BA just cut my credit limits --- a lot.

The card I was carrying, thinking I had 5,000 or so available credit. They
cut it to shaving distance from my balance. One day I tried to buy gas, but
was declined.

Anyone else having a bit of grief from BA?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

In article ,
"Stormin Mormon" wrote:

BA just cut my credit limits --- a lot.

The card I was carrying, thinking I had 5,000 or so available credit. They
cut it to shaving distance from my balance. One day I tried to buy gas, but
was declined.

Anyone else having a bit of grief from BA?


No, but then I haven't dealt with BA for about 10 years now. I thought
they were crooked LONG before the melt down proved it.

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz

On 2012-04-25, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article ,
"Stormin Mormon" wrote:

BA just cut my credit limits --- a lot.

The card I was carrying, thinking I had 5,000 or so available credit. They
cut it to shaving distance from my balance. One day I tried to buy gas, but
was declined.

Anyone else having a bit of grief from BA?


No, but then I haven't dealt with BA for about 10 years now. I thought
they were crooked LONG before the melt down proved it.

They were. Always have been dirtbags.

I quit the sonsabitches about 15 yrs ago when they told me I needed
permission to withdraw money from my own savings acct. I had about
$5-6K in it and wanted to withdraw about $2500 to buy a used car. I
was told I needed the bank mgr's signature. Say what!? Fsck the bank
manager! It's my $$$!! I closed all accts and withdrew every cent.
Walked out with about $8-9K in my pocket. All banks suck the big one.

Oh! ...as for that credit card nonsense, it's not BofA. It's the card
companies. They've been doing this back-stabbing crap for about the
last 10 yrs. They have all of Congress in their pocket and they do
what they pretty much damn well please with zero oversight or
regulation. Hey, this is what all you Reagan lovers wanted! ....no
regulation. Now you have it. How do you like it?

nb


--
vi --the heart of evil!

I used to be a BoA customer but came to the conclusion that they
absolutely despise their customers.

Find a local credit union that will appreciate your business.


On 4/25/2012 7:36 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
BA just cut my credit limits --- a lot.

The card I was carrying, thinking I had 5,000 or so available credit. They
cut it to shaving distance from my balance. One day I tried to buy gas, but
was declined.

Anyone else having a bit of grief from BA?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

Stormin Mormon wrote:
BA just cut my credit limits --- a lot.

The card I was carrying, thinking I had 5,000 or so available credit.
They cut it to shaving distance from my balance. One day I tried to
buy gas, but was declined.

Anyone else having a bit of grief from BA?


Not that. But then again, I'm not stupid enough to maintain a credit balance.

They did suddenly start charging me monthly fees, but a phone call took care of
that. They had apparently changed my account type as part of finalizing accounts
from my old bank into the BOA system.

On 4/25/2012 7:36 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
BA just cut my credit limits --- a lot.

The card I was carrying, thinking I had 5,000 or so available credit. They
cut it to shaving distance from my balance. One day I tried to buy gas, but
was declined.

Anyone else having a bit of grief from BA?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.



I've had credit accounts reduced when I never carried a balance. For
example I had a $25 000 line of credit that was there for emergency. I
rarely used it and when i did i always paid it off fully, sometimes
within a week, usually before the end of month.

They cut it down to $5000 because I was never using it therefore they
were never charging me interest. When I politely asked the bank to re
instate the line they refused, so they lost my homeowners insurance
policy business ( about $900 a year), my chequing account business
(About $4 a month) and my RRSP (like an American 401k) contributions for
the next 30 years (about .5% management fees per year and I invest 10%
of my pay). I was 33 years old at the time.

Fast forward 3 years. Nowadays I have a 6 month old baby with her own
bank account and educational investments, I have a second car loan, and
I have life insurance on myself and my baby. The bank lost all this
potential business. Greedy. Greedy Greedy. All they had to do was
re-instate my line of credit to a measly $25 000 and they would have
been making easy money, thousands per year, for the next 30 years. This
big picture thinking was lost on the branch management.

Now I deal with 4 separate banks for all these things, and it costs me a
little less, a bit more of a nuisance, but still saving me some fees.

If I were you Stormin, make sure your credit rating is good (just in
case that's the reason they lowered your credit limit) then vote with
your feet. Just go elsewhere to get what you want. They are NOT loyal
to you so why be loyal to them.

Sum Ting Wong writes:

Find a local credit union that will appreciate your business.

Motion seconded and passed.

--
Dan Espen

On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:36:25 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:

BA just cut my credit limits --- a lot.

The card I was carrying, thinking I had 5,000 or so available credit. They
cut it to shaving distance from my balance. One day I tried to buy gas, but
was declined.

Anyone else having a bit of grief from BA?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.


Be prepared for other card issuers to follow. It's like dominoes.
Each event is a ding on your credit score.

On Apr 25, 6:36*pm, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
BA just cut my credit limits --- a lot.

The card I was carrying, thinking I had 5,000 or so available credit. They
cut it to shaving distance from my balance. One day I tried to buy gas, but
was declined.

Anyone else having a bit of grief from BA?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

Did you go into the bank and complain to the branch manager? If he's
an assh---, you can raise you voice several dB and start talking about
how you were a loyal customer and now they're screwing you and do it
so a lot of folks hear you! May not help, but it will sure make you
feel good.

On Apr 25, 8:32*pm, Zz Yzx wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:36:25 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"

wrote:
BA just cut my credit limits --- a lot.

The card I was carrying, thinking I had 5,000 or so available credit. They
cut it to shaving distance from my balance. One day I tried to buy gas, but
was declined.

Anyone else having a bit of grief from BA?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

Be prepared for other card issuers to follow. *It's like dominoes.
Each event is a ding on your credit score.

On 26 Apr 2012 00:15:09 GMT, notbob wrote:

Hey, this is what all you Reagan lovers wanted! ....no
regulation. Now you have it. How do you like it?

nb

I think your anger is misplaced. We don't want regulation. What we
have gotten from B.O. is nothing but over regulation. Check out the
Dodd-Frank bill passed in July 2010. You will find that burdensome
over-regulation created by the esteemed 111th congress and our
idiot-in-chief is costing financial institutions 100's of thousands of
dollars annually in legal fees. Who do you think is going to pay for
that? Certainly not Barry and Michelle.

On 2012-04-26, Gordon Shumway wrote:

idiot-in-chief is costing financial institutions 100's of thousands of
dollars annually in legal fees.

I suppose those same "financial institutions" didn't actually receive
millions of dollars in bailouts for their inept handling of their own
business which they are supposedly so adept at.

Who do you think is going to pay for
that? Certainly not Barry and Michelle.

.....and certainly not the financial institutions.

nb

--
vi --the heart of evil!

On 26 Apr 2012 03:30:12 GMT, notbob wrote:

On 2012-04-26, Gordon Shumway wrote:

idiot-in-chief is costing financial institutions 100's of thousands of
dollars annually in legal fees.

I suppose those same "financial institutions" didn't actually receive
millions of dollars in bailouts for their inept handling of their own
business which they are supposedly so adept at.

Check history a little further back and you'll find where the
financial institutions were forced (regulated) to provide sub prime
mortgages. They were not inept - congress was for forcing them.


Who do you think is going to pay for
that? Certainly not Barry and Michelle.

....and certainly not the financial institutions.

nb

On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:36:25 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:

BA just cut my credit limits --- a lot.

The card I was carrying, thinking I had 5,000 or so available credit. They
cut it to shaving distance from my balance. One day I tried to buy gas, but
was declined.

Anyone else having a bit of grief from BA?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.



There are two separate issues here.

First, the credit line. Most bank started cutting back credit a
couple of years ago. They want to reduce exposure. Cuts of 50% to
75% were common.

Second issue is BofA. They bought out my old bank years ago. They
really did not want my account nor do they want any account with less
than six figures. Fees were the highest around, checks took a long
time to clear, etc.

Find another bank, another credit card, etc. Get away from them and
find a nice small local bank and hope they stay that way.

On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 00:02:58 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:36:25 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:

BA just cut my credit limits --- a lot.

The card I was carrying, thinking I had 5,000 or so available credit. They
cut it to shaving distance from my balance. One day I tried to buy gas, but
was declined.

Anyone else having a bit of grief from BA?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.



There are two separate issues here.

First, the credit line. Most bank started cutting back credit a
couple of years ago. They want to reduce exposure. Cuts of 50% to
75% were common.

Second issue is BofA. They bought out my old bank years ago. They
really did not want my account nor do they want any account with less
than six figures. Fees were the highest around, checks took a long
time to clear, etc.

Find another bank, another credit card, etc. Get away from them and
find a nice small local bank and hope they stay that way.


About 4 or 5 years ago I had one or two bank accts with BA and when I
decided to close them, all of a sudden they came up with bogus fees to
close them. I don't remember what I said but I complained and they
agreed to take them off. I remember the branch mgr saying to me, she
expected I'd come back but so far I haven't and don't see it happening
in the near future neither. So far I'm pleased with my current banks
but you have to watch all of them as they will try to nickle and dime
you to death if you let them. Sometimes if you've been banking with
them for years or carry a big balance, they bend a bit but not always.

On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 00:04:29 -0500, "Doug"
wrote:

On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 00:02:58 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 19:36:25 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:

BA just cut my credit limits --- a lot.

The card I was carrying, thinking I had 5,000 or so available credit. They
cut it to shaving distance from my balance. One day I tried to buy gas, but
was declined.

Anyone else having a bit of grief from BA?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.



There are two separate issues here.

First, the credit line. Most bank started cutting back credit a
couple of years ago. They want to reduce exposure. Cuts of 50% to
75% were common.

Second issue is BofA. They bought out my old bank years ago. They
really did not want my account nor do they want any account with less
than six figures. Fees were the highest around, checks took a long
time to clear, etc.

Find another bank, another credit card, etc. Get away from them and
find a nice small local bank and hope they stay that way.


About 4 or 5 years ago I had one or two bank accts with BA and when I
decided to close them, all of a sudden they came up with bogus fees to
close them. I don't remember what I said but I complained and they
agreed to take them off. I remember the branch mgr saying to me, she
expected I'd come back but so far I haven't and don't see it happening
in the near future neither. So far I'm pleased with my current banks
but you have to watch all of them as they will try to nickle and dime
you to death if you let them. Sometimes if you've been banking with
them for years or carry a big balance, they bend a bit but not always.

Big balance = a lot of money in your acct.

On 4/26/2012 1:06 AM, Doug wrote:


Big balance = a lot of money in your acct.

And the average bank CD is paying about 1% interest.

So they phuck you one way or another.

I've heard that closing credit cards is a ding -- regardless of why, the
other companies think some thing is wrong.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"Zz Yzx" wrote in message

Be prepared for other card issuers to follow. It's like dominoes.
Each event is a ding on your credit score.

On Apr 26, 3:35*am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
I've heard that closing credit cards is a ding -- regardless of why, the
other companies think some thing is wrong.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

"Zz Yzx" wrote in message

Be prepared for other card issuers to follow. *It's like dominoes.
Each event is a ding on your credit score.

I can vouch for that! We had a company discontinue one of our cards
FOR LACK OF USE! We did as any fiscally responsible person does, that
is use one card and keep it paid off monthly. But one never knows what
will happen so we kept that one [one of several] just kept for
'emergency' use.

The negative factor of EXPOSURE to maxing out the card was far less of
a ding on our score than having the company cancel, even though they
clearly stated the reason, and I was told by the rating companies that
the ding would have been the same even *IF* we had originated the
cancelling!

One other item. During the economic downturn when banks were
supposedly trying to liquidate their real estate holdings. We found
the opposite true. It was impossible to wrestle real estate out of a
bank's hands! Although the banks decried holding all this 'useless'
real estate and touted how they have to sell it at greatly distressed
prices; in reality they were dragging their feet at every turn!!
Experience based upon attempting to buy 6 houses. Specific example,
the offer to buy house with cash 30 days escrow took over six months!
That bank did NOT want to part with that property! And worst of all
you can NEVER find the responsible party at any bank! Everybody is
pointing to another! Once, when I got close, being in the right group
of people, I was confronted with "How did you get my name, this
number?" Not, a response of "How tenacious of you, of course we want
to sell you this property." Their response was get out of my face,
don't bother me/us again.

The phrase "talking out of both sides of their mouth" comes to mind,
along with an images of weasels.

Gordon Shumway wrote in
:

Check history a little further back and you'll find where the
financial institutions were forced (regulated) to provide sub prime
mortgages. They were not inept - congress was for forcing them.

Apparently in some states regulation was good enough so that the housing
collapse wasn't too bad there. Texas is an example. Where was it really
bad? Las Vegas and FL, etc, where speculation/flipping etc were really
rampant. There really, really is enough guilt/complicity/criminal mischief
to give almost everyone and almost every institution a good helping.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

In article ,
notbob wrote:


Oh! ...as for that credit card nonsense, it's not BofA. It's the card
companies. They've been doing this back-stabbing crap for about the
last 10 yrs. They have all of Congress in their pocket and they do
what they pretty much damn well please with zero oversight or
regulation. Hey, this is what all you Reagan lovers wanted! ....no
regulation. Now you have it. How do you like it?

That would be nice if it was remotely true. Most of the new stuff of
lowering limits, etc., is the direct result of bills passed after the
meltdown to "protect" thee and me from predatory practices. Whatever
that means.

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz

Again, you display great wisdom.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"Ed Pawlowski" wrote in message

Find another bank, another credit card, etc. Get away from them and
find a nice small local bank and hope they stay that way.

On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 23:01:36 -0500, Gordon Shumway
wrote:

On 26 Apr 2012 03:30:12 GMT, notbob wrote:

On 2012-04-26, Gordon Shumway wrote:

idiot-in-chief is costing financial institutions 100's of thousands of
dollars annually in legal fees.

I suppose those same "financial institutions" didn't actually receive
millions of dollars in bailouts for their inept handling of their own
business which they are supposedly so adept at.

Check history a little further back and you'll find where the
financial institutions were forced (regulated) to provide sub prime
mortgages. They were not inept - congress was for forcing them.



That's nonsense. They were forced to consider making loans, not just
turn people down because of their zip code. No one forced any loan to
be made if the numbers didn't add up. What did happen was wrapping up
mortgages into securities. Now the issuing bank didn't give a crap
about whether the loan made sense, they made their money up front and
got the ratings companies to give top ratings to crappy loans. Then
they sold them.

On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 06:01:34 -0400, Harry Johnson
wrote:

On 4/26/2012 1:06 AM, Doug wrote:


Big balance = a lot of money in your acct.

And the average bank CD is paying about 1% interest.

So they phuck you one way or another.


You getting that much grin ???
To be honest, I have invested in other avenues to boost my interest
rate because to me the banks are a joke.

On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 09:01:47 -0400, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:

Again, you display great wisdom.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
.

"Ed Pawlowski" wrote in message

Find another bank, another credit card, etc. Get away from them and
find a nice small local bank and hope they stay that way.



I once had a nice small bank but they kept getting bought out by
bigger banks each time to the tune of maybe 3 or 4 times so far. Where
I live, I doubt the small guy can survive any more among the other
giants around but it would be interesting to see.

On 4/26/2012 8:24 AM, Han wrote:
Gordon wrote in
:

Check history a little further back and you'll find where the
financial institutions were forced (regulated) to provide sub prime
mortgages. They were not inept - congress was for forcing them.

Apparently in some states regulation was good enough so that the housing
collapse wasn't too bad there. Texas is an example. Where was it really
bad? Las Vegas and FL, etc, where speculation/flipping etc were really
rampant. There really, really is enough guilt/complicity/criminal mischief
to give almost everyone and almost every institution a good helping.


You're confusing co-occurrence with causality. Texas has energy
resources (natural gas and oil) which kept their overall economy and
specifically their housing market relatively healthy over the past 4
years even when many of their other economic sectors declined a similar
amount to the rest of the county. Nothing to do with regulation. It's
the same reason Russia was able to stay financially afloat with far less
pain than western Europe. By your analysis, you would expect Russia to
be far less regulated than western Europe. In fact, it is much more
regulated.

On 4/26/2012 9:02 AM, dgk wrote:
On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 23:01:36 -0500, Gordon Shumway
wrote:

On 26 Apr 2012 03:30:12 GMT, wrote:

On 2012-04-26, Gordon wrote:

idiot-in-chief is costing financial institutions 100's of thousands of
dollars annually in legal fees.

I suppose those same "financial institutions" didn't actually receive
millions of dollars in bailouts for their inept handling of their own
business which they are supposedly so adept at.

Check history a little further back and you'll find where the
financial institutions were forced (regulated) to provide sub prime
mortgages. They were not inept - congress was for forcing them.



That's nonsense. They were forced to consider making loans, not just
turn people down because of their zip code. No one forced any loan to
be made if the numbers didn't add up. What did happen was wrapping up
mortgages into securities. Now the issuing bank didn't give a crap
about whether the loan made sense, they made their money up front and
got the ratings companies to give top ratings to crappy loans. Then
they sold them.

Finally the "non dittohead" answer. Prior to the idea of securitizing
mortgages banks had to concern themselves with determining if they were
making a good loan because they held it. And if they wanted to sell it
to another bank they knew that bank would examine it. With
securitization it didn't matter because they got a commission and no
responsibility.

In article , Peter
wrote:

On 4/26/2012 8:24 AM, Han wrote:
Gordon wrote in
:

Check history a little further back and you'll find where the
financial institutions were forced (regulated) to provide sub prime
mortgages. They were not inept - congress was for forcing them.

Apparently in some states regulation was good enough so that the housing
collapse wasn't too bad there. Texas is an example. Where was it really
bad? Las Vegas and FL, etc, where speculation/flipping etc were really
rampant. There really, really is enough guilt/complicity/criminal mischief
to give almost everyone and almost every institution a good helping.


You're confusing co-occurrence with causality. Texas has energy
resources (natural gas and oil) which kept their overall economy and
specifically their housing market relatively healthy over the past 4
years even when many of their other economic sectors declined a similar
amount to the rest of the county. Nothing to do with regulation. It's
the same reason Russia was able to stay financially afloat with far less
pain than western Europe. By your analysis, you would expect Russia to
be far less regulated than western Europe. In fact, it is much more
regulated.

Texas Foreclosures Listings (Texas State Foreclosure Laws)

Foreclosures in Texas increased in 2009 over the prior year. There was a
total of 100,045 properties with foreclosure filings. That works out to
a rate of one filing for every 94 households, which compares to the
United States average of 45, and is a little more than one percent of
the state's housing units.

So, their foreclosures were almost twice the national average, but they
weren't doing all that bad?

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz

On 4/25/2012 9:02 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

First, the credit line. Most bank started cutting back credit a
couple of years ago. They want to reduce exposure. Cuts of 50% to
75% were common.

Hmm, need to check my BOA card. I never use it. They took over another
bank's credit card business and worsened the cash back from 2% to 1%, so
I switched to a card that was 1.5%. I keep the BOA card for the Museums
on Us program http://museums.bankofamerica.com/, though that has been
worsened as well.

On Apr 26, 10:01*am, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article , Peter
wrote:





On 4/26/2012 8:24 AM, Han wrote:
Gordon *wrote in
:

Check history a little further back and you'll find where the
financial institutions were forced (regulated) to provide sub prime
mortgages. *They were not inept - congress was for forcing them.

Apparently in some states regulation was good enough so that the housing
collapse wasn't too bad there. *Texas is an example. *Where was it really
bad? *Las Vegas and FL, etc, where speculation/flipping etc were really
rampant. *There really, really is enough guilt/complicity/criminal mischief
to give almost everyone and almost every institution a good helping.

You're confusing co-occurrence with causality. *Texas has energy
resources (natural gas and oil) which kept their overall economy and
specifically their housing market relatively healthy over the past 4
years even when many of their other economic sectors declined a similar
amount to the rest of the county. *Nothing to do with regulation. *It's
the same reason Russia was able to stay financially afloat with far less
pain than western Europe. *By your analysis, you would expect Russia to
be far less regulated than western Europe. *In fact, it is much more
regulated.

Texas Foreclosures Listings (Texas State Foreclosure Laws)

Foreclosures in Texas increased in 2009 over the prior year. There was a
total of 100,045 properties with foreclosure filings. That works out to
a rate of one filing for every 94 households, which compares to the
United States average of 45, and is a little more than one percent of
the state's housing units.

So, their foreclosures were almost twice the national average, but they
weren't doing all that bad?


Based on the numbers you give above, isn't the
TX rate HALF the national rate?

On Apr 26, 9:57*am, George wrote:
On 4/26/2012 9:02 AM, dgk wrote:





On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 23:01:36 -0500, Gordon Shumway
*wrote:

On 26 Apr 2012 03:30:12 GMT, *wrote:

On 2012-04-26, Gordon *wrote:

idiot-in-chief is costing financial institutions 100's of thousands of
dollars annually in legal fees.

I suppose those same "financial institutions" didn't actually receive
millions of dollars in bailouts for their inept handling of their own
business which they are supposedly so adept at.

Check history a little further back and you'll find where the
financial institutions were forced (regulated) to provide sub prime
mortgages. *They were not inept - congress was for forcing them.

That's nonsense. They were forced to consider making loans, not just
turn people down because of their zip code. No one forced any loan to
be made if the numbers didn't add up. What did happen was wrapping up
mortgages into securities. Now the issuing bank didn't give a crap
about whether the loan made sense, they made their money up front and
got the ratings companies to give top ratings to crappy loans. Then
they sold them.

Finally the "non dittohead" answer. Prior to the idea of securitizing
mortgages banks had to concern themselves with determining if they were
making a good loan because they held it. And if they wanted to sell it
to another bank they knew that bank would examine it. With
securitization it didn't matter because they got a commission and no
responsibility.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Except of course that the process of selling off
mortgages to another party isn't anything new.
I don't know why some folks think it's something new.
FNMA was founded 75 years ago. Nor is it
inherently anything bad. You want broad markets
to make mortgages widely available at favorable
rates.

On Apr 25, 7:36*pm, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
BA just cut my credit limits --- a lot.

The card I was carrying, thinking I had 5,000 or so available credit. They
cut it to shaving distance from my balance. One day I tried to buy gas, but
was declined.

Anyone else having a bit of grief from BA?

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
*www.lds.org
.

Surprisingly, while I've had issues with some large companies (I'm
looking at you, Verizon) but I've really had no issues w/ BoA other
than them jacking up my CC rates from what were admittedly
astonishingly low a few years ago.

On Apr 26, 12:36*am, "Stormin Mormon"
wrote:
BA just cut my credit limits --- a lot.

The card I was carrying, thinking I had 5,000 or so available credit. They
cut it to shaving distance from my balance. One day I tried to buy gas, but
was declined.

Anyone else having a bit of grief from BA?


If your income has fallen, it may be the reason.
They may have done you a favour.
I never borrow money anyway.

" wrote in
:

On Apr 26, 10:01*am, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article , Peter
wrote:





On 4/26/2012 8:24 AM, Han wrote:
Gordon *wrote in
:

Check history a little further back and you'll find where the
financial institutions were forced (regulated) to provide sub
prime mortgages. *They were not inept - congress was for forcing
them.

Apparently in some states regulation was good enough so that the
hous
ing
collapse wasn't too bad there. *Texas is an example. *Where was i
t really
bad? *Las Vegas and FL, etc, where speculation/flipping etc were
re
ally
rampant. *There really, really is enough
guilt/complicity/criminal
mischief
to give almost everyone and almost every institution a good
helping.

You're confusing co-occurrence with causality. *Texas has energy
resources (natural gas and oil) which kept their overall economy
and specifically their housing market relatively healthy over the
past 4 years even when many of their other economic sectors
declined a similar amount to the rest of the county. *Nothing to do
with regulation. *
It's
the same reason Russia was able to stay financially afloat with far
les
s
pain than western Europe. *By your analysis, you would expect
Russia
to
be far less regulated than western Europe. *In fact, it is much
more regulated.

Texas Foreclosures Listings (Texas State Foreclosure Laws)

Foreclosures in Texas increased in 2009 over the prior year. There
was a total of 100,045 properties with foreclosure filings. That
works out to a rate of one filing for every 94 households, which
compares to the United States average of 45, and is a little more
than one percent of the state's housing units.

So, their foreclosures were almost twice the national average, but
they weren't doing all that bad?


Based on the numbers you give above, isn't the
TX rate HALF the national rate?

That seems right to me, trader. I have no time to search for the
reference now (family emergency), but I distinctly recall having seen a
proud Texan quote what I said.

--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid

In article ,
Han wrote:

" wrote in
:

On Apr 26, 10:01*am, Kurt Ullman wrote:
In article , Peter
wrote:





On 4/26/2012 8:24 AM, Han wrote:
Gordon *wrote in
:

Check history a little further back and you'll find where the
financial institutions were forced (regulated) to provide sub
prime mortgages. *They were not inept - congress was for forcing
them.

Apparently in some states regulation was good enough so that the
hous
ing
collapse wasn't too bad there. *Texas is an example. *Where was i
t really
bad? *Las Vegas and FL, etc, where speculation/flipping etc were
re
ally
rampant. *There really, really is enough
guilt/complicity/criminal
mischief
to give almost everyone and almost every institution a good
helping.

You're confusing co-occurrence with causality. *Texas has energy
resources (natural gas and oil) which kept their overall economy
and specifically their housing market relatively healthy over the
past 4 years even when many of their other economic sectors
declined a similar amount to the rest of the county. *Nothing to do
with regulation. *
It's
the same reason Russia was able to stay financially afloat with far
les
s
pain than western Europe. *By your analysis, you would expect
Russia
to
be far less regulated than western Europe. *In fact, it is much
more regulated.

Texas Foreclosures Listings (Texas State Foreclosure Laws)

Foreclosures in Texas increased in 2009 over the prior year. There
was a total of 100,045 properties with foreclosure filings. That
works out to a rate of one filing for every 94 households, which
compares to the United States average of 45, and is a little more
than one percent of the state's housing units.

So, their foreclosures were almost twice the national average, but
they weren't doing all that bad?


Based on the numbers you give above, isn't the
TX rate HALF the national rate?

That seems right to me, trader. I have no time to search for the
reference now (family emergency), but I distinctly recall having seen a
proud Texan quote what I said.

You're right, mea culpa.
Trying to do math before coffee...

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
acquired carpal tunnel syndrome.-Howard Berkowitz

"Stormin Mormon" wrote in message
...

Again, you display great wisdom.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"Ed Pawlowski" wrote in message

Find another bank, another credit card, etc. Get away from them and
find a nice small local bank and hope they stay that way.

We have had accounts with BofA for over 50 years-never had a problem with
them . Under the Community Investment act, banks were required to make a
certain percentage of their loans in low income zip code areas. If they did
not pass inspection of their activity in those areas, they were stopped from
opening new branches or expanding in other ways. that's why they made many
loans that they would not have made otherwise.
Elgy

Good perception.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"Kurt Ullman" wrote in message
m...

Anyone else having a bit of grief from BA?


No, but then I haven't dealt with BA for about 10 years now. I thought
they were crooked LONG before the melt down proved it.

On 4/26/2012 6:02 AM, dgk wrote:

That's nonsense. They were forced to consider making loans, not just
turn people down because of their zip code. No one forced any loan to
be made if the numbers didn't add up. What did happen was wrapping up
mortgages into securities. Now the issuing bank didn't give a crap
about whether the loan made sense, they made their money up front and
got the ratings companies to give top ratings to crappy loans. Then
they sold them.

And of course Fannie and Freddie made far fewer bad loans than the banks
who were in a race to the bottom to make loans. Fannie and Freddie were
late to the sub-prime game. They got into riskier mortgages because they
were losing market share in what they saw as a highly profitable area.

It is true that back in 1999 the Clinton administration was urging that
standards for home loans be relaxed slightly, but they never required or
even requested anything like the total lack of qualifications that
caused the sub-prime mortgage crisis--that was pure greed by the banks
that knew there was little downside because if things went bad the
government would be forced to bail them out. Of course no one foresaw
what a mess W would make of things in just eight years.

On 26 Apr 2012 12:24:45 GMT, Han wrote:

Gordon Shumway wrote in
:

Check history a little further back and you'll find where the
financial institutions were forced (regulated) to provide sub prime
mortgages. They were not inept - congress was for forcing them.

Apparently in some states regulation was good enough so that the housing
collapse wasn't too bad there. Texas is an example. Where was it really
bad? Las Vegas and FL, etc, where speculation/flipping etc were really
rampant. There really, really is enough guilt/complicity/criminal mischief
to give almost everyone and almost every institution a good helping.

Good grief, "flipping" was a symptom of the problem, not the problem.
Regulation, or the lack of, had nothing to do with the differences between FL
and TX.

In article ,
Gordon Shumway wrote:
On 26 Apr 2012 00:15:09 GMT, notbob wrote:
...snipped...
I think your anger is misplaced. We don't want regulation. What we
have gotten from B.O. is nothing but over regulation. Check out the
Dodd-Frank bill passed in July 2010. You will find that burdensome
over-regulation created by the esteemed 111th congress and our
idiot-in-chief is costing financial institutions 100's of thousands of
dollars annually in legal fees. Who do you think is going to pay for
that? Certainly not Barry and Michelle.

Personally, I'd rather that banks and financial institutions pay a few
hundred thousand $ more every year than to have the taxpayers bail them
out at a cost of hundreds of billions.

--
The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation
with the average voter. (Winston Churchill)

Larry Wasserman - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar. org