The idea peddled that consumers can proactively "manage" their FICO score? Yeah, it's b.s.
... and they'll charge you for monitoring these scores, too, if you let them. Amazing.
WILL CONGRESS ACT?
I don't know how many people are involved in the story mentioned above. It would help to know what is going on.
First, 28% is too high and, while I'm against government involvement in pricing, broadly put, there is no supporting a usurious rate, right? 28% is as outrageous as the "late fees" that have been egregiously abused, without apology.
PENALIZED FOR LOW / UNEVEN CARD BALANCES?
We might call 28% a non-default default rate. It's possible that, if you have a "low" balance on one card and the card company thinks they will be disadvantaged in default because of "high" balances on other cards, they will move you quickly to a punitive rate to try to get you to pay down their disadvantaged claim first.
I don't know that for sure, but someone who is a bankruptcy lawyer will eventually weigh in with a possible rationale, I suspect.
Monday, February 11, 2008
"FICO" b.s.
