; it's not our responsibility to stop you from exceeding the limit; and if you do, we "may" charge you for it.

And this is disclosed in the document that always goes out with the new cards every time an account is opened. You know, the one that nobody reads (except for me, because it's my job).
Bazinga!

User avatar
peacock2121
Posts: 18451
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:58 am

Re: Sticker Shock

#27 Post by peacock2121 » Thu Feb 26, 2009 3:02 pm

mcd1400de wrote:
ghostjmf wrote:
OK: You agree with Barclay's that I'm over my limit (which I had had them set back to $2,500.00 after they initially set it at a much higher level).

Now: Do you agree that Barclay's should have

(a) rejected my purchases until they cashed my check they hadn't cashed yet

or

(b) let me continue to run up charges, then charged me a penalty for it

(which is what they did do, though upon discussion they removed it;
I wonder if that penalty, during the brief 2 days it was on my account, could have
triggered my other card, by an unrelated company, raising my rates)

I thought that limits were there to stop use of the card at the limit, not to be an opportunity for the card company to let whomever is using the card, presumably a crook in most cases, to keep spending, then charge the owner of the card penalty fees.

The limit, no matter who sets it, is not there to stop usage by anyone -- you or a crook. It merely indicates how much credit to which you are entitled without being charged a fee. Most of the time the limit is set by the company, based on risk modeling, but whoever sets it, it stil operates the same. You can charge all you want up that limit with no fee. If you go over, it's at the discretion of the company if they want to extend you the additional credit.

Unless the amount is wildly over the limit or the usage pattern is significantly different than usual (that's what curbs fraudlent spending, not the limit itself), they generally will do so -- for both customer convenience, as Cal noted, and so they can charge the fee. CC companies count on that sort of income.

As you said, you are not beholden for any more than $50 in fraud charges, and usually not even that. Any fees and finance charges resulting from the fraud, as well as negative credit impacts, are also reversed. So all you really did by lowering your line was to reduce the amount of credit YOU had available without a fee being imposed!


By the way, here are the two snippets of legalese from the Cardmember Agreement we issue, regarding credit limits and fees.

Credit Line: You are responsible for keeping track of your account balance, including any fees and finance charges, and making sure it remains below your credit line. If your account balance is over your credit line for any reason, we may charge you an overlimit fee as described in this agreement. We may, but are not required to, authorize charges that go over your credit line.

Overlimit Fee: If your account balance is over your credit line at any time during a billing cycle, even if only for a day, we may charge an overlimit fee. We may charge this fee even if your balance is over the credit line because of a finance charge or fee we imposed or a transaction we authorized.


Basically: it's up to YOU to keep track of how much you spend in relation to your limit; it's not our responsibility to stop you from exceeding the limit; and if you do, we "may" charge you for it.

And this is disclosed in the document that always goes out with the new cards every time an account is opened. You know, the one that nobody reads (except for me, because it's my job).
Personal responsibility........... what a concept.

User avatar
MarleysGh0st
Posts: 27966
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:55 am
Location: Elsewhere

Re: Sticker Shock

#28 Post by MarleysGh0st » Fri Feb 27, 2009 7:22 am

My apologies to wintergreen for not posting a proper reply yet. I want to write something more thoughtful than the run-of-the-mill pointy stick jabbing. Maybe this evening?

But it's nice that some other BBs have kept the thread alive! :mrgreen:

User avatar
wintergreen48
Posts: 2481
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 1:42 pm
Location: Resting comfortably in my comfy chair

Re: Sticker Shock

#29 Post by wintergreen48 » Fri Feb 27, 2009 9:04 am

ghostjmf wrote:TheCalvinator24 says:
The contract allows them to honor the charges.
I'll bet it does. On page 37 of the 60 page treatise, written in almost-invisible ink.


ghostie, ghostie, ghostie... this vexes me. What you are basically saying is that it is OK for you to ignore/break a rule because the people who made the rule deliberately made it impossible to find or understand it, so it is not your fault.

It vexes me, first, because it means that you do not think that you have any responsibility or obligation to do something that you agreed to do, if you do not understand what it is that you are agreeing to. Maybe it's just me, but it seems to me that if you do not understand something, then the proper way to handle it is NOT to do just whatever the heck you please and then complain and whine and moan about bad consequences, but rather, you should get someone (maybe one of those smart RichU kids) to explain it to you so that you will do what it is that you are supposed to do (and what you are agreeing to do), whereupon you could decide if you really want to agree to it.

But what vexes me even more is that your claim is simply not true. It does not matter who your credit card company is, but I do know that they did not bury the overlimit fee 'on page 37 of the 60 page treatise, written in almost-invisible ink,' rather, THEY PUT IT AT THE TOP OF THE VERY FIRST PAGE OF THE VERY FIRST DOCUMENT THEY SENT YOU, AND THEY PUT IT IN BOLD TYPE. Why do I know this? Because it is a legal requirement, and this information has to be included in a specially-outlined box at the head of all the disclosures that you receive when you are first offered a credit card: this is the 'Schumer Box,' after Charles Schumer, the senior Senator from NY who, as a Congressman, introduced the consumer protection legislation that made this a requirement. The law specifies exactly how this information is/must be presented to you, and where it must appear, and it is IMPOSSIBLE to miss it, unless you deliberately avoid it, or simply do not bother to read things that you are agreeing to. And far from being in 'almost-invisible' ink, it is actually written in bold type. And it is certainly not written in incomprehensible legalese: it simply says Over-the-credit-limit fee, and I rather think that anyone who is smart enough to know the numbers to get to this website should be able to understand those five words, even if she hasn't gone to law school. It can't be any more obvious or easier to comprehend (OK, maybe it could be more obvious: Schumer requires that the APR be more prominent than anything else, in 18-point type, so maybe the law should have required this to be written in 22-point type for people who really need to be slammed over the head with it, but still, it is pretty obvious and pretty easy to understand for any person who has at least some ability to read simple English, which I think even people at RichU can do).

If you were complaining about something like 'double cycle billing' (which Capital One does not use, but Discover and some other credit card lenders use), you might almost have a point: I have worked in this business for years, and I don't completely understand double cycle billing, except enough to know that it usually (but not always) means that people who pay credit card interest usually end up paying a little more interest than would be the case if their credit card company did not use double cycle billing, but you are complaining about something that that is very obvious, and very easy to understand, and you are kvetching about a problem that you brought on yourself because you wanted to have your cake and eat it too, and then not have to deal with the calories afterward. Sheesh.
Innocent, naive and whimsical. And somewhat footloose and fancy-free.

User avatar
ghostjmf
Posts: 7452
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 11:09 am

Re: Sticker Shock

#30 Post by ghostjmf » Fri Feb 27, 2009 9:54 am

wintergreen says:
THEY PUT IT AT THE TOP OF THE VERY FIRST PAGE OF THE VERY FIRST DOCUMENT THEY SENT YOU, AND THEY PUT IT IN BOLD TYPE
Being me, I've probably got the "very 1st document they sent me". They sent it fairly recently, anyway, since they took this card over from Bank of America, whom I'm getting to like better & better retroactively, but who doesn't give me free shipping of my LL Bean clothes with their card any more, last summer.

I don't recall seeing what you claim was in bold print at the top. They did give a readable-print list of "stuff we offer that BoA didn't offer, & stuff BoA offerred that we will not be giving you". I don't recall this being on that list.

User avatar
ghostjmf
Posts: 7452
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 11:09 am

Re: Sticker Shock

#31 Post by ghostjmf » Fri Feb 27, 2009 10:01 am

Another thing, as TheCalvinator24 has pointed out, is that you make your payment to the CC company with every expectation that they will in fact cash your check. Then they fail to cash your check until the very last day possible even though they've had it a week (I haven't yet had them hold it over the due date, but I believe people who say that has happened to them). Which, if you are keeping track of staying under the limit, as I in fact was doing, completely screws up your records.

I will bet that people who do electronic transfers of money to their credit card companies still find that, inexplicably, the money doesn't appear credited to their account instantly, though it should be. I would be happy to find I am wrong about this, but don't think I am.

User avatar
ghostjmf
Posts: 7452
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 11:09 am

Re: Sticker Shock

#32 Post by ghostjmf » Fri Feb 27, 2009 10:16 am

And also on this very clear-to-understand, if you're wintergreen & work in the industry, that is, topic of what credit card companies are & are not allowed to do, & what point type they are mandated to notify you about it in:

How come they're always raising my credit limit when I didn't ask them to? If I'm such a bad customer that they have to raise my rates, & all? How come I have to keep making calls to them to bring those astronomical limits they keep trying to give me back down? Sometimes I have to call special branches of the company, not just the regular 24-hour help line, & beg them to bring my credit limit down.

User avatar
TheCalvinator24
Posts: 4886
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:50 am
Location: Wyoming
Contact:

Re: Sticker Shock

#33 Post by TheCalvinator24 » Fri Feb 27, 2009 10:46 am

ghostjmf wrote:Another thing, as TheCalvinator24 has pointed out, is that you make your payment to the CC company with every expectation that they will in fact cash your check. Then they fail to cash your check until the very last day possible even though they've had it a week (I haven't yet had them hold it over the due date, but I believe people who say that has happened to them). Which, if you are keeping track of staying under the limit, as I in fact was doing, completely screws up your records.

I will bet that people who do electronic transfers of money to their credit card companies still find that, inexplicably, the money doesn't appear credited to their account instantly, though it should be. I would be happy to find I am wrong about this, but don't think I am.
My issues with payments not being posted timely have, in fact, been on electronic fund transfers.

Annoyed the crap outta me.
It is our choices that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities. —Albus Dumbledore

Post Reply