Amex Decreasing Unused Limits!

[Anonymous]

---

@blindambition wrote:

Hey Guys,

A happy ending with some info for others. Amex is doing what they call Right Sizing. There was what they consider minimal spend over the last 12 months.

The rep asked if I’m making any big purchases. I’m actually redoing my living room in a couple weeks. Told him YES, and what it is. He asked about my income. Restored me to $15,700.

Use your cards, they are reviewing. To what extent, we’ll see.

---

That makes sense. If you don't have a high income and you don't carry a balance they must have decided you don't need a high limit.  But increased it back when you said you would ahve a higher than normal purchase coming up.  I am glad your limit went back up.  

It is always good to have a large diversity of issuers that way one company cannot affect you with a decrease. 

[simplynoir]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@simplynoir wrote:

I'm actually curious if this is going to be a trend from AMEX going forward what exactly do they look at. Does AMEX take the entire credit profile into consideration or is this on a card-by-card basis?

---

Amex considers all your cards with them as one account.   I don't think I would see it as a trend. OP says they never used more than 5 percent of their limit and the limit of the card was high compared to their income. 

---

I only mentioned it because my recently upgraded BCP other than reaching the $2k needed for the SUB last December I don't use this card much anymore except for offers and it's been that way for awhile; been keeping it as a 'donor' card for any future apps to shift limits accordingly. The other cards see continual use so wondering if AMEX does take the "all cards are one account" mindset and leave it as is because of the possibility of using the limit as intended. Or will they simply reduce it because they're seeing the other cards being used and don't see it being practical.

[CreditCuriosity]

I just don't see it as a trend yet as OP has a modest income for the CL that was assigned and they actually gave it back to him when he asked.  I think it is a bunch of nothing at this point still. 

[Anonymous]

---

@HeavenOhio wrote:

---

But it hasn't been characteristic of AMEX to CLD for low usage. As a matter of fact, they keep extending CLIs to people with low usage, and I don't recall low usage being used as a denial reason.

---

That was the denial reason on my Cash Magnet a while back. I think they called it insufficient use if memory serves.

[RonM21]

I'm thinking I'll just keep an eye on it. For now, these couple of examples are data points that I'll stash away. Now, let this start popping up left & right, then I would certainly want to see more of the data representing how Amex is making these decisions.

As it stands now, I also could easily be decreased. I don't know that I've ever ran more than 6 or 700 through BC card. I've carried a balance on the card maybe twice in the 2 1/2 years I've had it. In early Dec, they declined me for an increase for not using the current limit. After that, I hadn't used it for more than 3 months. Then several days ago, I put one small charge on it and got a 10.7k increase the next day, which I posted in the Approvals forum earlier. Go figure lol 😃

[Anonymous]

---

@Gmood1 wrote:

---

BBS yours and my Amex credit limits are a drop of water in a large pond, when compared to the 113 million plus Amex cards issued worlwide.

---

Agreed, but that doesn't mean that I [we] should be given those limits when we use < 1% of them in a cycle just because it's like pissing in the ocean.  The fact that Amex is seemingly willing to initiate a CLD on a high credit line due to only using a small portion of it means to me that they care whether or not you're using it, so that should be taken into consideration before the fact, not after the fact.

As far as the whole 3X CLI thing and people requesting CLIs that don't need them, I see a fairly simple solution that could be built into the software.  Your request and receive a CLI, seemingly because you feel you "need" it, perhaps for a large purchase as some above have suggested.  So, say you take your $2500 limit to $7500 via 3X CLI using the numbers someone else provided above.  If this person was spending (say) a few hundred bucks tops per cycle at the $2500 limit, with the bump up to $7500 their spend should perhaps begin to average $1k or so, or a large purchase of (say) $3k+ would show that the new limit was "needed."  I think if someone is given the 3X CLI and their spend remains exactly the same over the course of (say) 3 cycles, perhaps an automated CLD could be initiated, since this person clearly didn't need the CLI.  Just sort of thinking out loud here. 

Keep in mind this is all coming from the guy that thinks that all CLIs should be HPs, as it would create a level playing field and dramatically reduce the amount of [unnecessary] CLI attempts.

[RickNATL]

They hit my Delta Reserve with $9K reduction to fund $10K on a new Marriott Business Bonvoy....my spend went down because I stopped buying airline tickets on Delta CC, instead used Amex Platinum for the 5x rewards (Delta Reserve only pays 2x)....reduction was as much of a surprise to me as well...

With that I PC down to Delta Platinum...

[Gmood1]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Gmood1 wrote:

---

BBS yours and my Amex credit limits are a drop of water in a large pond, when compared to the 113 million plus Amex cards issued worlwide.

---

Agreed, but that doesn't mean that I [we] should be given those limits when we use < 1% of them in a cycle just because it's like pissing in the ocean.  The fact that Amex is seemingly willing to initiate a CLD on a high credit line due to only using a small portion of it means to me that they care whether or not you're using it, so that should be taken into consideration before the fact, not after the fact.

As far as the whole 3X CLI thing and people requesting CLIs that don't need them, I see a fairly simple solution that could be built into the software.  Your request and receive a CLI, seemingly because you feel you "need" it, perhaps for a large purchase as some above have suggested.  So, say you take your $2500 limit to $7500 via 3X CLI using the numbers someone else provided above.  If this person was spending (say) a few hundred bucks tops per cycle at the $2500 limit, with the bump up to $7500 their spend should perhaps begin to average $1k or so, or a large purchase of (say) $3k+ would show that the new limit was "needed."  I think if someone is given the 3X CLI and their spend remains exactly the same over the course of (say) 3 cycles, perhaps an automated CLD could be initiated, since this person clearly didn't need the CLI.  Just sort of thinking out loud here. 

Keep in mind this is all coming from the guy that thinks that all CLIs should be HPs, as it would create a level playing field and dramatically reduce the amount of [unnecessary] CLI attempts.

---

@Anonymous 

And I bet you don't drive one mph over the speed limit either .

I've found it much easier to already have what I need to do transactions, than scramble trying to figure out how to get it done.

I may not need the limit today, but who knows if I'll need it a week or a month from now.

I recently initiated a couple of BTs. Those BTs weren't planned months in advance. I gave the business to the lenders who intrusted me with CLs that allowed me to do it. Others may have had better offers, but they lacked the CLs to absorb those BT's..they lost out on earning money off the fees because of it.

It would be nice if the world was as perfect as some think it should be. Unfortunately it's not. I'd rather have and not need, than need and not have.

[Anonymous]

---

@Gmood1 wrote:

---

And I bet you don't drive one mph over the speed limit either .

I'd rather have and not need, than need and not have.

---

If driving one mph over the speed limit resulted in getting a ticket every time, I wouldn't drive one mph over the speed limit.

But, it doesn't.  The same way asking for CLIs the majority of the time doesn't result in a HP.  We play by the "rules" of the game.  If asking for a CLI always resulted in a HP, I and plenty of others would ask for CLIs less often unless we actually needed them or knew that it would be of some kind of benefit.

The better having it and not needing it verses needing it and not having it is a great argument from your perspective, but I'm talking about the perspective of the lender here.  Extending $50k+ to someone using a few hundred bucks (at most) a cycle is pretty dumb. 

[HeavenOhio]

---

@Gmood1 wrote:

I've found it much easier to already have what I need to do transactions, than scramble trying to figure out how to get it done.

---

Exactly. You need some options. And you need to have a backup plan in mind in case something doesn't work out with your first choice. That means having unused limits available if you happen to need to tap into them.

For those with small card collections, that might mean having the wiggle room on a category card that'll only bring back 1% on the transaction. Still, you're happy that the merchant got his money and that you have a grace period before needing to tap into your bank account.

Because it hasn't been necessary to spend a lot to support AMEX limits, their cards have been good options for people who need a cushion. It'll be interesting to see if that changes.