Interesting Letter regarding my BoA CLI approval

[Taurus22]

So after receiving the BoA CLI this past week, I received a letter with some interesting verbage. This was my first CLI with BoA, so also my first letter like this from them.  It was interesting that although BoA pulled EX for me when I applied for the card, they SP'ed TU for the CLI request, and that my TU score was actually higher than I see reported.

The weird part, is in the 3rd image "FCRA notice" .....it's worded as if there may have been reason for TU to take adverse action, but did not do so. Is this just standard "cut and paste" verbage included with all CLI notices, whether approved or not?.......or what?

[simplynoir]

That's a new one for me. The "did not" portion to go with the rest of that paragraph seems... unnecessary in its entirety if they didn't do anything in the first place

[Taurus22]

I know right?  This was a CLI, not an AA event.  Just weird....

[simplynoir]

Well, the second sentence on is fair because that's a right the consumer has if there are any inaccuracies that lead to a score different than what the person expects. But the fact they mentioned TU did not take any adverse action is a head scratcher

[chiefone4u]

---

@Taurus22 wrote:

So after receiving the BoA CLI this past week, I received a letter with some interesting verbage. This was my first CLI with BoA, so also my first letter like this from them.  It was interesting that although BoA pulled EX for me when I applied for the card, they SP'ed TU for the CLI request, and that my TU score was actually higher than I see reported.

The weird part, is in the 3rd image "FCRA notice" .....it's worded as if there may have been reason for TU to take adverse action, but did not do so. Is this just standard "cut and paste" verbage included with all CLI notices, whether approved or not?.......or what?

---

I read it not that Transunion could have taken adverse action, but that Transunion played no part in the actions the bank took.

It is worded differently than some banks, but in general the same as most of my lenders.

The wording I believe was placed in the letter because so many people (you can find several instances on this board) think the CRA makes the decision and gets mad because Experian, Equifax or Transunion denied their CLI request... when as most of here know, the bank uses the information in those files to make a decision. 

It's an attempt to keep you from calling Transunion to find out why your credit limit is only $11600.

[Taurus22]

@chiefone4u   So the curiousity there is.....why does it make it sound like an AA might have been warranted at all?

[chiefone4u]

---

@Taurus22 wrote:

@chiefone4u   So the curiousity there is.....why does it make it sound like an AA might have been warranted at all?

---

I think the AA has to do with factors in the credit report limiting how much credit was granted. It is *possible* with a higher score they would have given OP $50,000, so the AA was not extending as much as they otherwise would qualify for. 

(Pure speculation) 

[cashorcharge]

First off, congrats on your CLI

Yes, several DP's note they HP EX for new apps but SP TU for CLI's and the score they provide you is TU F8 if you've agreed to see it online. 

As for that last part, I am leaning towards "boiler plate lingo" since they didn't give you what you requested so while not a decline, not a completely fulfilled request as per what you asked versus granted. 

[Taurus22]

@cashorcharge   I do have visibility of the TU score BoA provides on my portal, and it shows 815....as it does with my other lenders as well.  Interesting that they pulled at 822. I'll take it. 

And the AA comment is still just strangely worded.  The CLI was obviously approved either way, no complaints at all.  Requested $15k (shot in the dark) so it wasn't too far off.  Just thought it would be interesting to show the weirdness of the verbage.

[FinStar]

---

@Taurus22 wrote:

I know right?  This was a CLI, not an AA event.  Just weird....

---

Just for reference, the FCRA language or disclosure is addressed as part of AA when the lender is required to inform you whenever the intended request was only partially fulfilled or granted.  In other words, such communication is fairly standard.  For instance, when declined for a particular loan (i.e. any origination or extension thereof) it is considered an Adverse Action by a variety of lenders.  This is more or less regulatory 'CYA' on their part.

I wouldn't read too much into it or lose sleep over it. You got a partial increase approved and life goes on 👍