How to Minimize Credit Line Decreases?

[Anonymous]

Hey, Guys.

As I wrote yesterday in another post, Chase Freedom sent me a letter yesterday, decreasing my Freedom limit from $56500 to $23,200, effective in 30 days. 

I have no intention of protesting this, because I only use Freedom for quarterlies when they fit, and those categories have become less and less relevant to my lifestyle. Groceries and Everyday Spend are my main expenses. Freedom offers groceries in the 2nd quarter, which conflicts with AMEX BCP. Annual spend on groceries is about $6000, so I just barely make the AMEX $6000 6% cap, without diverting Grocery spend to another card.

I do, however, have two other cards which I use regularly. Citi DC ($24000) for all of my 2% purchases and AMEX BCP ($30000) for 6% groceries and 3% gas (when I drive which is not too often).

I obviously try to maximize my cash back with the use of CITI DC and AMEX BCP. Citi monthly bill is normally $2000 plus or minus, and AMEX BCP maybe $700-$800. 

Both spends are FAR beneath the limits provided. 

Maybe I should worry less about rewards and spread the spend more among the Freedom and AMEX, even though they both only pay 1% on everyday spend?

Obviously, I put everything other than category spend on CITI DC, but maybe the 2% should not be a big concern over maintaining limits?

Maybe Freedom needs more spending, even at 1%? 

Bottomline: How do I use these three cards so as to minimize the chances of future CLD on any of them?  How do I "divide the pie," so to speak?

Any suggestions on how to divide spending between these three cards in order to minimize chances of CLD? Or should I go with CITI DC and AMEX BCP for the higher rewards and not worry so much about Freedom?

[Anonymous]

Instead of seeking to minimize credit line decreases, consider minimizing the effect of those decreases on you. If you carry no balances and your spend is below the limits there are few to no effects of decreased limits.

You can't control what twitchy banks are going to do. You can absolutely control how their actions affect your score and finances.

[kerplunk]

If it were me, I would call Chase and simply ask if you can keep your limit as is. Others have done that and it's worked. It's a simple phone call. 

Generally, using your cards regularly and keeping your credit score excellent is all you can do.

[Ficoproblems247]

---

@kerplunk wrote:

If it were me, I would call Chase and simply ask if you can keep your limit as is. Others have done that and it's worked. It's a simple phone call. 

---

^^^This for sure! Never worth losing out on your rewards for the sake of pleasing a FI. If you want to avoid a CLD just call like was stated. No sense in taking money out of your own pocket on lower rewards rate non-category spend just to impress the bank into keeping your limits in a range that you're not even scraping the surface of. 

[Gmood1]

I wouldn't worry about. Use your cards to benefit you.

If you are concerned with CLDs.

Join a couple of Credit Unions that offer CC's in your spend categories. CLDs are very rare compared to the larger banks.

I'd keep doing what you've been doing. 

Citi and Amex aren't quite as CLD happy as Chase IME.

I've had CLDs from all three at one time or another.

Chase seems to be a little more proactive at it than the other two.

---

[Anonymous]

As has been stated you really can't worry about what Banks might do, hence the saying you don't worry about what you cannot control.

This is the risk we take in having low usage on higher CL cards. And I'd wager to say that unless you are using close to 50% of the CL, then you stand a risk of a CLD. The question is if we're not really using it then what's the harm in losing it. Being totally honest here, but $56K CL seems very excessive for the amount of usage this card gets, and $20K would be quite sufficient. IMO

Lets face it a CLD is really only going to impact people using it for UT padding, myself included, but that's not Chase's or any Lender's problem. 

At least Chase is allowing people to contact them and keep them intact, whereas SYNCh did not.