@ReVeLaTeD wrote:
No. It says that the information provided on your application (income) in addition to (note ADDITION TO) information obtained from a credit reporting agency is used to determine the terms of the card if approved. That's why I want it in writing that this occasion they did not use the income to help in determining the limit.
The application asks for more information than your income, and it doesn't state anywhere that they will consider your income/or not in their lending decision. They're not, in any way, obligated to offer you terms based on your (consumer) preferences, your interpretation of their vague language, nor your personal assessment of your creditworthiness, unfortunately. They also have no obligation to provide this to you in writing.
@ReVeLaTeD wrote:
- A human being reviewed the Equifax report and made an arbitrary decision based on the Equifax report. When I mentioned that the card letter stated Experian, "...that must have been a print error". Must have.
[A representative from the corporate HQ used the word "arbitrary" to describe the decision-making rationale? Or, is that that your interpretation of her description? At any rate, wouldn't this confirm that you got what you wanted? Apparently, in so far as the corp rep was able to tell, the terms of your credit approval were based upon your EQ report. As you requested.]
- In the process of doing so, said human essentially ignored my reported income. << this alone explains the poor credit limit offered, if they were not considering income as part of their review. Especially granted the fact that at my current income level, I could buy and pay off a Chevy Volt in a year and still have a place to live.
[They're allowed to make their lending decisions based upon whatever (legal & non-discriminatory) criteria they want. Further, I doubt that your income was "essentially ignored", it sounds as though what Chase may have been trying to explain to you is that it wasn't the *only* or even the most compelling factor in the terms determination. Risk-based pricing is heavily weighted towards your risk of default... the chance that you won't pay them back. While your stated income may or may not be a factor in your *ability* to pay back a loan, a lender has every right to weigh the information in front of them (past & present history & obligations) in their efforts to weigh your *risk*. Also, based upon your Chevy Volt statement, if you happen to live in a really "high rent/cost of living" area, your income could be in the ballpark of $60000 to $65000 to make that statement true. Your current credit lines are fairly young (some being newish, IIRC, so it'd likely be very reasonable for Chase to take a more cautious approach.
Of course, you're not obligated to accept Chase's terms - that's the beauty of a free market as well. You can take your business elsewhere. What confuses me is what you're hoping to get from Chase, at this point. They've acted within their rights, and you've acted within yours. Are you attempting to Recon again? Are you attempting to get them to a) reveal, and b) modify their underwriting?]
- Said human based their decision to ignore the income and offer the lowest possible limit based on two things: Too many inquiries in the past year (I guess 4 is just a crazy amount, huh...) and too many accounts with balances (a $2 balance on the $600 Chevron Private card, a $8 balance on a $750 Capital one, $200 on a $1700 Discover card...yeap, I'm totally overextended. There must come a point when you look at what balances there are and realize that they're penny-ante.).
[Unfortunately, there doesn't have to come such a point. Although, there undoubtedly is some point (Chase would have some criteria that they work by), but it's not up tot he borrower to determine.]
- When I asked her to provide me a letter summarizing this she refused. Awful shady of them, considering it's a reasonable request.
[To what end? I think that requesting someone to provide your own interpretation of their words, and the limited view (a 3rd party explanation of a lending decision) of the assessement, as they were able to explain it to you, would be concerning for anyone. They're not legally obligated to provide you anyting, other than the name of the credit bureau & address that was used if it factored into their decision.]
So it's on to step two, now that I know that income wasn't part of the consideration.
Out of curiosity, what, exactly, are you hoping to accomplish? I thought you were attempting to 'invalidate' the EQ INQ, but now it sounds like you may be either Reconning, or applying again...? Sorry if you stated this somewhere else-- I may have missed it.
Starting Score: ~500 (12/01/2008)
