No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
@JeffM wrote:Why do you feel entitled to a backdate?
I don't get the impression that the OP feels entitled. Seems more like an inquiry why this is unique to AmEx. I haven't had much luck with Googling for an answer either.
My best guess is this.
Federal law requires all information reported on CRAs to be accuarate. For AmEx, given their history and practice "members since" dates, their backdating is an "accurate" entry into the CRAs, whereas other banks, who have never engaged in this practice, would be considered "inaccurate."
Similar to if one were to make a new payment to a very old debt, the entry is updated and SOLs reset to reflect the most accurate and up-to-date information. This is the reason why the credit scoring method creates a disinsentive to pay off really old debts, even if one felt honor bound.
If all of the credit cards backdated accounts, then it would lose its meaning. It would become an element that is either ignored or discounted in the scoring algorithm.
Or, at least, that is what makes sense to me. Having a television in your house was impressive until everyone had one.
@BootStraps wrote:If all of the credit cards backdated accounts, then it would lose its meaning. It would become an element that is either ignored or discounted in the scoring algorithm.
Or, at least, that is what makes sense to me. Having a television in your house was impressive until everyone had one.
+1 Very true.
The TV analogy is a good one. Similarly, when Platinum credit cards were new, they were a hot, enviable status symbol. Now Platinum is near the bottom of the heap and people complain when they get one. Backdating is so prized ONLY because it's a rare benefit. If every card issuer did it, it would be nothing.
In general, when a new law is passed that applies to the area of banking there is an implementation date that says "you must comply by this date". Very infrequently is there grandfathering, unless the customer relationship or asset exists with the bank prior to the law being passed. For example, banks are generally prohibited from investing in equity securities (stocks), but many older banks who held equity securities were grandfathered in with their current holdings. However, when it comes to issues involving customer disclosure (think CARD Act, Truth In Lending, etc.) no bank is grandfathered in here. Otherwise, no bank would have to do it.
I hope I made that distinction clear. When a law is passed, business practices generally have to change. Now, with that said, I have no clue where backdating falls in this debate.
ETA: 1,500th post!
@Open123 wrote:My best guess is this.
Federal law requires all information reported on CRAs to be accuarate. For AmEx, given their history and practice "members since" dates, their backdating is an "accurate" entry into the CRAs, whereas other banks, who have never engaged in this practice, would be considered "inaccurate."
Similar to if one were to make a new payment to a very old debt, the entry is updated and SOLs reset to reflect the most accurate and up-to-date information. This is the reason why the credit scoring method creates a disinsentive to pay off really old debts, even if one felt honor bound.
That probably accounts for differences in SP/HP for CLI. So, IF I enter a HP, it had better be the case that the customer was seeking credit, but I am not obliged to enter one even if the customer was seeking credit. So accurate but not necessarily complete!
@longtimelurker wrote:
@Open123 wrote:My best guess is this.
Federal law requires all information reported on CRAs to be accuarate. For AmEx, given their history and practice "members since" dates, their backdating is an "accurate" entry into the CRAs, whereas other banks, who have never engaged in this practice, would be considered "inaccurate."
Similar to if one were to make a new payment to a very old debt, the entry is updated and SOLs reset to reflect the most accurate and up-to-date information. This is the reason why the credit scoring method creates a disinsentive to pay off really old debts, even if one felt honor bound.
That probably accounts for differences in SP/HP for CLI. So, IF I enter a HP, it had better be the case that the customer was seeking credit, but I am not obliged to enter one even if the customer was seeking credit. So accurate but not necessarily complete!
Right, there are no laws that state a creditor *MUST* provide information, only that the information is *ACCURATE*. So, let's say, Longtimelurker Inc. misses a payment with Open Inc. I have every right to *not* report it, but if I do, it must be accurate and reflect that you paid late.
@Open123 wrote:
@longtimelurker wrote:
@Open123 wrote:My best guess is this.
Federal law requires all information reported on CRAs to be accuarate. For AmEx, given their history and practice "members since" dates, their backdating is an "accurate" entry into the CRAs, whereas other banks, who have never engaged in this practice, would be considered "inaccurate."
Similar to if one were to make a new payment to a very old debt, the entry is updated and SOLs reset to reflect the most accurate and up-to-date information. This is the reason why the credit scoring method creates a disinsentive to pay off really old debts, even if one felt honor bound.
That probably accounts for differences in SP/HP for CLI. So, IF I enter a HP, it had better be the case that the customer was seeking credit, but I am not obliged to enter one even if the customer was seeking credit. So accurate but not necessarily complete!
Right, there are no laws that state a creditor *MUST* provide information, only that the information is *ACCURATE*. So, let's say, Longtimelurker Inc. misses a payment with Open Inc. I have every right to *not* report it, but if I do, it must be accurate and reflect that you paid late.
Can you stop harping on about that? It was just two days, ok 2 weeks late. Honest error. God!
@longtimelurker wrote:
@Open123 wrote:
@longtimelurker wrote:
@Open123 wrote:My best guess is this.
Federal law requires all information reported on CRAs to be accuarate. For AmEx, given their history and practice "members since" dates, their backdating is an "accurate" entry into the CRAs, whereas other banks, who have never engaged in this practice, would be considered "inaccurate."
Similar to if one were to make a new payment to a very old debt, the entry is updated and SOLs reset to reflect the most accurate and up-to-date information. This is the reason why the credit scoring method creates a disinsentive to pay off really old debts, even if one felt honor bound.
That probably accounts for differences in SP/HP for CLI. So, IF I enter a HP, it had better be the case that the customer was seeking credit, but I am not obliged to enter one even if the customer was seeking credit. So accurate but not necessarily complete!
Right, there are no laws that state a creditor *MUST* provide information, only that the information is *ACCURATE*. So, let's say, Longtimelurker Inc. misses a payment with Open Inc. I have every right to *not* report it, but if I do, it must be accurate and reflect that you paid late.
Can you stop harping on about that? It was just two days, ok 2 weeks late. Honest error. God!
Oh, by the way, don't forget to remit the $35 late fee, $45 over the limit fee, and the $28.99% penalty interest that now applies to your entire balance.