Chase credit line increase experience

[Anonymous]

---

@LawStudentCivilis wrote:

---

@SouthJamaica wrote:

---

@Remedios wrote:

---

@Wavester64 wrote:

---

@blindambition wrote:

Requesting is an HP. One, sometimes two pulls. Usually EX and either EQ or TU.

---

CHASE should get with the times.

It's tough enough to get one of their cards, and to HP once even TWICE for a CLI IMO is ridiculous. 

At least if you are going to make your cards so difficult to get, CLI requests should be SPs.

---

I don't understand why you're bothered by HPs for CLIs but ended up with dozen or more on new accounts (which are now preventing you from getting cards you want).

If person truly needs a CLI due to spend, HP or two are a small price to pay compared to a new account that seemed like a good idea at the time. 

If one if looking for utilization padding, Chase ain't your girl. 

I'm really struggling with understanding HP phobia, but no fear of stacking accounts. 

---

I am one of those folks you have trouble understanding.

I don't 'fear' hard pulls. I just hate wasting a hard pull on a credit limit increase request. The reasons are simple: they (a) cost points and (b) are completely unnecessary.  The lender already has a significant body of experience with me, and has access to all the data it needs through a soft pull.

I completely understand the necessity for a hard pull when applying for a new account, especially if it's a first account with that lender.

---

It's completely unnecessary.

---

From this point of view, I can see it being necessary:

You have a 20K card with a lender. You open a new card, its a HP, and they give you 10K. Now you have 30K exposure.

Or, you request a CLI on your current card from 20K to 30K. Approved, but with a HP. Now you have 30K exposure.

[LawStudentCivilis]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@LawStudentCivilis wrote:

---

@SouthJamaica wrote:

---

@Remedios wrote:

---

@Wavester64 wrote:

---

@blindambition wrote:

Requesting is an HP. One, sometimes two pulls. Usually EX and either EQ or TU.

---

CHASE should get with the times.

It's tough enough to get one of their cards, and to HP once even TWICE for a CLI IMO is ridiculous. 

At least if you are going to make your cards so difficult to get, CLI requests should be SPs.

---

I don't understand why you're bothered by HPs for CLIs but ended up with dozen or more on new accounts (which are now preventing you from getting cards you want).

If person truly needs a CLI due to spend, HP or two are a small price to pay compared to a new account that seemed like a good idea at the time. 

If one if looking for utilization padding, Chase ain't your girl. 

I'm really struggling with understanding HP phobia, but no fear of stacking accounts. 

---

I am one of those folks you have trouble understanding.

I don't 'fear' hard pulls. I just hate wasting a hard pull on a credit limit increase request. The reasons are simple: they (a) cost points and (b) are completely unnecessary.  The lender already has a significant body of experience with me, and has access to all the data it needs through a soft pull.

I completely understand the necessity for a hard pull when applying for a new account, especially if it's a first account with that lender.

---

It's completely unnecessary.

---

From this point of view, I can see it being necessary:

You have a 20K card with a lender. You open a new card, its a HP, and they give you 10K. Now you have 30K exposure.

Or, you request a CLI on your current card from 20K to 30K. Approved, but with a HP. Now you have 30K exposure.

---

As a bottom line catchall my comment still stands, I believe their policy is unnecessary. 

However, with the hypothetical you provided I could agree this is a more reasonable approach. In this specific scenario you know it will likely be a HP once you reach a certain threshold with this lender.  Do I think it is necessary even in this instance? Not necessarily since a good bit of us are sp'd often and have a long established relationship with a clear pattern of spending habits. More reasonable? Yes, definitely.

[Anonymous]

---

@Remedios wrote:

---

Okay, but let's be honest here...you ask amex because SP. You don't need it, you don't use it, but you ask because you can. 

You just asked Citi, and they increased it via SP. You called it "meh".

It wasn't "Oh these guys are great, they gave me increase without HP"

Nope..."Meh" in the title.

---

You are further making my point.  "Meh" relative to the norm/expectation.  If you read my data on the CLI relative to what I had experienced previously it makes perfect sense.

And yes, I do ask for SP CLIs.  That doesn't mean I don't think the current system of building crazy limits via SP CLIs isn't ridiculous when I really think about it.  I play by the same set of rules as everyone else.  If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.  I'm not going to boycott SP CLIs just because I think it's a ridiculous business move on the part of lenders, but I will certainly voice my opinion on it.  If Best Buy gave out $100 bills every Wednesday to every in-store customer with any purchase, I would say that's ridiculous and not a smart business move.  But, if everyone was talking about free $100 bills at Best Buy, I'd probably find myself on line next Wednesday as I'd be playing by the same set of rules as everyone else.

I've also posted in many threads that my lenders could slash my limits by 50% or greater at any given time and reduce my [SP CLI driven] credit exposure and that would be just fine.  My limits shouldn't be as high as they are anyway and it's crazy for them to allow me a limit that I don't even use 1% of.  Again, going back to all CLIs being HPs rather than SPs would fix that issue very quickly.

[Anonymous]

---

@LawStudentCivilis wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@LawStudentCivilis wrote:

---

@SouthJamaica wrote:

---

@Remedios wrote:

---

@Wavester64 wrote:

---

@blindambition wrote:

Requesting is an HP. One, sometimes two pulls. Usually EX and either EQ or TU.

---

CHASE should get with the times.

It's tough enough to get one of their cards, and to HP once even TWICE for a CLI IMO is ridiculous. 

At least if you are going to make your cards so difficult to get, CLI requests should be SPs.

---

I don't understand why you're bothered by HPs for CLIs but ended up with dozen or more on new accounts (which are now preventing you from getting cards you want).

If person truly needs a CLI due to spend, HP or two are a small price to pay compared to a new account that seemed like a good idea at the time. 

If one if looking for utilization padding, Chase ain't your girl. 

I'm really struggling with understanding HP phobia, but no fear of stacking accounts. 

---

I am one of those folks you have trouble understanding.

I don't 'fear' hard pulls. I just hate wasting a hard pull on a credit limit increase request. The reasons are simple: they (a) cost points and (b) are completely unnecessary.  The lender already has a significant body of experience with me, and has access to all the data it needs through a soft pull.

I completely understand the necessity for a hard pull when applying for a new account, especially if it's a first account with that lender.

---

It's completely unnecessary.

---

From this point of view, I can see it being necessary:

You have a 20K card with a lender. You open a new card, its a HP, and they give you 10K. Now you have 30K exposure.

Or, you request a CLI on your current card from 20K to 30K. Approved, but with a HP. Now you have 30K exposure.

---

As a bottom line catchall my comment still stands, I believe their policy is unnecessary. 

However, with the hypothetical you provided I could agree this is a more reasonable approach. In this specific scenario you know it will likely be a HP once you reach a certain threshold with this lender.  Do I think it is necessary even in this instance? Not necessarily since a good bit of us are sp'd often and have a long established relationship with a clear pattern of spending habits. More reasonable? Yes, definitely.

---

It could be unnecessary, but they may look at it differently than the rest of us. They may see nothing but exposure, regardless of how it is sliced.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

You have a 20K card with a lender. You open a new card, its a HP, and they give you 10K. Now you have 30K exposure.

Or, you request a CLI on your current card from 20K to 30K. Approved, but with a HP. Now you have 30K exposure.

---

Agreed.  It is an application for [more] credit, so it should indeed be a HP.  All SP CLIs that are customer-initiated should be HPs.  But, they aren't the majority of the time.   The norm/standard that has been arrived at is that SP CLIs are fairly standard for the majority of lenders.  Those in the minority, like Chase, will then be the target of scrutiny for not following the norm/standard.  Again, it's not "right" but it's how human beings work.

[LawStudentCivilis]

@AnonymousI agree, at the end of the day Chase can and will do what they want.  I can be annoyed (and express that I'm annoyed), with the process along the way.  Although I have not and will not request an increase from them. 

[Remedios]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Remedios wrote:

---

Okay, but let's be honest here...you ask amex because SP. You don't need it, you don't use it, but you ask because you can. 

You just asked Citi, and they increased it via SP. You called it "meh".

It wasn't "Oh these guys are great, they gave me increase without HP"

Nope..."Meh" in the title.

---

You are further making my point.  "Meh" relative to the norm/expectation.  If you read my data on the CLI relative to what I had experienced previously it makes perfect sense.

And yes, I do ask for SP CLIs.  That doesn't mean I don't think the current system of building crazy limits via SP CLIs isn't ridiculous when I really think about it.  I play by the same set of rules as everyone else.  If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.  I'm not going to boycott SP CLIs just because I think it's a ridiculous business move on the part of lenders, but I will certainly voice my opinion on it.  If Best Buy gave out $100 bills every Wednesday to every in-store customer with any purchase, I would say that's ridiculous and not a smart business move.  But, if everyone was talking about free $100 bills at Best Buy, I'd probably find myself on line next Wednesday as I'd be playing by the same set of rules as everyone else.

I've also posted in many threads that my lenders could slash my limits by 50% or greater at any given time and reduce my [SP CLI driven] credit exposure and that would be just fine.  My limits shouldn't be as high as they are anyway and it's crazy for them to allow me a limit that I don't even use 1% of.  Again, going back to all CLIs being HPs rather than SPs would fix that issue very quickly.

---

I'm not against SP CLIs, I'm all for them.

My only point was (and still is), if a lender doesn't do SP CLIs and consumer really needs one and the use justifies it, ask for HP increase. 

Hoping for SP to happen some day with a lender who's not famous for them is exercise in futility. 

[FinStar]

As this topic has veered off course from what the OP initially asked, and appears to be beaten to death, it is time to move on folks.  Thread has been closed to further comments.

Notwithstanding, one can chose to be annoyed or disenchanted with a lender's internal lending practices or policies, but they are what they are.  One can voice their opinion just as others will do so on the opposite side of the spectrum.  What is clear is that unless a lender changes their own policies, they're here to stay regardless whether a lender of size is viewed as the minority or any other traditional lender or CU that has these practices in place.