Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And yes, Amex voluntarily gave me a set of hoops that was also part of the new regulations at the exact same time that new regs took effect. I guess you could call that a coincidence. To me it seems related.
But with the exception of people 21 or younger the new regulations do not require any new "hoops". They have, at least directly, nothing to do with underwriting. Undoubtedly, they may cause tightening in the credit card market but that is hardly an unintended consequences, rather an intended consequence.
If American Express has changed its underwriting its because they decided it was the best for their business. Nothing about the new regulations would require them to do this, so your claim of "unintended consequences" is just a bit odd.
Anyhow, its really hard to see how the new regulations are bad. They will greatly reduce some of the most predatory lending practices and make things much more predictable for the consumer.
But with the exception of people 21 or younger the new regulations do not require any new "hoops". They have, at least directly, nothing to do with underwriting. Undoubtedly, they may cause tightening in the credit card market but that is hardly an unintended consequences, rather an intended consequence.
If American Express has changed its underwriting its because they decided it was the best for their business. Nothing about the new regulations would require them to do this, so your claim of "unintended consequences" is just a bit odd.
Anyhow, its really hard to see how the new regulations are bad. They will greatly reduce some of the most predatory lending practices and make things much more predictable for the consumer.
Amex is attributing their new hoops to new regs directly. Whether they are actually required or not it not really my point. My point is that the law was written and then Amex did what they did in response. The result is that getting a new card is more difficult for me in spite of the fact that I do nearly $500k in business with them each year, paying off my balance each month on-time.
As for whether the law will be generally beneficial or detrimental, time will tell. I will grant that some of the regs (and the bill at-large) were brought on by the actions of the industry itself. However, I also maintain that Congress rarely fixes anything without causing a lot more problems in the process and sometimes those problems end up being worse than the original problems. I would rather see an information campaign and then let consumers "punish" credit card companies by taking their business elsewhere. I am not naive enough to think that is a perfect solution (or that regulations are never needed) but it will usually be a better solution than laws and regulations.
Since the law passed I have seen my interest rates increase, my credit lines decrease, and the availability to get financing for business diminished.
Thank you, Washington, D.C.
Idiots. At least those who voted in favor of the legislation feel good about themselves.
Now... on to health care!!!!
Such is the price to pay when D.C brings the hammer down on the credit card companies who abuse the citizen and walk all over the commoner. Personally, you won't hear me complain about it at all.
I don't think this changes much of anything at all. For people who have always been responsible with their credit cards, the changes are irrelevant. For those who live on the edge of their credit limits or heaven help them go over and/or late paying, it simply defines the rules on how the banks can punish this group and in many cases the sky is the limit now.
The bottom line is no changes to bank rules are going to protect people from irresponsible behavior with their finances. Credit cards should not be considered the most important item with your finances. They should be used as a convenience item and last resort access to an emergency loan. If you are running a balance each month just due to normal living, then you are screwing yourself financially. Fix this, and these changes won't matter.
The new credit card regulations simply outlaw some of the most egregious abuses these companies have added in the past decade or so.
It may "hurt" some people to have credit lines reduced, but that has been happening for over a year now without regard to this regulation.
Trying to blame the government for taking corrective action is just one way to undermine regulations that do far more good than harm.
It is time that there be a limit placed on the amount of interest that can be charged as well, to bring the rates to less usurious levels. Of course, this would mean making some state laws, like South Dakota and Delaware null and void.
The end result is that it will be tough for poor credit risks and highly indebted people to find additional money to borrow, and that would not be a bad thing. In the end, the default rate would go down along with the interest rates.
It would be nice for the relationship between banking and consumers to return to a more balanced level.
Amex is attributing their new hoops to new regs directly.
And you base this on what some $10/hour employee is telling you on the phone?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Niners fan
My point is that the law was written and then Amex did what they did in response. The result is that getting a new card is more difficult for me in spite of the fact that I do nearly $500k in business with them each year, paying off my balance each month on-time.
I know your point, but the regulations have nothing to do with charge cards or business cards. A bit hard to imagine why the new regulations would have resulted in a change in their underwriting for these cards.
How much business you do with them under a different corporation does not really matter. I suppose if you are personally guaranteeing the cards it may have some weight...but then again it may not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Niners fan
I would rather see an information campaign and then let consumers "punish" credit card companies by taking their business elsewhere
.
Information campaign? The information is already available and there are numerous sites that allow you to compare cards. This is not like shopping for a new pair of shoes though, there are many people that are heavily in debt and got caught with their pants down. They are not able to shop around, they are stuck and these laws provide them some deal of stability while they dig themselves out.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
