As one who just jumped through seemingly endless fiery hoops closing a USDA GUARANTEED, secured home loan (as they all are) by providing tax returns, paystubs, W2's and every other shred of information as far as the eye can see, I am incredulous that people complain about having to provide proof of income to open, extend, or maintain UNSECURED credit.
People, 100% of the risk is with the lenders when unsecured credit cards are involved. If you want to complain that a CCC is inconsistent...ok, well, show me one that ISN'T at some point or another. As all borrowers are different, so too will the requirements for credit. Just because Peggy doesn't know policies from a hole in the wall doesn't mean you shouldn't have to comply with any and all requests they make of you to best ensure minimal risk on their end and to confirm your creditworthiness.
Capital One is well-known as a stingy lender when it comes to CLs and CLIs. Perhaps they are adjusting their model to mitigate risk. I don't call these sorts of practices "annoying". I call them the tools of a successful business model that has made Cap1 one of the premier lenders in the world. They have basically gobbled up nearly every other sub-prime lender and are a verifiable credit empire because they do business in a smart, not convenient, manner.
all that i got out of your post, they are a monoply due to shrewd business.
...as is BOA, Citi, AMEX, Barclay...the list is nearly endless.
They are in business to make money. The business that ISN'T doesn't stay in business very long.
Exactly my point. But let's not paint a flowery picture was main point. That is what you were doing.
It IS a flowery picture...for them. They are a BUSINESS...and by definition, in this industry to make money. In the credit world, this is best accomplished by exercising intelligence and putting in place smart business practices. You are basically banging on Cap1 because they are ultra-successful. How is that something to not celebrate from a business perspective?
So that this doesn't degenerate into an argument, I will end with this post. You and I simply disagree on this issue. You don't like their business model...or the fact that it is successful. I think they are a prime example of how to do business successfully in the United States. They serve a diverse group of credit customers in a manner that allows them to be extremely profitable. They have no intention of (nor should they) of changing their business model just because some fine them "annoying"...and why should they? Does AMEX throw away FRs just because some people find them annoying and intrusive?
If you don't like their products and services, LOSE THEM. That's how capitalism best works. It's called letting the free market reward successful business models...something I champion whole-heartedly.
Have a great day
Umm my point went past you. I'm talking about a flowery picture to the consumer. Capitalism analogy, you're talking to someone that understands that game very well. But we as consumers also have that right to challenge it too. That's how democracy works. Hence one female voice encouraging others to switch from bank of america after their slick changes with both credit cards and debit card fees. Bank of america changed their minds when people changed their minds about using their services.
legacys7 wrote:But we as consumers also have that right to challenge it too. That's how democracy works.
I'm not going into it, but *no,* this most assuredly has nothing to do with Democracy, or any other form of government.