|
Capital One adds interest to a credit card balance. The result of that
transaction brings the new balance over the credit limit. An over-
limit fee is imposed becasue of that. How can the addition of the over-
limit fee NOT be usery?
|
| |
| |
R <RABurdick@gmail.com> wrote in news:f80vn3lf8l909knrg43bncscamajn7133k@
4ax.com:
Capital One adds interest to a credit card balance. The result of that
transaction brings the new balance over the credit limit. An over-
limit fee is imposed becasue of that. How can the addition of the over-
limit fee NOT be usery?
It's usury, and state law will define what that is. Not that it will help
much. Most states don't have usury laws, and credit card companies are
allowed to charge whatever rate is legal in the state in which they're
based, no matter where their customers live. Ever wonder why Citibank has
its credit card operations in South Dakota?
|
| |
| |
On Jan 5, 6:10 am, R <RABurd...@gmail.com> wrote:
Capital One adds interest to a credit card balance. The result of that
transaction brings the new balance over the credit limit. An over-
limit fee is imposed becasue of that. How can the addition of the over-
limit fee NOT be usery?
In the modern world, usury is defined as assessing excessive
interest. Charging fees as provided for in a contractual agreement
(which all credit cards come with and few read) does not fall in that
category.
|
| |
| |
R <RABurdick@gmail.com> wrote:
Capital One adds interest to a credit card balance.
The result of that transaction brings the new
balance over the credit limit. An over-limit fee is
imposed becasue of that. How can the addition of
the over-limit fee NOT be usery?
Unfortunately I am not up-to-date on usery
laws. but I have successly complained about
this practice and have gotten the fee removed.
It's a matter of being polite and firm.
Dick
|
| |
| |
In article <f80vn3lf8l909knrg43bncscamajn7133k@4ax.com>,
R <RABurdick@gmail.com> wrote:
Capital One adds interest to a credit card balance. The result of that
transaction brings the new balance over the credit limit. An over-
limit fee is imposed becasue of that. How can the addition of the over-
limit fee NOT be usery?
If the total interest rate, including the interest + overlimit fee, is
less than the state's limit for usury, then it isn't usury.
Seth
|
| |
| |
R,
Capital One adds interest to a credit card balance. The result of that
transaction brings the new balance over the credit limit. An over-
limit fee is imposed becasue of that. How can the addition of the over-
limit fee NOT be usery?
Usury is excessive interest. Has nothing to do with fees.
Manage your credit better and you won't have to worry about
over-the-limit fees.
Lighthope
Pearls of Wisdom - My wife is the only person who can watch a cartoon
and ask "How'd they do that?"
|
| |
| |
sethb@panix.com (Seth) wrote in news:u7i1o3pj9lvbfqnt7hgas98rv2596f6rc4@
4ax.com:
In article <f80vn3lf8l909knrg43bncscamajn7133k@4ax.com>,
R <RABurdick@gmail.com> wrote:
If the total interest rate, including the interest + overlimit fee, is
less than the state's limit for usury, then it isn't usury.
Seth
Please note that the state in question is the state in which the credit
card company is based, not the state in which the credit card holder lives.
Some states have usury laws and some don't. Which states do you suppose
credit card companies choose to operate from?
|
| |
| |
On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 08:10:34 -0500, R <RABurdick@gmail.com> wrote:
Capital One adds interest to a credit card balance. The result of that
transaction brings the new balance over the credit limit. An over-
limit fee is imposed becasue of that. How can the addition of the over-
limit fee NOT be usery?
Your own state's usury law, whether it has one or not, and regardless
of what that law says, doesn't matter in 49 cases, according to the
woman who teaches commercial law at Harvard Law (Prof. Elizabeth
Warren) who has her book out about 3 months ago. (I see in Google
there is also something by Angela Littwin, also of Harvard, "Beyond
Usury: A Study of Credit Card Use and PREFERENCE AMONG LOW-INCOME
CONSUMERS", but I don't know what it says.) That is, according to a
Supreme Court decision in the last few years, the law that applies is
the law in the state where the credit card billing** is done, and
Kansas or Nebraska or N. or S. Dakota soon changed its laws so nothing
or almost nothing is illegal. Then almost all the credit card
companies moved there, and this is what we have now.
I presume this is the type of decision that in which Congress could
overrule the SC, but I also presume the Republicans would fillibuster
such an effort and el Presidente would veto it. It doesn't seem to be
an issue that is talked about however.
**Or maybe processing. I'm not sure what defines which state, but
currently it is, I see, South Dakota.
If you are inclined to email me
for some reason, remove NOPSAM :-)
|
| |
| |
On 2008-01-07 04:24:16 -0800, mm <NOPSAMmm2005@bigfoot.com> said:
Your own state's usury law, whether it has one or not, and regardless
of what that law says, doesn't matter in 49 cases, according to the
woman who teaches commercial law at Harvard Law (Prof. Elizabeth
Warren) who has her book out about 3 months ago. (I see in Google
there is also something by Angela Littwin, also of Harvard, "Beyond
Usury: A Study of Credit Card Use and PREFERENCE AMONG LOW-INCOME
CONSUMERS", but I don't know what it says.) That is, according to a
Supreme Court decision in the last few years, the law that applies is
the law in the state where the credit card billing** is done, and
Kansas or Nebraska or N. or S. Dakota soon changed its laws so nothing
or almost nothing is illegal. Then almost all the credit card
companies moved there, and this is what we have now.
Could a case be made that credit card transactions are interstate
commerce and therefore can be federally regulated? Is a federal usury
law that is the same in all states a possibility?
|
| |
| |
|
