peteypablo said:Jane0218 said:DavidScubadiver said:Send them an e-mail from your online account:

Hello. I received a notice that the agreed to terms and conditions on my account are being unilaterally changed by Chase to provide that ____ and _____. These changes would present a great hardship to me if they are applied retroactively to my existing balance which was incurred when the terms were not as Chase proposes to change them. I do not believe I agreed to allow Chase to retroactively change my terms when I have been honoring those terms to date. However, I understand that if Chase wishes to change the terms as they relate to future purchases, that seems fair enough - I will not make any future purchases on my card, and if that means you need to close the account while permitting me to pay off my existing balance on the terms I previously agreed to, you have my permission to do so. I cannot repay everything at once, nor should I be required to do so as we had a contract which permits me to make the minimum payments at the fixed rate, so long as I am not in default, which I am not. Please let me know how to proceed, and please do not charge my account any additional fees or otherwise cause me to pay more than i am required to pay under the terms we've previously agreed to. Thanks."

Good post, but I'm not sure if Chase has actually changed the terms of our agreement regarding my 3.99% BT interest rate until the balance is paid off. The rate will remain 3.99%; they just are demanding a higher minimum payment. The real question is, but I could be wrong (a good lawyer would know): Is increasing the minimum pmt from 2% to 5% of the OS balance for only those cardholders who have been carrying large fixed, low-rate, for-the-life-of-the-balance amounts a change in terms? If it is, then shouldn't we be able to opt-out and continue paying as we have until our cards expire? Or, is the notice possibly discriminatory, choosing cardholders only with BT and life-of-the-balance low interest rates?

Man, oh man, this is not a fun way to start a Thanksgiving holiday...

I would also be interested in contacting a lawyer who could answer these questions

You just quoted a lawyer working in New York earning $300K per year. I'm a lawyer too, and I think changing the monthly payment is a change in terms. Otherwise, what keeps them from increasing the 2% to 100% and completely nullifying the "life of the balance" bargain?

Sorry, I wasn't aware the suggestion to send the e-mail was from a lawyer.

A bit of venting: I also fear that contacting Chase in any way will prompt them to screw me even further...this is all so frustrating; I finally got to a place where I can handle my expenses and I have a stable job, and this ball drops on my head.

I'm confused (sorry again) as what to indicate for the blanks in "...changed by Chase to provide that ____ and _____."

peteypablo said:jane0218 said:I'm confused (sorry again) as what to indicate for the blanks in "...changed by Chase to provide that ____ and _____."

Why don't you propose something and ask for a critique instead of asking for us to compose the whole letter?

Why? Because it's already composed above.

I am not a lawyer, I am not a writer. I've never had to do anything like this before. I am scared that I will either have to declare bankruptcy because of this new 5% minimum payment, or, if I write Chase and say the wrong thing, I'll make some CSR angry and he/she will make my terms even worse than they just have.

That's why.

DavidScubadiver said:the ___ and ____ was just for you to fill in what the terms were that you were notified of. If there is only one term than you only have to fill in one blank and delete the and. Read it like, "Changed by Chase to provide_________" Perhaps its, "to provide that the minimum payment is being increased from 2% to 5%, a 150% increase!"

Thanks very much. Your help is greatly appreciated!

Jane, let us know how they respond. I was not fortunate enough to get a for life deal but am curious how they respond.

Or I could transfer everything to Citi and then OPT OUT of their rate increase and keep my 6.24%(var). They'll close my account in 11/10 and I would have to repay the balance under current terms. By then I could transfer to another card.

Restive, can you quote the language you are referencing? It seems to me unlikely there would be a clause that says any clause can be changed for any reason, else they could add a clause that says, "pay me back at 150% interest by last week or i am foreclosing on your sister's house."

Jane, if you have a "for life" rate that is low, and does not have a monthly fee, i suggest you read your card's terms and see what they say about losing the rate or being subject to additional fees. If there is nothing there that makes sense to you which states that they have this right, I would simply write them as its better to have a response in writing, and ask them to allow you to pay off at your 'for life' rate without the additional fee and that you agree not to use the card for additional purchases.

DavidScubadiver said:Jane, if you have a "for life" rate that is low, and does not have a monthly fee, i suggest you read your card's terms and see what they say about losing the rate or being subject to additional fees. If there is nothing there that makes sense to you which states that they have this right, I would simply write them as its better to have a response in writing, and ask them to allow you to pay off at your 'for life' rate without the additional fee and that you agree not to use the card for additional purchases.

David, thanks for the suggestion. I will seriously consider it.
QUESTION: Would e-mailing my request via their website & receiving a reply electronically be equivalent to receiving a response 'in writing' nowadays? Or do I need to do this via snail mail, Cert., ret. rec. requested?

To David or anyone who might be able to help (not just help me, but the thousands like me who rec'd the notice):

I didn't keep the terms of the 3.99% "for life" rate I obtained in 2005. They were probably similar to the wording of the "for life" offers I have on my desk now, i.e.: RBS': 5.99% FIXED APR until the balance is paid in full. Each check will have a fee of 3% of the transferred amount--$10 min. and $75 max. There's verbage about how the BT fee will get charged interest @ the Purchases rate & that a default rate will apply if I pay late. There's nothing in the promotion literature that states 1) what the minimum payment requirement will be...so I guess it's assumed it's the minimum required for Purchases, correct? or 2) they cannot or will not impose additional monthly finance charges (as Chase has done). So, does the fact the the verbage is NOT there equate to they CANNOT do it? Or is lack of the verbage equal to they CAN do whatever they want?

The back of my cc statement has terms about how finance charges are calculated, etc. As far as obtaining all of my card's terms, I went online and there is not that option.

I will write to them, I think. Transferring the balance to 0% or 2.99% cards would only be a temporary solution, since the offers I have limited time ones. Who knows what the economy will be like in 9, 12, or 15 months? Maybe there won't be any additional low APR BT offers then...

Thanks for all the time you (and others) have taken to try to help me. I'm sure there are others who have been following this thread who are in the same position as I am in.

amen.

pay up all you deadbeats. stop living beyond your means. there's a diff btw want and need.

if you don't like the new terms. pay off your balances/xfer them out and close your account.
actions speak louder than words.

CreditGuy said:Frankly, I don't think Chase has done anything illegal or in violation of its original offer. I'm sure its attorneys were very careful. The life-of-balance offers never say anything about the minimum payments required or how long that LOB will take to be repaid with minimum repayments. They never talk about features of the card itself, such as a membership fee. If Chase chooses to change terms not covered by the LOB agreement--such as the minimum payment due each month, or a membership fee for the card itself of $10 per month--those changes are not altering the LOB agreement. They're just changing the terms for the card. A $10 added finance fee monthly for those carrying LOB balances would be a change in the rate and thus illegal--but calling it a $10 monthly membership fee for the card itself isn't illegal IMHO.

Now, I'm not an attorney. And I'm not naive. I understand why Chase is doing what it's doing--and it's dastardly. But I think it is legal. Give me red if you must, but I think courts will agree with me.

if you don't like the new terms. pay off your balances/xfer them out and close your account. actions speak louder than words.

Although I understand your sentiment, let me respond with a scenario and I'd like to hear what you have to say:

Consider this happened with your mortgage:
You are offered a deal where you get 4% for the life of the loan if you pay a $500 fee. Then, you get a notice that the rate will stay the same but your monthly payments will increase by 2.5x AND they're adding a monthly fee of $200.
Situations:
A. You can still afford your mortgage: Would you be happy and just pay the new amounts and fees without question?
B. You can't afford your mortgage: You come here to ask for help and you get a response from someone on the board that says "Stop living beyond your means. Why did you buy a house you couldn't afford?" Does that really help when someone says that???

From your response, it seems like you wouldn't be bothered by this, would pay off your mortgage, and shrug without being upset. Personally, I'll be paying off the card but I feel like I should get the money I paid in that initial fee back. In addition, I STILL feel like I was abused. I guess you and I differ on what we expect when we enter a contract with a financial institution.

CreditGuy said:A $10 added finance fee monthly for those carrying LOB balances would be a change in the rate and thus illegal--but calling it a $10 monthly membership fee for the card itself isn't illegal IMHO.

Now, I'm not an attorney. And I'm not naive. I understand why Chase is doing what it's doing--and it's dastardly. But I think it is legal. Give me red if you must, but I think courts will agree with me.
The $10.00 is catergorized as a finance charge, as follows by Chase: "1a. Account Service Charge. The FINANCE CHARGES section of your Agreement is amended to add the following new section: Account Service Charge: Your acount has a service charge, which will be billed monthly (as stated in the Rates andFees Table). This charge is owed whether or not you use your account, and you agrre to pay it when billed. These charges are finance charges[all bold wording is by Chase, not me], and are added to the balance for purchases on your account."

Is a finance charge the same thing as the interest rate? Legally, probably not. But I wish it was so I could have some solid ground to stand on when I send them my email to request them to allow me to continue paying as per the terms of the original agreement.

I'm curious why there hasn't been any across the board media attention to this (or online boards postings), as Chase is the only card issuer (so far) to institute this 5% minm. pmt. on LOB cardholders.