Has there been any discussions about another very important part of this Dodd-Frank Act, and probably more important to all of us in a slightly different way.
The now new DIRECT DISPUTE provision of this bill where instead of disputing with the CRA agency's you go directly to the orginal CO. Does anyone have any details on the provision.
I totally agree with Tazman. How can we have a level playing field if we don't know what is stacked up against us.
I believe that something should be included that would not allow banks to lower your credit limit if you have had no late payments. We have scores in the mid 700's but would like to achieve the 800 mark. No late payments, no derogs, just a high debt to credit limit ratio. Based on this, we have been making significant payments to our accounts to bring the balances down, but every time we do that, the lender lowers the credit limit, which keeps the ratio high. To make matters worse, I use one card solely for business purposes. The card has a $25K limit, and I typically run about $20K per month through it. When that card had a $30K limit, and I made a $10K payment on it, they immediately lowered my CL to $25K which caused a little grief for business travel. To make matters worse, this particular bank only allows 4 online payments a month, which means we have to craft payments to coincide with closing dates so as not to lose more credit limit. Almost a full time job!
I believe this reform will probably somehow down the road benefit the banks. They will find a way to take away from consumers just like protecting us the consumer from the craziness of all the fees they would charge. Now they just found a new way to charge us and increase it. Look at chase - they now charge 34.00 returned or overdraft charge and in addition if you have not paid the money back within 5 days they give you another 15.00 charge for additional late fee. Pretty swife. As a consumer I believe that all these protections are in place and the banks find a way around them so that they can double and triple there money. I would love to feel more protected but when our own government is out of money how can anyone protect us. We need to protect ourselves and not overdraft and pay our credit cards off and get back to the business of living within our means. The government doesnt seem to know how that is done so maybe we the consumer need to show them how to do it. I know with all these things in place it has made me stop using credit cards and pay them off and make sure I have a good budget in place and no exactly what I am spending so that I don't give the banks any more of my money. I think it is a great thing that we can pass on to our children and grandchildren. I am for becoming debt free and using only my money and not anyone elses for the things that I can eventual save up for. Sure a house, a new car well then you have to go that route but otherwise I think that I needed to change my way of thinking. I needed to become the banker with my money and that is my goal. I think most of us are only everyday people who are doing the best they can and there is never any help out there for them so we need to get realistic and do it for ourselves.
I can tell you that this legislation is going to cost the consumers, not help them. It's also going to put undue pressure on financial institutions because of the cost of doing business driving up the cost of services and credit. The unfortunate thing is the government try to pass legislation before they really understand the full impact of their actions.
I think its all a way for the Gov to give themselves a seat at a table they don't belong at. You cant fix stupid (consumers).
I personally believe there should be FULL disclosure of all of EVERY lender's underwriting criteria, available on the Internet, including the origin of the credit scores used (tell us if it's FICO or FAKO), so that everyone could determine if they will be approved BEFORE possibly wasting an inquiry, and spending the time to do an app for nothing. Nondisclosure should have a fine attached to it, with half of the fine going to the potential borrower. I also believe that the auto dealers, bank's new account dept, insurance companies, and potential employers (anyone and everyone who has a *reason* to pull a credit report) should be subject to the new rules, as well. And, as long as we're going, all those companies who do "soft" pulls to make credit offers should be required to drop us a note in the mail if they pull also. And lastly, we the people, should be allowed to choose which companies are allowed to do a "soft" pull. For example, if I don't want B of A to do soft pulls to offer me a credit card, I can say NO, just to B of A, and , if I like Wells Fargo, I can say OK to only Wells Fargo. And again, any violation has a fine, half payable to the individual whose report/score, is pulled.
I agree 100%, but it is doubtful this will ever happen. They would argue that they should not have to give up their proprietary information, but I think there may be some stuff that they use to judge scores that are less than kosher. Plus the companies who charge "application fees" will get less revenue because if you know whether or not you are going to get approved, less people would apply.