topic Re: Executive Office - Rant in Credit Cards

Executive Office - Rant

Skye12329 — Sat, 08 Aug 2015 19:00:09 GMT

This is a rant, and is not directed or targeted at anyone specific.

So there is always a post(s) asking for EO information, primarily Capital One. Thing of it is thats how we ruined the phone number. I have learned that the phone number listed in the BD thread is still the EO number but you need a security pin. I know this because due to a big security issue i have been needing/dealing with the EO office and letting them know about the issue.

I am just as guilty because i have done it once last year like i am sure many of us have, but requesting a manual CLI is going to end up getting the email broken too. The phone number and email i am guessing is not common knowledge to the average consumer as it probably shouldnt be. Capital One does not have a wand to just make everything better. They like every other lender will either grant a CLI or Decline it based on numerous factors, one of those including usage and payments.

I just don't see Chase's EO being called up everytime a CLI was declined, or Amex EO...etc. I think we need to accept the fact that maybe the account isn't eligible after only a few months or less than a year opening. I am guessing they loosened up on the limits being given for their cards possibly due to the fact of everyone requesting a CLI. I mean to them they think your the average consumer and a 10k+ line would be more than sufficient enough.

My point is we should'nt be calling or emailing for every little thing, not just Capital One but any EO. We have to think like the average consumer or the reasons why were declined for the CLI or whatever it is. I know i shouldn't be eligible due to the fact i do not use mine.

Re: Executive Office - Rant

Callandra — Sat, 08 Aug 2015 19:06:21 GMT

While I do agree with your rant and that the EO shouldn't be abused/overused (let's face it, MOST issues can be resolved by frontline CSRs...but when people don't get the answer they like from mommy, they go to daddy), it won't change most peoples' minds. People are very entitled nowadays (don't believe me? Spend some time working in retail...people expect the world when they are a customer) and that's just how it is.

Of course Cap1 EO's is part of the problem; if they really wanted to deter people from contacting them, they would flat out just repeat what was said by the CSR and leave it at that. If people just get the same answer from the EO as the CSR right away (unless it was something that the EO should be dealing with), that would stop the overuse of it. However, they feel the need to keep their customers happy and try to give them what they want (of course they are not a magic wand and they might still say no but they either do try to overturn it or just wait some time and call you back -- we do this where I work. If it's a no, I tell them I'll try for them and just call back later pretending I tried).

Re: Executive Office - Rant

kdm31091 — Sat, 08 Aug 2015 19:06:39 GMT

Well the other part of it is that if the system declined you, there's a reason. It may not be one you agree with, but it's not just "they don't like you". It's either too new of an account, too high or low of usage, etc. There's a reason, and EO is not going to magically waive it in every case. There's this perception that "EO overrides the computer" and yes they can but you have to remember -- the computer's programming was done by a human who works at Capital One, so it's going by their standards!

Plenty of people just have sky high expectations for no reason. I'm sorry, but if you just got a $300 QS1, you aren't getting it bumped to 5k just because you call the EO. The limit is telling you something. They want history and usage. Not 2 weeks, not one month.

Credit is very reliant on history which is why every account you open remains for 10 years. Creditors look for the long haul and history. So short term "fixes" like the EO are not going to work.

I am guilty of it too, but I admit it was because of this forum. I have dialed back on the habits though. I no longer call any EO. If the CLI is declined, it's declined. Whatever. I have enough credit. I'm not going to beg for a CLI. When they want to give me one, they will. This forum at first kind of gave me the impression that I could just bypass the system by using EO. But I know that is NOT true. The EO is merely a higher level worker at the company, and if the initial denial makes sense, they will likely uphold it. People just need to dial back their expectations about credit in general bigtime.

The other side effect of calling EO and begging for things is merely drawing attention to your account and that could end up with other negative consequences if you have a ton of new inquiries etc. In short, a phone number or email is NO substitute for time, history and patience and yes, I think the email will stop working sooner or later since almost every Cap One thread starts with "I emailed the CEO..."

Re: Executive Office - Rant

Anonymous — Sat, 08 Aug 2015 19:18:26 GMT

kdm31091 - great write up. Said a lot! "ENTITLED" certainly is the politically correct view today. I come from an era where you had to submit an application along with a statement of net worth which was manually reviewed by a credit professional who may or may not approve the account so ... you had no place to go and cry as lenders would not listen and yes it was a long time ago.

Re: Executive Office - Rant

Anonymous — Sat, 08 Aug 2015 19:20:36 GMT

Does reaching out to social media count? As they pass on certain issues to EO?? If so, I am guilty of that.

I was very polite with my requests....my CLI was denied only due to a recent CLI, and my credit has improved enough that I should have a chance at getting one. It is taking some time, but I think they will get it done. I wanted a chip card, a CLI to 5k, and possibly visa signature, but that VS is NOT a priority. Then in october go for a APR reduction as it starts in at 22.9.

Sure...all of this could EASILY be circumvented by giving in to the bank, and lowering my score even further by adding another 3 inquiries...and then this lessens my chance of growing and going to better banks, and holds me in to capital one's dungeon... Sorry, but I refuse to have a total of 9 inquiries unless they release this game changing new product and throw me a nice limit on a card to help others grow. Its really not a must for me though, which is why I have yet to jump on the Venture bandwagon.

Dont get me wrong, I admire cap1. They lend way more than the others. And they let you acutally use your whole limit when other banks dont. But there needs to be some serious changes in how they operate as a persons credit improves. It should be the responsibility of the consumer to be informed, yes...however having a bank that encourages members to carry multiple cards from that same bank, even duplicates...to me seems kinda shady.

I don't think I have crossed any boundaries yet...

Re: Executive Office - Rant

Anonymous — Sat, 08 Aug 2015 19:22:09 GMT

I believe in contacting the EO but only for product change. Since my Quicksilver MC is heavily used. My QUICKSILVER VISA (still waitingfor the arrival of my new Quicksilver Platinum VISA) which I will in a few months request a cli to *cross fingers* get $5K and send a letter to the EO demanding the visa signature but in a nice tone

Re: Executive Office - Rant

CreditCuriosity — Sat, 08 Aug 2015 19:26:26 GMT

I gotta admit I wrote an email to the EO asking them nicely yesterday if they would consider removing some late payments from 4 years ago as my report is pretty dang clean now and the lates were due to losing a job and having to move across the country. By no means do they have to do this and most they won't but really the EO is the only method to perform this, so in this case I will write them as I had a hardship during this time and had to make a decision of moving and having a roof over my head or missing some payments, guess which one I choose four year ago? So I am hoping they consider my circumstances that was a very detailed email and willing to GW remove them as I have had perfect payment history the last 4 years with them and multiple new accounts. Is this a misuse of the EO email? This can be debatable cause yes I was at fault for the lates, but kinda out of my control. I can live with them for another 3 years or maybe they will remove them early as a courtesy as others have had some success. Only one way for me to find out right? Guess I could of sent them Snail mail for this request, but ultimately it is the same thing, just quicker way of getting ahold of them by email.

I agree about CLI and asking for conversions to Signature card or WMC or what not is what really most likely got the phone # shut off and the likes.

Re: Executive Office - Rant

Anonymous — Sat, 08 Aug 2015 19:29:52 GMT

@CreditCuriousity wrote:
I gotta admit I wrote an email to the EO asking them nicely yesterday if they would consider removing some late payments from 4 years ago as my report is pretty dang clean now and the lates were due to losing a job and having to move across the country. By no means do they have to do this and most they won't but really the EO is the only method to perform this, so in this case I will write them as I had a hardship during this time and had to make a decision of moving and having a roof over my head or missing some payments, guess which one I choose four year ago? So I am hoping they consider my circumstances that was a very detailed email and willing to GW remove them as I have had perfect payment history the last 4 years with them and multiple new accounts. Is this a misuse of the EO email? This can be debatable cause yes I was at fault for the lates, but kinda out of my control. I can live with them for another 3 years or maybe they will remove them early as a courtesy as others have had some success. Only one way for me to find out right? Guess I could of sent them Snail mail for this request, but ultimately it is the same thing, just quicker way of getting ahold of them by email.

I agree about CLI and asking for conversions to Signature card or WMC or what not is what really most likely got the phone # shut off and the likes.

ummm no. there is nothing wrong at all with writing a goodwill letter.

Re: Executive Office - Rant

Skye12329 — Sat, 08 Aug 2015 19:31:53 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
@CreditCuriousity wrote:
I gotta admit I wrote an email to the EO asking them nicely yesterday if they would consider removing some late payments from 4 years ago as my report is pretty dang clean now and the lates were due to losing a job and having to move across the country. By no means do they have to do this and most they won't but really the EO is the only method to perform this, so in this case I will write them as I had a hardship during this time and had to make a decision of moving and having a roof over my head or missing some payments, guess which one I choose four year ago? So I am hoping they consider my circumstances that was a very detailed email and willing to GW remove them as I have had perfect payment history the last 4 years with them and multiple new accounts. Is this a misuse of the EO email? This can be debatable cause yes I was at fault for the lates, but kinda out of my control. I can live with them for another 3 years or maybe they will remove them early as a courtesy as others have had some success. Only one way for me to find out right? Guess I could of sent them Snail mail for this request, but ultimately it is the same thing, just quicker way of getting ahold of them by email.

I agree about CLI and asking for conversions to Signature card or WMC or what not is what really most likely got the phone # shut off and the likes.
ummm no. there is nothing wrong at all with writing a goodwill letter.

Beat me to it, i mean the big difference here is that a Frontline CSR could not fix that issue only the EO.

but they could attempt to fix a PC or CLI. Thats the difference. Hopefully they remove the lates

Re: Executive Office - Rant

Anonymous — Sat, 08 Aug 2015 19:34:10 GMT

In the Cap One case, at least originally the EO became popular (for those in the know) because the CSRs were so unempowered This can be a sound business approach, all reps read from the same script, "No, sorry we cannot do that" and only those who really really care eventually reach the EO. With easy access from forums like these, that changed, and all sorts of stuff gets sent, hence the clamping down. (Now there is less need, as CSRs do more, and more self-serve is available)

Re: Executive Office - Rant

Anonymous — Sat, 08 Aug 2015 20:09:29 GMT

Thanks for the reminder. I need to contact the EO and demand that they stop denying my bi-weekly CLI requests.

Re: Executive Office - Rant

Revelate — Sat, 08 Aug 2015 20:11:45 GMT

Not precisely credit related (and I don't think I've Kudo'd three posts in a row in the CC forum like ever, excellent Skye / Callandra / KDM all three!) but EO's back in the day were incredibly difficult to reach in all market segments: I was one of the techs backing the EO CSR's at Dell back in the early 90's, and by the time any of the cases got handed to me it's because the customer had gone through pure hell as a result of our customer service and tech groups: we're talking on the order of 20 calls into Dell, some utterly laughable and stupid things in the log, shipping parts and techs that had no hope of fixing the problem obviously just to get them off the phone, etc ad naseum.

I had carte blanche in that role to up and simply send them another computer, but the funny thing was, out of all the calls I never had to do so: some of them were frighteningly easy (after talking the righteously angry customer down off the ledge, believe me they had a right to be angry at this point), and while others were more complicated, the fact is most really never needed to go this route in the first place and it was our fault that they did.

While you could've gotten me in the second line queue anyway when I wasn't handling these issues, the fact is to get to senor Dell's office, you had to have not only been dragged through the muck, but they had zero issues telling you off and not bothering me with the issue if it wasn't clear that we'd screwed the pooch with the customer somewhere (vast majority of customer issues were resolved with one call, most of the rest with 2, and exceptionally few with 3... when we're talking double-digits, well something went wrong and it was probably our fault).

So calling the EO with the equivalent of a hangnail issue or even more trivial than that? Think others have it exactly right, it will cause lenders' to change their policies, and usually not to the benefit of us or the people who actually need EO assistance. TANSTAAFL, and as KDM suggests, there will be a mark in the file, and that may not be in your favor later.

I view it about as favorably as I view the SCT recommendations frankly, may not be to your benefit to exploit it.

Re: Executive Office - Rant

Anonymous — Sat, 08 Aug 2015 20:20:58 GMT

@CreditCuriousity wrote:
I gotta admit I wrote an email to the EO asking them nicely yesterday if they would consider removing some late payments from 4 years ago as my report is pretty dang clean now and the lates were due to losing a job and having to move across the country. By no means do they have to do this and most they won't but really the EO is the only method to perform this, so in this case I will write them as I had a hardship during this time and had to make a decision of moving and having a roof over my head or missing some payments, guess which one I choose four year ago? So I am hoping they consider my circumstances that was a very detailed email and willing to GW remove them as I have had perfect payment history the last 4 years with them and multiple new accounts. Is this a misuse of the EO email? This can be debatable cause yes I was at fault for the lates, but kinda out of my control. I can live with them for another 3 years or maybe they will remove them early as a courtesy as others have had some success. Only one way for me to find out right? Guess I could of sent them Snail mail for this request, but ultimately it is the same thing, just quicker way of getting ahold of them by email.

I agree about CLI and asking for conversions to Signature card or WMC or what not is what really most likely got the phone # shut off and the likes.

Am I the only one that thinks stuff like this should not be allowed? The very concept of centralized credit reporting and cra's is that the report contains unbiased factual information. Allowing people to do stuff like request courtesy deletion of lates or pay-for-delete schemes to me seems like a way for a customer to bribe a financial institution - either with a payment now or in the case of a courtesy deletion what the bank probably hopes is a promise of future business - to withhold truthful information from the reporting agencies. The late policies are supposed to be the same for everyone. If it was just an accident or a bad circumstance you then show this by future on-time payment history, which creditcuriosity did.

Don't get me wrong, it seems perfectly reasonable and even a right to allow the customer to make their case. For example if someone were to be declined for those lates they should have the chance to explain that it was a one-time hardship and they have since proven their credit worthiness. However to purposely delete accurate negatives just because you like the customer - i don't think financial institutions should be allowed to do this.

Re: Executive Office - Rant

Anonymous — Sat, 08 Aug 2015 20:22:14 GMT

this forum makes people think they deserve the highest limit possible lol. before the forum people accepted what they got and moved on

Re: Executive Office - Rant

Anonymous — Sat, 08 Aug 2015 20:30:28 GMT

I don't even bother with EO these days, chat wth customer reps and if it's not resolved, try again in couple weeks.

Re: Executive Office - Rant

kdm31091 — Sat, 08 Aug 2015 20:40:53 GMT

I agree the late policies should be the same for everyone. The rules exist for a reason, to show your history for x amount of time. So you should wait for your mistakes to fall off like everyone else, assuming the info is accurate. If it is, theres no reason for it to be removed.

Re: Executive Office - Rant

Anonymous — Sat, 08 Aug 2015 20:45:14 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
this forum makes people think they deserve the highest limit possible lol. before the forum people accepted what they got and moved on

That probably lies with either the philosophy that happiness lies within not having expectations, or the philosophy that 'ignorance is bliss'--a person with an excellent credit score (without having been aware of it, or aware of the credit game) but no knowledge of what their score will open the opportunity to (and therefore no expectation of what they receive) will most likely be happy with $1000-$2000 at 22.99% APR and go with it. Meanwhile, someone more aware will expect more, and will likely be disappointed to be accepted on such terms.

Also, it's pretty much a human nature to compete. Competition can be positive, but it might also pressure a person to take any shortcuts in order to get ahead--not all shortcuts work out well, either for them, or others around them.

In the one hand, I'm bummed that C1's EO accessibility has become tighter, because it requires you to jump through a lot more hoops for a matter that can only be solved through them. At the same time, I'm glad, because it means that issues that manage to get to the EO will be treated seriously; also, as mentioned above, it may have led to more powers being handed over to CSRs or the customers, which essentially will up overall customer satisfaction, since most customers will either use self-service tools or talk to CSRs, not the EO.

Re: Executive Office - Rant

Anonymous — Sat, 08 Aug 2015 21:17:58 GMT

@Anonymous wrote:
@CreditCuriousity wrote:
I gotta admit I wrote an email to the EO asking them nicely yesterday if they would consider removing some late payments from 4 years ago as my report is pretty dang clean now and the lates were due to losing a job and having to move across the country. By no means do they have to do this and most they won't but really the EO is the only method to perform this, so in this case I will write them as I had a hardship during this time and had to make a decision of moving and having a roof over my head or missing some payments, guess which one I choose four year ago? So I am hoping they consider my circumstances that was a very detailed email and willing to GW remove them as I have had perfect payment history the last 4 years with them and multiple new accounts. Is this a misuse of the EO email? This can be debatable cause yes I was at fault for the lates, but kinda out of my control. I can live with them for another 3 years or maybe they will remove them early as a courtesy as others have had some success. Only one way for me to find out right? Guess I could of sent them Snail mail for this request, but ultimately it is the same thing, just quicker way of getting ahold of them by email.

I agree about CLI and asking for conversions to Signature card or WMC or what not is what really most likely got the phone # shut off and the likes.
Am I the only one that thinks stuff like this should not be allowed? The very concept of centralized credit reporting and cra's is that the report contains unbiased factual information. Allowing people to do stuff like request courtesy deletion of lates or pay-for-delete schemes to me seems like a way for a customer to bribe a financial institution - either with a payment now or in the case of a courtesy deletion what the bank probably hopes is a promise of future business - to withhold truthful information from the reporting agencies. The late policies are supposed to be the same for everyone. If it was just an accident or a bad circumstance you then show this by future on-time payment history, which creditcuriosity did.

Don't get me wrong, it seems perfectly reasonable and even a right to allow the customer to make their case. For example if someone were to be declined for those lates they should have the chance to explain that it was a one-time hardship and they have since proven their credit worthiness. However to purposely delete accurate negatives just because you like the customer - i don't think financial institutions should be allowed to do this.

Am I the only one who thinks 7.5 years is WAY too long for late pays to report? I mean I can understand charge offs, bankruptcy, collections, judgments, etc. taking that long to fall off, but late pays? I think if you were late, got back on track, and haven't been late again then those should be removed after like 3 years or something. But, that's just wishful thinking on my part.

Back to the topic, I agree with Skye completely. I just read a post yesterday where someone had asked for a CLI after only having the card 2 months. They were denied, so they contacted Cap1's CEO People need to be more patient with things like this and quit contacting the EO (or CEO) over something that can probably be taken care of on its own with just a little time and patience.

Re: Executive Office - Rant

CreditCuriosity — Sat, 08 Aug 2015 21:52:22 GMT

@kdm31091 wrote:
I agree the late policies should be the same for everyone. The rules exist for a reason, to show your history for x amount of time. So you should wait for your mistakes to fall off like everyone else, assuming the info is accurate. If it is, theres no reason for it to be removed.

The point is this policy isn't set in stone and every creditor will remove lates if you get the right person to hear your story.. I would be all for it if it and live with it for 7 years if it was the SAME no removal for anyone for no reason, but quite frankly that isn't the case with any creditor, they all make exceptions, so I am just doing what others have done and hoping for the best otherwise I will live with it another 3 years and my life will continue as well as my approvals as I have a very strong profile and strong income/job to back said credit and lates will ultimately be overlooked by 95% of the lenders.

Long story short is either don't allow it for anyone on late removals or as it is know it is a case by case scenario and what I am doing isn't wrong... I also think 7 years is extreme especially when a hardship aka job loss was involved. Hell people a few years out of BK7 have higher scores then me in some cases, is that right? If they declared BK7 they don't owe a penny to the debitor, in my scenario I paid back every penny and been recent for the last 4 years...

Re: Executive Office - Rant

taxi818 — Sat, 08 Aug 2015 22:21:07 GMT

@CreditCuriousity wrote:
I gotta admit I wrote an email to the EO asking them nicely yesterday if they would consider removing some late payments from 4 years ago as my report is pretty dang clean now and the lates were due to losing a job and having to move across the country. By no means do they have to do this and most they won't but really the EO is the only method to perform this, so in this case I will write them as I had a hardship during this time and had to make a decision of moving and having a roof over my head or missing some payments, guess which one I choose four year ago? So I am hoping they consider my circumstances that was a very detailed email and willing to GW remove them as I have had perfect payment history the last 4 years with them and multiple new accounts. Is this a misuse of the EO email? This can be debatable cause yes I was at fault for the lates, but kinda out of my control. I can live with them for another 3 years or maybe they will remove them early as a courtesy as others have had some success. Only one way for me to find out right? Guess I could of sent them Snail mail for this request, but ultimately it is the same thing, just quicker way of getting ahold of them by email.

I agree about CLI and asking for conversions to Signature card or WMC or what not is what really most likely got the phone # shut off and the likes.

No way could i call this misuse. Life happens to us all. If not now, Later.But at some point in life we all experience hardships. Real or Perceived. In any case. i would keep good willing them and sooner or later something is going to bite. Im sure you read the story of this guy in my Taxi to get my last Baddie off of my report. otherwise it would have been 2017 before that thing fell off. I explained to him how i goodwilled my cable company and over and over they denied me. Despite that I still have the service. Im sure this Cfo went and looked at my account as i gave him all my information. and he could see it was 5 years of nothing but good will on my part as consumer. So 4 year old lates. i think the EO would be the only place that would handle that. And i have seen lates removed before from cap one. You guys were talking about old accounts being visible earlier. I have one with cap one. 11 years ago. i still have the emails where they were blasting me for blowing them off. hehehe. Keep trying CC. and use the EO as much as you feel necessary to get those lates off. Still waiting to see the boost in your scores.