Credit Card Regulation Failing?
The Credit CARD Act of 2009 has some simple objectives. For example, according the White House’s website, the legislation:
- Bans Unfair Rate Increases
- Prevents Unfair Fee Traps
But today’s Wall Street Journal raises real questions about whether this latest wave of credit card regulation has seriously prevented card issuers from gouging customers, even in these two respects.
Credit Card Companies “Outflank Law?”
Take credit card rates. The new law says that credit card companies can raise them only in exceptional circumstances. But at least one card issuer has issued an ultimatum to some of its customers–waive your rights so we can raise your rates or we’ll more than double your monthly minimum payments.
Another of the credit card companies circumvented fee restrictions by hiking rates before the act came into force.
02 Jun
Posted by Mary Sanders as Credit Cards
The group warned that spending money on credit cards that have been used for balance transfers could cost people hundreds of pounds in interest because in most cases repayments are used to clear the cheapest debt first.
As a result, repayments will not be used to clear any additional spending until the money that was transferred to the card at 0pc interest has been cleared.
The group estimates that making a purchase of just £50 on a card to which a £2,500 balance had been transferred could cost up to £106 in interest over 12 months.
From the beginning of next year, credit card companies will be required to use customers’ repayments to clear their most expensive debts first, but until then many firms are continuing to use them to pay down the cheapest ones, enabling them to make more money through interest charges.
Kevin Mountford of moneysupermarket.com said: “Despite this issue receiving a lot of publicity over the last few years, it is worrying that many credit cardholders still make the crucial error on their cards of using them for both balance transfers and purchases.
“Although many cards advertise 0pc rates for balance transfers and purchases, the majority of cards only offer short-term deals for purchases.
29 May
Posted by Mark Wood as Financial Articles
Getting threatened with foreclosure is tough.
Actually being foreclosed on is tough.
Particularly when the mortgage company has foreclosed illegally.
But then to add insult to injury, you will receive a letter demanding you leave your home or you will be sued.
Remember this – if the foreclosure was wrong . . . and they often are . . .
It may seem simple enough to look through the various credit card offers available and choose the one that offers the lowest APR, but times have changed. Due to the Credit CARD Act that went into effect on February 22, 2010, there are new stipulations on credit lenders regarding APR. Lenders have had to make changes to the way they do business in order to accommodate these new federal requirements while still being able to turn a profit. As a consumer, you will need to pay more attention to the details of any credit card offer before accepting it.
Read the Fine Print
As you compare credit card offers you may be lured in with promises of zero percent interest rates on balance transfers or low introductory rates. However, it is critical to read the terms of service and the credit card agreement. Many lenders add expensive fees to credit cards. These may include new annual charges, hefty fees associated with over-the-limit occurrences and even a high interest rate after your introductory period ends.
While there have been conflicting reports as the actual available download and upload speeds available through Sprint’s Overdrive 4G mobile hotspot, the product itself seems to offer a rather divisive first look into current 4G internet options.
The product is promised as a 4G/3G modem of sorts, offering tethered or wireless connections for up to 5 devices (ranging from cell phones to laptops). In cities with supported 4G the reviews from initial users have been positive, mentioning that the speeds were indeed impressive enough to warrant a next generation-type of label.
While the speeds weren’t as high as the suggested 10mpbs for most users, they were fast enough to warrant the $49 purchase (with 2year service, $499 without). Perhaps the biggest pitfall for Sprint will be that their product has come out ahead of their actual 4G support schedules, making the process a purchase-at-your-own risk transaction.
Currently, the wireless provider’s 4G connections are only promised in 31 select cities – while the number is growing, the amount of users who are willing to shell out money for both a device and a service that isn’t national (let alone state-wide) isn’t.