!!! Capital One Just Closed All 4 of My Cards !!!

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

I actually think these companies can be part of the topic if they are places Gregg should check to find out what is going on, so it could be helpful information for him when he checks back in with us.

---

Maybe but another CL already told him to check.  There really isn't anything more to add about that.  If people want info about various CRAs they can ask in General Credit or check Google..  

[Anonymous]

Next time I'll post it as a list so Gregg can see all 5 places we suggest for him to check in order to help him in this specific situation. Thanks. I think when someone is in crisis as Gregg is, it may be more helpful for us to share the information than to tell him to "check Google."

[Anonymous]

I hope that you're able to find out soon what exactly is going on.  Best of luck.

[Anonymous]

OP, I'm so sorry you're having to deal with this lousy situation. Talk about being blindsided I hope you're able to get to the bottom of it and that it's resolved quickly.

[creditguy]

Sounds like a bs excuse on Cap One's part. Why is there so much vagueness from credit card companies? How would a little more transparency hurt anyone? Just say what the reasons are, so tired of this juvenile tap dancing they do around closures and AA. Best of luck OP hope you get a positive resolution and sorry for the unneeded stress this has no doubt caused.

[Ghoshida]

---

@creditguy wrote:
Sounds like a bs excuse on Cap One's part. Why is there so much vagueness from credit card companies? How would a little more transparency hurt anyone? Just say what the reasons are, so tired of this juvenile tap dancing they do around closures and AA. Best of luck OP hope you get a positive resolution and sorry for the unneeded stress this has no doubt caused.

---

It might be a stretch but I think CCCs do that primarily to avoid any legal hassles.

The more specific the reasons become, the more risk the CCC has in terms of legal retaliation; because the consumer is more likely to be able to defend and react to a specific allegation than a generic accusation such as "you are risky, according to our lending department". 

Many times, such riskyness does not depend on the consumer herself, but is rather a factor of the bank's changing behaviour. 

For example, when times are good and bonuses are aplenty (for the bankers), consumers with 660 scores, and 50% utilization may be given $10k credit lines by some bank; when times become tough, and the bank needs to rein in its stretched credit, such customers might be given $1k only.

But the consumer has not really changed her behaviour; she used to charge up to 50% of her limit and over time pay it back! Still, the bank would be foolish to write that "your debt obligation has gone up" (it really has not, in percentage terms), or "we made a mistake and we'll now crawl back". Therefore, watch the rise of legalese generality! 

[Officer737]

I think it may some sort of mix up. They may have gotten a BK notice with similar name and DOB on it and restricted the accounts. They get those electronically from the courts and the clerk may have transposed the the SS# or identification information. As for LexisNexis, I don't trust them as far as I can throw them. A few years ago I was insurance shopping and was informed that I was showing a wreck on my MVR. I informed the insurance company that I have not had a wreck and they informed my they got the information from LexisNexis. I called LexisNexis and spoke to a very rude POS who stated "yes you did have a wreck, I have the information right in front of me, the wreck was on June 5, 2012 and you were driving a white Chevy Impala registered to you". I informed the person that I have never owned a Chevy Impala and wasn't anywhere near where the wreck happened that day. I asked them the diver's license number on the report and the driver's vital information, They rattled off the name, address, date of birth, race, gender and such. I quickly informed them that yes the name was similar, I have lived on the same street years ago, but my driver's license number was completely different and that I was a white male and not black male and the social security number was wrong!! The idiots then informed me that since there a small amount of adat that was similar, they stuck someone else's wreck on my MVR! Then to add insult to injury, after I sent them everything to prove that it wasn't who had the wreck they advised me that it would stay on there until the insurance agency reporting the wreck changed it. Hence comes in State Farm. I called the corporate office and went thru their hoops tracking the original report down and they stated that they are not reporting the wreck but an independant agent in my city was and they gave me all of their tracking information. I called the local agent and had a heated discussion with me about getting it removed and they basically informed tough **** we are going to keep reporting it no matter what you prove. So now every time I get a quote I have to call the company directly and verify the information with them before I can get an accurate quote. My MVR gets reviewed every year because I drive a government vehicle and it does not show the wreck on the official MVR but because LexisNexis reports it on their system, every quote is several hundred dollars higher and causing a royal pain in the rear.

[Anonymous]

I am so sorry to hear they did this to you. I hope and pray you can get good answers as to why they would take such action. I remember reading somewhere about an algorithm that some banks use to try and predict something they call "bust out" or break out". Basically, from what I remember, they were predicting that some people would suck out the money from their credit lines and default, if I remember correctly. I wonder if anything like this algorithm got triggered somehow?

[Anonymous]

---

@Officer737 wrote:

I think it may some sort of mix up. They may have gotten a BK notice with similar name and DOB on it and restricted the accounts. They get those electronically from the courts and the clerk may have transposed the the SS# or identification information. As for LexisNexis, I don't trust them as far as I can throw them. A few years ago I was insurance shopping and was informed that I was showing a wreck on my MVR. I informed the insurance company that I have not had a wreck and they informed my they got the information from LexisNexis. I called LexisNexis and spoke to a very rude POS who stated "yes you did have a wreck, I have the information right in front of me, the wreck was on June 5, 2012 and you were driving a white Chevy Impala registered to you". I informed the person that I have never owned a Chevy Impala and wasn't anywhere near where the wreck happened that day. I asked them the diver's license number on the report and the driver's vital information, They rattled off the name, address, date of birth, race, gender and such. I quickly informed them that yes the name was similar, I have lived on the same street years ago, but my driver's license number was completely different and that I was a white male and not black male and the social security number was wrong!! The idiots then informed me that since there a small amount of adat that was similar, they stuck someone else's wreck on my MVR! Then to add insult to injury, after I sent them everything to prove that it wasn't who had the wreck they advised me that it would stay on there until the insurance agency reporting the wreck changed it. Hence comes in State Farm. I called the corporate office and went thru their hoops tracking the original report down and they stated that they are not reporting the wreck but an independant agent in my city was and they gave me all of their tracking information. I called the local agent and had a heated discussion with me about getting it removed and they basically informed tough **** we are going to keep reporting it no matter what you prove. So now every time I get a quote I have to call the company directly and verify the information with them before I can get an accurate quote. My MVR gets reviewed every year because I drive a government vehicle and it does not show the wreck on the official MVR but because LexisNexis reports it on their system, every quote is several hundred dollars higher and causing a royal pain in the rear.

---

That's horrible, officer, sorry that happened. I don't think these agencies that retain data do much in terms of verifying they have the correct person. For almost 2 years I had another person's address popping up periodically on my EQ, and I didn't even know that person - somehow made it on there because he had the same last name. Great quality control.

I hope Gregg is ok and this gets resolved.

[longtimelurker]

---

@Ghoshida wrote:

---

@creditguy wrote:
Sounds like a bs excuse on Cap One's part. Why is there so much vagueness from credit card companies? How would a little more transparency hurt anyone? Just say what the reasons are, so tired of this juvenile tap dancing they do around closures and AA. Best of luck OP hope you get a positive resolution and sorry for the unneeded stress this has no doubt caused.

---

It might be a stretch but I think CCCs do that primarily to avoid any legal hassles.

The more specific the reasons become, the more risk the CCC has in terms of legal retaliation; because the consumer is more likely to be able to defend and react to a specific allegation than a generic accusation such as "you are risky, according to our lending department". 

Many times, such riskyness does not depend on the consumer herself, but is rather a factor of the bank's changing behaviour. 

For example, when times are good and bonuses are aplenty (for the bankers), consumers with 660 scores, and 50% utilization may be given $10k credit lines by some bank; when times become tough, and the bank needs to rein in its stretched credit, such customers might be given $1k only.

But the consumer has not really changed her behaviour; she used to charge up to 50% of her limit and over time pay it back! Still, the bank would be foolish to write that "your debt obligation has gone up" (it really has not, in percentage terms), or "we made a mistake and we'll now crawl back". Therefore, watch the rise of legalese generality! 

---

Yes, this, but also once the issuer has decided to basically get rid of someone as a customer, there is no upside for them to be involved in a discussion.   So while we are discussing possible mistakes, remember that there are probably far more cases where the person really has engaged in increasingly risky behavior.   So if I  give you some of the reasons ("You have 48 inquiries in the last month and have maxed up nearly 20 cards") I can be caught up in unproductive conversations ("I had to because", "it was my girlfriend who did all those charges" etc) and given enough examples, people in forums like here would attempt to reverse engineer the risk algorithms ("With Chase, you can have an average of 56% util providing no single card is above 63%" etc).   Much better just to say "Too many inquiries and too high balances, we are closing the card (or reducing limits)"