Oh Disco... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Anonymous]

I would give to Amex since they do the investigation themselves. I wouldn’t give it to a company who outsources it to a CRA for more data mining.

[Anonymous]

---

@KJinNC wrote:

Yes, this sort of thing is probably more common here than in the marketplace in general, because we are a self-selected group of people who mostly have unusual credit backgrounds or current patterns. Else, we probably wouldn't be here.

Yes, a company can do anything they like, as long as it's legal. Example: a company could put "most of our customers smell bad - literally. Ever met them?" on its web site. That would be legal.

But also, a consumer can react however they like, in any legal way. In the above example, one would expect customers to take offense and to close accounts, and for potential customers to choose different options instead.

To me, requesting a tax transcript without some obviously good reason to do so (eg applying for a $100k credit limit) is, in my opinion, offensive.

For anyone not aware, the Amex limit beyond which they normally ask for tax transcripts is $35k. Fair enough. I will never request a higher CL from Amex, at least not until some point in the future when the numbers move upward.

But with Discover, these requests sound like they are happening simply because some Discover algorithm has identified these people as unprofitable customers (or perhaps it's random, or due to some minor oddity in identifying data). I would be less offended if Discover sent me a letter saying "you're getting too much cash back, so we are closing your account to improve our profits" than if Discover sent me a letter saying "we'll close your account unless you give us personal data that we can carelessly allow hackers to obtain any time in the coming years, and by the way, if you do give us the personal data, we'll close your account anyway."

---

They won't ever do it that way though. It doesn't sound very nice to say to a customer. Neither is, "we find you to be too risky now for our tastes". Maybe 4506-Ts or CLDs or balance chasing is their way of saying these things.

[thornback]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@M_Smart007 wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

---

Hopefully it wasn't too much cash back. This is why I never let myself hold more than a couple bucks on any of my cards or cash out whenever I hit the minimum. 

It does seem like Disco seems intent on shedding a bunch of customers so if it happens,

I'll make sure that they put that I closed the accounts on my reports and never do business with them again. 

---

@Anonymous, I do not think you would have that option.

"We will report to the credit bureaus that the account was Closed by Grantor."

---

Nope. That was after sending them the info. I will tell them to close my account on the spot and insist they mark it that I closed it since I voluntarily closed rather than comply with the request. 

---

Update: I just closed it.   The rep that assisted advised that it will be noted as 'closed at consumer's request' before I even had a chance to ask him to make sure it would be noted as such.  He said so long as the consumer makes contact prior to reaching the deadline to authorize the 4506t, account closure will be considered voluntary and "at consumer's request".  However, if you ignore the request, account closure will be 'by creditor';  if you authorize and then "fail" verification, account closure, obviously, will be "by creditor".    I will re-confirm this once my account actually reports to the bureaus as closed.

I explained my reasoning for wanting to close and (he claims) he noted my account about my concerns regarding passing my IRS info through Equifax.  He said he gets it but there is, unfortunately, no work-around at this time.   He said I can re-apply in the future with no issue since my account is closed in "excellent standing" (so there's no 'blacklist' apparently).  He was not able to answer whether or not future approval would be contingent upon providing the 4506t -- or if one would be requested again post-future approval .  My cashback balance will be mailed to me.   All and all, closing was a super simple process.  And the rep didn't seem surprised at all by my wanting to close and made no effort to convince me otherwise.

So that's that.  

Need to update my siggy and now I'm going to have an uneven number of cards displayed and it's going to drive me insane. 

[Anonymous]

---

@thornback wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@M_Smart007 wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

---

Hopefully it wasn't too much cash back. This is why I never let myself hold more than a couple bucks on any of my cards or cash out whenever I hit the minimum. 

It does seem like Disco seems intent on shedding a bunch of customers so if it happens,

I'll make sure that they put that I closed the accounts on my reports and never do business with them again. 

---

@Anonymous, I do not think you would have that option.

"We will report to the credit bureaus that the account was Closed by Grantor."

---

Nope. That was after sending them the info. I will tell them to close my account on the spot and insist they mark it that I closed it since I voluntarily closed rather than comply with the request. 

---

Update: I just closed it.   The rep that assisted advised that it will be noted as 'closed at consumer's request' before I even had a chance to ask him to make sure it would be noted as such.  He said so long as the consumer makes contact prior to reaching the deadline to authorize the 4506t, account closure will be considered voluntary and "at consumer's request".  However, if you ignore the request, account closure will be 'by creditor';  if you authorize and then "fail" verification, account closure, obviously, will be "by creditor".    I will re-confirm this once my account actually reports to the bureaus as closed.

I explained my reasoning for wanting to close and (he claims) he noted my account about my concerns regarding passing my IRS info through Equifax.  He said he gets it but there is, unfortunately, no work-around at this time.   He said I can re-apply in the future with no issue since my account is closed in "excellent standing" (so there's no 'blacklist' apparently).  He was not able to answer whether or not future approval would be contingent upon providing the 4506t -- or if one would be requested again post-future approval .  My cashback balance will be mailed to me.   All and all, closing was a super simple process.  And the rep didn't seem surprised at all by my wanting to close and made no effort to convince me otherwise.

So that's that.  

Need to update my siggy and now I'm going to have an uneven number of cards displayed and it's going to drive me insane. 

---

Good, no burned bridges lol.

That's an account feature. "You can close the account hassle-free". That's another reason to have Discover!

[addicted_to_credit]

Upthread a bit someone mentioned the algorithm flagging someone unprofitable, if I remember correctly this is also happening to people who have a 200 secured card. I mean it’s secured.... if they don’t pay, take the money owed, close the account and refund the difference. I’m not sure what is going on with discover and I hope it doesn’t trickle across all issuers.

[GApeachy]

Do ccc's judge a Personal credit like they do Business credit? Meaning with Business we are hindered by sic/naics that catagorizes us by class. ie. Construction=risky  These codes can cuz AA's.  I've read a lot of articles about this lately but have not seen anything as far as personal cards so I was just wondering if that's a thing personally.

So could our profession, not income be a part of the algorithms used by some or all lenders....just curious?

(I'm not talking about self employed but the Industry we are assoc. with)

[thornback]

---

@addicted_to_credit wrote:
Upthread a bit someone mentioned the algorithm flagging someone unprofitable, if I remember correctly this is also happening to people who have a 200 secured card. I mean it’s secured.... if they don’t pay, take the money owed, close the account and refund the difference. I’m not sure what is going on with discover and I hope it doesn’t trickle across all issuers.

---

The 4506t requests for secured cards is insane, imo.    I don't think profitability vs. improfitability is the underlying reasoning here.   It seems random but I don't know about that either.   I think  'The Work Number' registry maintained by EQ may be a flagger.   My employer is not listed on that registry - so not auto-verifiable (of course, someone could simply call HR to confirm but whatevs).  If everyone that has received this 4506t request from Disco could confirm whether their employer can be found on 'The Work Number'  - we may find a common thread.    Requesting tax docs that are passed through EQ also allows EQ to update 'The Work Number' database with new entities - making their service that much more de$irable to lenders.

[Anonymous]

---

@thornback wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@M_Smart007 wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

---

Hopefully it wasn't too much cash back. This is why I never let myself hold more than a couple bucks on any of my cards or cash out whenever I hit the minimum. 

It does seem like Disco seems intent on shedding a bunch of customers so if it happens,

I'll make sure that they put that I closed the accounts on my reports and never do business with them again. 

---

@Anonymous, I do not think you would have that option.

"We will report to the credit bureaus that the account was Closed by Grantor."

---

Nope. That was after sending them the info. I will tell them to close my account on the spot and insist they mark it that I closed it since I voluntarily closed rather than comply with the request. 

---

Update: I just closed it.   The rep that assisted advised that it will be noted as 'closed at consumer's request' before I even had a chance to ask him to make sure it would be noted as such.  He said so long as the consumer makes contact prior to reaching the deadline to authorize the 4506t, account closure will be considered voluntary and "at consumer's request".  However, if you ignore the request, account closure will be 'by creditor';  if you authorize and then "fail" verification, account closure, obviously, will be "by creditor".    I will re-confirm this once my account actually reports to the bureaus as closed.

I explained my reasoning for wanting to close and (he claims) he noted my account about my concerns regarding passing my IRS info through Equifax.  He said he gets it but there is, unfortunately, no work-around at this time.   He said I can re-apply in the future with no issue since my account is closed in "excellent standing" (so there's no 'blacklist' apparently).  He was not able to answer whether or not future approval would be contingent upon providing the 4506t -- or if one would be requested again post-future approval .  My cashback balance will be mailed to me.   All and all, closing was a super simple process.  And the rep didn't seem surprised at all by my wanting to close and made no effort to convince me otherwise.

So that's that.  

Need to update my siggy and now I'm going to have an uneven number of cards displayed and it's going to drive me insane. 

---

Thank you for confirming that voluntary closure will show the consumer closed it. I suspected that would be the case based on reddit but you can't believe everything you read on reddit. 

Glad that it went as smoothly as a closure could for you. Sorry about the open space in your signature, I know exactly what you mean because that's how I ended up getting my 19th and 20th cards. 

[thornback]

---

@GApeachy wrote:

Do ccc's judge a Personal credit like they do Business credit? Meaning with Business we are hindered by sic/naics that catagorizes us by class. ie. Construction=risky  These codes can cuz AA's.  I've read a lot of articles about this lately but have not seen anything as far as personal cards so I was just wondering if that's a thing personally.

So could our profession, not income be a part of the algorithms used by some or all lenders....just curious?

(I'm not talking about self employed but the Industry we are assoc. with)

---

I don't know but it's certainly possible - and I wouldn't be surprised to find that to be the case.   My industry (IT in the public school sector) doesn't seem very risky... I mean -the computer screen may cause some loss of sight down the road but... 

[GApeachy]

---

@thornback wrote:

---

@GApeachy wrote:

Do ccc's judge a Personal credit like they do Business credit? Meaning with Business we are hindered by sic/naics that catagorizes us by class. ie. Construction=risky  These codes can cuz AA's.  I've read a lot of articles about this lately but have not seen anything as far as personal cards so I was just wondering if that's a thing personally.

So could our profession, not income be a part of the algorithms used by some or all lenders....just curious?

(I'm not talking about self employed but the Industry we are assoc. with)

---

I don't know but it's certainly possible - and I wouldn't be surprised to find that to be the case.   My industry (IT in the public school sector) doesn't seem very risky... I mean -the computer screen may cause some loss of sight down the road but... 

---

I hate to say this but IT actually is in the "Risky".....surprising but it's right there with us Construction folk.  I'll see if I can pull up that link and post it here.

EDIT: found it ...hope it's okay to posthttps://www.creditsuite.com/blog/which-sic-codes-get-you-denied/#SIC_Codes_Lookup_High-Risk_Industri...

of course that's business not personal