Capital One: Take and Double Take
Capital One got $3.55 billion in TARP funds. Now they are taking their customers to the cleaners - including me.
Like many Capital One customers, I recently received a rather dramatic "change of terms" notice. I actually called Capital One to 1) translate it for me, and 2) loudly complain.
The notice informed me that my relatively low fixed rate accounts were being transformed into variable rate accounts. On my lowest rate card, that means they are jumping from a 7.9% fixed rate to a 17.9% variable rate on purchases - 24.9% on cash advances, and 29.4% default rate - all variable - (and we've been upset about the payday loan folks). The basic rate change goes into effect in February 2010 (for me) with the other changes taking effect immediately. The only positive news here is they are giving me essentially a one year warning to pay off any outstanding balances on my Capital One cards. Unfortunately, this is a time when many people are using their credit to keep housed and fed, or meet emergency needs (medical bills, fix the busted refrigerator, etc).
While I am personally ticked off at them treating me this way (and other C1 customers feel the same way) there is a bigger impact.
The Congress has passed, and President Obama signed, the "stimulus package." As reiterated by Obama, one of the goals is to get the credit markets flowing again for businesses and people. After all, we are told that "the flow of credit is the lifeblood of our economy" (Obama speech to Congress 2/24/09). The message from Capital One is that "You had better not use your credit card for any major purchases - or pay through the nose for them."
A bit of a mixed message I would say.
It makes me angry that Capital One got $3.5 billion that we are on the hook for, and then pulls a trick like this. The 2010 date would seem to indicate that they are not anticipating a rapid economic recovery. Or perhaps, they are aiming at squeezing their customers.
Capital One, and other credit companies, have been pulling back credit - namely closing customer accounts. The rate jump strategy by Capital One may, in part, be an attempt to get angry customers to cancel their accounts. Decreasing accounts allows companies to have less outstanding potential debt on their books.
However the strategy of either pulling back credit, or customer's canceling their cards in anger, is that while it may "help" the credit companies it damages the credit customers. One's credit rating is significantly based upon the total amount of credit one has available and the amount of credit one is using. If you decrease the amount of credit available, it raises the debt ratio - thereby lowering the credit score. Since getting major loans is based upon one's credit score, people attempting to buy a major item (home, or car for example) are going to face problems - or increased interest rates.
What is happening here is that Capital One (and other credit companies) are working at cross purposes to attempts to stabilize and improve the economy. It is the credit card version of the banks taking TARP funds and not putting them towards either addressing the mortgage situation or "loosening" credit.
I do believe we need some more stipulations on the recipients of those TARP funds.
Note: In 2007-2008 Capital One paid $700,161 in campaign contributions and $1,132,000 in lobbying funds. The $3.55 billion was a 193944% return on investment (Open Secrets).












This is no more than the rape of the American consumers by the very same group we are bailing out! Off w/ their heads!
February 27, 2009 9:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
The last Congress passed legislation to take effect July 1, 2010 that will make it more difficult for card issuers to change interest rates.
The card issuers are going to variable pricing now while it is still easy to change the terms on the card.
February 27, 2009 9:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ah HA! Yet another subversion of the law. Thanks for the additional information.
February 27, 2009 11:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
25%? What the hell is that? Are they still playing with the billing cycle because they know it will make a lot of payers late and they can sock them with fees.
Does there come a point where the Mob can come in and compete for the usury portion of the economy?
February 27, 2009 10:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think we have been in usary territory for some time.
February 27, 2009 11:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
That would be South Dakota Territory.
T.M. Reardon's first-hand account of Citibank's move to South Dakota tells of South Dakota removing its usury laws and inviting CitiBank to move its credit card opertions there. However, it also says that California had no usury law and they modeled South Dakota's on that. So all good things start in California again.
However, in 1980, the high inflation rate and high interest rates were such that the Congress effectively removed usury laws for nationally chartered institutions.
February 27, 2009 1:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well that shows whose interest they were protecting. Same with rewriting the bankruptcy laws which was there to protect folks from predatory lending.
February 27, 2009 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
We have to stop using Credit Cards! The banks sell a defective, dangerous product (debt).
February 27, 2009 11:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
While generally, I think this is a good idea, I have had far too many experiences where the credit card was necessary - primarily emergencies. It has certainly made the difference between life and death with several of my pets over the years, and whether I was able to get medical care for myself or a family member. Further, I admit to using it for household emergencies as well - like when the pipes broke, or the water heater blew up. While I have some savings, I do not have enough to cover significant unplanned expenses.
I also know that it is a sign of class privilege to even have a credit card. Others, without that privilege have not had the option of acting. They are just stuck with the consequences - months without hot water, or medical treatments not received, or a cherished four legged member of the family dying in agony in their living room.
February 27, 2009 11:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Rowan Wolf: I sympathize, and understand. I've never had a credit card, becuase my parents went bankrupt twice b/c of them. I know the damage they cause. But I undertsand where you're coming from, and won't get all preachy on you. (I'm a HUGE dog lover, and would be devastated to choose between my dog Chippy and a pile of money). If you want tips & tricks to get out of their grasp, check http://www.daveramsey.com/. They guy's the best. Very much in line with Liz Warren, Juliet Schor, and others... :)
February 27, 2009 4:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rowan - how did your balances accumulate in the first place? Was your current income not enough to pay your credit card balances in full each month? Did you recently lose your job or incur unexpected one-time charges and that's why the balances have grown?
February 27, 2009 3:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
My household budget and job situation are not the point of this post.
However, if the point of throwing money at the financial industry is to get credit flowing again, these practices will definitely not help.
February 27, 2009 8:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wot haz you got in yer wallet?
February 27, 2009 9:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
A shrinking pile of 1s
February 27, 2009 10:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yah, mon.
(hugs)
February 27, 2009 10:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
The points I think you raised were credit card companies and their extension of credit.
The point I read is that they are tightening their lending standards. And my view is that some borrowers currently deserve to have their borrowing limits lowered and/or their rates increased to discourage usage of their cards. I don't think what Capital One is doing is so egregious. Banks typically tightening lending during recessions.
The message I think from Capital One is slightly different - that you should only use your card for major purchases if you can quickly pay it back. And I don't think that's such a bad message.
You brought up your personal situation, not me.
February 27, 2009 11:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is what happens when we let our goverment set policy in the open market. If I ran a c/c company I would be forced to make a similar move. They are going to lose customers for sure, but you have to protect yourself as a business. I got the same notice from cap 1. I was mad of course. But if you stop and think about it, it has nothing to do with "raping" the consumer. If we keep looking for our goverment to solve our problems, we can expect more of the same.
February 27, 2009 5:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
We had laws in many states previously making it illegal to charge interest over a certain rate. I think in most places it was either 12% or 14%.
With the help of enthusiastic Republican state legislators and timorous Democrats those laws fell like dominoes the moment interest rates topped those high rates back in the 80's. The laws were designed to essentially stop the banks from charging exhorbitant rates and to control the sort of usury that you describe coming from Capitol One.
Capitol One, of course, has a history of shady practices and unethical methods so this news comes as no surprise.
February 27, 2009 6:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't carry balances on credit cards. Live within your means. Simple as that. If you want money without having wroked for it in advance, you have to expect people to charge interest.
Not that I don't agree there ought to be conditions on receipt of TARP funds. But credit contraction was always going to happen. Too many borrowed too much for too long.
February 27, 2009 6:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yez, "live within your means." (However mean that may be)
Don't get ill. Don't have emergencies. Don't love anyone or have kids that get ill or have emergencies. Don't be human.
Then you can be happy, risk free and use the handle "el Presidente'
Of course, if people hadn't been using credit, people like the shareholders at Capitol One wouldn't have gotten fat, spoiled rich and selfish, so maybe he has a point.
February 27, 2009 9:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
This form of "living within my means" is exactly what many of us have been doing - in my case literally since my divorce in 1991. Colorado, effectively, has banned marriage for any individual making less than $75K through some rather strange modification of their divorce laws. Survival level (college student?) lifestyle has been the standard for nearly two decades of my life, thought others we following this lifestyle, but find I was rare based on the recent financial crisis!
March 9, 2009 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Back when I had my business I did a lot of charging on credit cards...It was an easy way to place orders w/o having to go through credit checks with 100 different vendors at trade shows, but still have the benefit of 30 days to pay for merchandise.
Citibank sucked even back then...Every other card I had was due on the same date each month. I paid all my cards on line and had a schedule I followed religiously. Citibank, on the other hand would go months on the same date, then slip in an early one and I'd get whacked $35.00 for a late charge...Always did hate them, and it sounds like they haven't changed.
February 27, 2009 9:31 PM | Reply | Permalink