Suppose that you wake up tomorrow, and find that somehow during the course of the evening you have become a United States Senator. If you could file a bill in the Senate tomorrow that could reform the way in which credit card companies do business, what specific reforms would you call for? What changes are most urgently needed?
All creditors must first, prior to furnishing negative information to CB's, send a letter informing the debtor/account holder of the impending negative information. Upon receipt of the notification, debtor/account holder, should they disagree with the information, shall have 45 days during which they may request verification that the information is correct. If not correct, creditor will rescind efforts to furnish the negative information. This is so very important because of the now common practice of creditors doing AR's randomly and using new negative information ON OTHER ACCOUNTS as justification for jacking interest rates, changing terms of agreements, lowering credit limits, and otherwise taking punitive action PRIOR to the account holder having a chance to dispute invalid information. Many have posted here and on PFB how a mistake or erroneous info on a different account cost them higher interest rates on their other cards and how those creditors refused even after removal from the credit reports of negative info to reprice the APR back to it's prior percentage. Additionally, it seems that now all types of insurance can be repriced based on credit reports. I say, let the consumer check what's about to go on their reports BEFORE it causes irreversible damage.
Credit card companies should be required to educate customers how a credit card works before they extend a line of credit to someone. For example, the consumer would have to sign a separate affidavit to confirm that they understand how a credit card works...
Credit card legal reform Unwise | 5 posts what specific reforms would you call for? What changes are most urgently needed? == == == === === ==== ===== The consumer must be notified before any info. is made a part of their file.
Re: Credit card legal reform Mist | 723 1*All creditors must first, prior to furnishing negative information to CB's, send a letter informing the debtor/account holder of the impending negative information. Upon receipt of the notification, debtor/account holder, should they disagree with the information, shall have 45 days during which they may request verification that the information is correct. If not correct, creditor will rescind efforts to furnish the negative information. 2*This is so very important because of the now common practice of creditors doing AR's randomly and using new negative information ON OTHER ACCOUNTS as justification for jacking interest rates, changing terms of agreements, lowering credit limits, and otherwise taking punitive action PRIOR to the account holder having a chance to dispute invalid information. 3*Many have posted here and on PFB how a mistake or erroneous info on a different account cost them higher interest rates on their other cards and how those creditors refused even after removal from the credit reports of negative info to reprice the APR back to it's prior percentage. 4*Additionally, it seems that now all types of insurance can be repriced based on credit reports. 5*I say, let the consumer check what's about to go on their reports BEFORE it causes irreversible damage. MIST ======================================= 1* I Agree except validation as verified is not good enough. Also this should apply to all reporters of info. This should apply to both creditors and CRAS. Your suggestion should include both Pos.& Neg. Info. do to the fact that even Pos. Info us used against you for scoring. 2*This bilking method should be outlawed period. It's not punishment its legal robbery. There is no excuse for having to dispute anything in this case. 3* This has nothing to do with non defaulted accounts ban the gyp. 4* Credit has nothing to do with insurance = this is deluxe fleecing Out law credit for insurance! 5* Right on, and heavy fines and damages to enforce such.
This doesn't just apply to credit cards, but I don't believe an inquiry should lower your score unless perhaps initially after accepting a new account. Trying to get the best deal should not penalize one and currently that is exactly how it is. The credit card companies and other lenders do not disclose the specific terms prior to applying...they generally have tiers...9.9%, 15.9% and 18.9% for example. Until you apply, you don't know which of those you will be offered or the credit line. I will *never* accept another $200 credit card at 18.9% again so if I apply and get approved but at that rate, I will cancel it immediately. Anyway...hope you catch the drift of my complaint...lol. L
Trying to get the best deal should not penalize one and currently that is exactly how it is. whyspers . ================== We are not criminals deserving punishment. We are victims getting shafted. There in no justification for punshing a customer.
