Credit Card Blues
Maybe Dave Ramsey
Credit cards have two horrifically malodorous traits: 1) they entice you to spend more money than you would if you used cash, and, 2) despite all the hoopla banks emit claiming that "they're on you're side" should a dispute with your card arise, when all is said and done banks are still banks, and will screw you over for a penny in a heartbeat.
The first problem, the tendency to overspend when using credit cards, has been wonderfully explained by Mr. Ramsey in his books
The second problem, that as large bureaucracies banks place their vested interests considerably ahead of ours, (which, quite frankly, is how the real world works, so I shouldn't be whining about it!), isn't something we hear as much about. Perhaps all the marketing nonsense banks make about how your "purchases are protected", (or whatever verbiage they use), causes us to forget that a credit card is in essence a means to receive a monetary loan, and that we are liable for repayment of these loans. Should a fraudulent charge occur, the onus will be on us to prove that said charge was invalid. (The bank could care less whether the care is legitimate or not; they just want their money.)
Recently I had a dispute with Capital One over an unexplained charge on my VISA card. The original charge for $85.59 occurred on July 6th, and was billed to "705 - SMAC", whatever the heck that is. I called Capital One, explained that I had no idea what this charge was for, and they agreed to flag it and send me a new credit card with a new account number.
In a week or so I received my new card, and all seemed well and good until I looked at my account online. The original charge to "705 - SMAC" now showed as being made on July 8th, but at least it was reversed. However, on August 4th it was added back in again, and on August 10th ANOTHER CHARGE FOR $85.59 was billed to "705 - SMAC"!
I called Capital One again, and after discussing this situation with them, finally got them to admit that this was a recurring charge, and that the charge had NO BUSINESS NAME, ADDRESS, OR PHONE NUMBER ASSOCIATED WITH IT. Despite this, they insisted that the charge was legitimate because it had been filed via the chip on my card.
In a prior life, I worked with computer technology. I am an obsolete COBOL programmer; for the last twenty years of my career I supported old, frail computer software, including the credit card billing software for a bank whose name I won't mention. (Hint: the name consists of two words, the first of which starts with the letter "C"!) I know the limitations of this software, and how sometimes it can go awry. So telling me that a recurring charge that I don't recognize from a business with no name, address, or phone number is legitimate just because my card has a chip on it doesn't sit well with me.
So I immediately cancelled my Capital One VISA card.
This drama isn't quite over yet. Once I get my final bill from Capital One, (which, unfortunately, I will have to pay in full), I intend to file a complaint with the Consumer Protection Division of the State of Georgia, asking that Capital One refund me $171.18, (two charges of $85.59). I will probably lose this case, but at least I will have documented yet another instance where a bank is mistreating a customer.
Comments
Post a Comment