|
|
Chase Changed the Terms of My Loan
Posted Sat January 10, 2009 12:00 pm, by Peggy C. D. written to Chase Bank
Write a Letter to this Company | Rate this Company
On January 1, 2009 Chase Credit Card Services instituted a change-in-terms with no opt-out option on a loan I obtained in November, 2005. The amount of the loan was $38,000 with 3.99% fixed interest rate, 2% minimum payment due each month until the balance is paid in full. Chase claims to have included an insert in my December 2008 bill. I never saw it and no doubt it was designed not to draw my attention.
The result is that my payment which was $416 in December, 2008 has been increased to $1,025 in January, 2009. (This is outrageous...my initial payment when the balance owed was $38,000 was only $763.00 In addition, they have added a $10/month fixed fee which increases my interest rate to 4.64% while they "pretend" to be holding the "fixed" 3.99% rate. Chase has refused to adhere to the original terms of the agreement and upon my protest they offered to return the minimum payment to 2% and remove the $10/monthly fee only if I agree to an increased interest rate of 7.99%.
This is after receiving 25 BILLION dollars of bail-out money AND testimony by their Chief Marketing Officer before the Senate Banking Committee last January that they provide an opt-out feature which allows the customer to refuse the change, close the account and continue to pay off the balance at the original rate and terms.
I have been a customer of Chase for over 20 years. I have never been late on a payment, nor have I ever missed a payment to them or any other creditor. I have learned that Chase is doing this to some of their best customers, while writing off or reducing the debt of defaulting consumers, lowering the interest rates and lengthening the period to pay off the balances for their worst customers.
In addition the federal interest rate is at 35 year lows - so why is Chase engaging in the most egregious, greedy money grab against hundreds of thousands of their best customers?
Please do the right thing and honor the original terms under which I obtained the loan. Terms which I have honored and done my part faithfully for over three years. Return the account to minimum payment of 2% of outstanding balance and remove the $10/month fee.
Reply
| Log In/Create an account | 12 comments |
|
|
| PlanetFeedback Comments are subject to strict terms and conditions. We reserve the right to deny site membership privileges to any individuals acting inappropriately. |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
by Alaine M. Posted Thu February 5, 2009 @ 12:42 AM
|
|
|
First of all, Chase DID offer you 2 alternate options (read the change in terms notice). Second, Chase did NOT change the terms of your loan. Your loan is still at the fixed APR as agreed upon. They changed your card member agreement (read your statement). You are upset because they raised your minimum payment to 5% instead of 2% (which means you over extended yourself) and actually they could raise it to what ever they want to. By paying the 5% you will be paying off your debt faster which is a positive thing! And the $10 service fee is to keep the account in operation since you aren't using it.
Reply
|
|
 |
|
|
by Michael G. Posted Mon January 26, 2009 @ 1:48 PM
|
|
|
I am in the same boat. My loan had a 2.99%, no finance charge. They change it now to 5% of the balance (instead of 2%) and $10 finance charge, irrespective of the fact I have NEVER used the card since I received the original loan.
In respect to Barb A. responses - don't pay attention - the facts may or may not be correct. I asked for the original credit card terms, and will look it over. If Sony Card is correct in being able to change the terms, as described by all of us, then - we can do nothing about it. Otherwise, we can file class action suit - and there are many lawyers that would love to get engaged, if there is a case.
In the meantime - I will probably pay the balance of the loan as quickly as possible, and avoid Chase or Sony Card like the plague.
Not having a credit card division may allow them banks to concentrate of core businesses, which they all forgot.
Reply
|
|
 |
|
|
by Barb A. Posted Thu January 22, 2009 @ 11:25 PM
|
|
|
I would like to begin by stating that this IS NOT an official statement from the bank, merely someone who knows something. The follwing is merely my humble opinion.
I will reply to your comments one by one, because they are all . . . I'll be nice and say misguided. One, "no doubt it was designed not to draw my attention." Do you know how much stuff they have to put on a monthly statement? They have a lot of laws to comply with, including giving you 15 days notice of any changes to your account. Also, that thing they give you each month is a statement, not just a bill. It describes the activity and the state of your account. If you can read your minimum payment you can read the notices.
Two, a "fixed" rate merely means that it's not variable, that it doesn't fluctuate with the national prime which is determined by the Wall Street Journal. A variable rate goes up or down with the prime. It doesn't mean the card company promises to never ever change it.
I'll run the numbers for you. I'll assume you've paid regularly on your card and you've got about 25,000 left. At 7.99 your approximate interest for an entire 30 day period with no payments would be around 169.00. At your current interest rate, and including the new fee, you're paying about 94.00. But it would mean taking your payments back down to what you're budget will allow. On the other hand a 5% payment means it's paid off that much faster. Also, the bank and the bank alone determines the minimum monthly payment. You have a valid complaint for being offered a low interest rate, but you were never guaranteed a set minimum payment.
Three, the bailout was directed toward mortgages and JPMorgan Chase is not a big player in the mortgage field, so they got a relatively small cut. It was intended to entice the banks to invest in bad investments, in the hope that it would reinvigorate them and help the economy. This was not a requirement however, and many banks are holding funds until the market recovers. I do not know if Chase practices this. But it was never intended for unsecured, personal, credit card debt. With the downturn in the economy people aren't spending as much, and the bank depends on that revolving credit. Also, the bank has to borrow the money that they loan you, at an interest of around 3%, but I could be wrong about that. When you're paying 3.99, the bank isn't making much, if anything. And with things the way the are right now, Chase and all the banks have to start hedging for the future. That's why they have that clause in your cardmember agreement. It's in contents IV of your cardmember agreement.
This isn't personal, it's business. (A side note, your credit card is *a contract!* Like any contract,if you don't read your contract carefully sometimes there are unpleasant surprises. The banks are trying to weather this storm. Also try to remember that there are millions of jobs to protect in this industry.
For those of you that want to call and chew out Chase, I can't stop you. But please remember that the voice on the other end of the phone belongs to a person who has bills to pay like everyone else. The people taking the calls didn't do this they're just getting paid 10 to tell you what happened. Yes it sucks, and yes, I'm sure it feels like a slap in the face. But understand that this is a last resort. No one's sitting in a shadowy room gleefully rubbing their hands together. Stay calm and reassess. No one will blame you for transferring your balance to another company.
Reply
|
|

|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Chase has done exactly same thing to me. It is just amazing how they can get away with this. How can they blatantly alter the contract which they thought is good in the begining? This is the classic 'heads I win tails you lose' philosophy.
Basically, it seems like crooks and fraudesters get bailed out and average guy gets screwed.
Reply
|
|
 |
|
|
by The_Prospector Posted Mon January 12, 2009 @ 2:24 AM
|
|
|
I agree 100%! Let us now if you have any luck with them. I would think some lawyer would have filed a class action lawsuit on this one for sure. If they do count me in! I'm in the same boat.
Reply
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
As I said in another post, it was not the bank that did this, it was the government. They instituted a minimum monthly amount.
Reply
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|