I have asked secumd on their policy for non-activity closure on both their LOC and their credit card.
If such a thing were true, it would be extremely convenient because I would never have to spend on either loan products and have major age related fico boosts. Both loans were opened on month 0 of my credit journey. However a couple months ago, a bankteller told me secu cards close out for inactivity at 2 years while LOC never closes out. Anyways such a policy of never closing sounds too good to be true, can anyone else elaborate on whether this is too good to be true?
Starting Score: Ex08-732,Eq08-713,Tu08-717
Hello SubEx! My comments below in blue.
@Subexistence wrote:I have asked secumd on their policy for non-activity closure on both their LOC and their credit card.
If such a thing were true, it would be extremely convenient because I would never have to spend on either loan products and have major age related fico boosts. Both loans were opened on month 0 of my credit journey.
You describe these accounts initially as an LOC and a credit card. These are revolving accounts, not loans. I am not trying to be picky about words -- it's just that the scoring advantage of having open loans that would never close (and which you could alter the balance at will) would be much greater than having open revolving accounts. Revolving accounts that can be kept open indefinitely with almost no work are fairly commonplace.
However a couple months ago, a bankteller told me secu cards close out for inactivity at 2 years while LOC never closes out. Anyways such a policy of never closing sounds too good to be true, can anyone else elaborate on whether this is too good to be true?
I think the initial rep was likely to be right. That bank probably never closes LOCs and they probably close credit cards after a long period of non-use. Such a policy would be typical for most banks, and I have never heard of a single bank (or CU or CC issuer) in the world who has an explicit policy of promising never to close a credit card even after ten years of non-use.
But let's just suppose that they do. (Conceivable, since you have something in writing from them, but still in my opinion likely to be a mistake by the rep who wrote that.) Even in this best case scenario, all you can conclude is that in August 2017 they had such a policy. You cannot conclude that the policy wouldn't change two months from now. This is a crucial idea when making plans about credit: identifying what is stable and what could change in a heartbeat. (Actually a likely crucial skill in life in general.)