33 replies to this topic

[zman]

For years, Ann Minch of Red Bluff, Calif., has carried a balance of several thousand dollars on her Bank of America credit card, making minimum monthly payments of about $130, sometimes paying an extra $50 or $100. She says she's never missed a payment. Bank of America rewarded her loyalty this year by repeatedly raising her interest rate, which reached 30 percent in July. Fed up, the 46-year-old stepmother of two turned to YouTube. "There comes a time when a person must be willing to sacrifice in order to take a stand for what's right," said Minch in a Sept. 8 webcam video. "Now, this is one of those times, and if I'm successful this will be the proverbial first shot fired in an American debtors' revolution against the usury and plunder perpetrated by the banking elite, the Federal Reserve and the federal government." Minch announced that she'd be dumping Bank of America, refusing to pay off her credit card debt unless she was offered a lower rate. She explained that she'd been a reliable customer even though she'd lost her job as a mental health case manager. She said bank reps refused to negotiate her interest rate when she called them to complain a few weeks ago. "You are evil, thieving bastages," she said in her video. "Stick that in your bailout pipe and smoke it." The video made a splash online, getting links from all kinds of venues and garnering over 96,000 views as of Monday morning.

[IndexTrader]

Something doesn't quite add up with her. I have a BAC credit card. I've had it since 1994 without problem. They raised my rate as well. But in the notice they sent they said that if you had a balance you could stay at your old rate, provided you made no more charges. I don't think banks raised anyone's rate to 30% unless there was some other issue....a late pay. Or perhaps a late pay on another account. I'm not trying to defend the banks on their credit cards policies by the way. But then again, I would hate to support irresponsible behavior such as this woman is advocating. IT

[MaryAM]

Excuse Me - 30% - when they are paying less than 1.5% on a CD. I can't wait for the public as a whole just refuses to pay all debt and demand their pay checks in cash. That might shake things up a bit. Mary Anne

[IndexTrader]

Excuse Me - 30% - when they are paying less than 1.5% on a CD. I can't wait for the public as a whole just refuses to pay all debt and demand their pay checks in cash. That might shake things up a bit.
Mary Anne

So you don't think people have a responsibility to pay their debts? It's OK to buy something and then decide it's not convenient to pay?

IT

[dcengr]

Lenders take risks as much as the borrower. There needs to be a happy medium. This whole mess has taught folks that banks are willing to back down, as the whole subprime mess has shown. There are people who are squatting in their foreclosed homes for years now. At first the banks were kicking them out, now they aren't. I assume similar compromise will be made between card debt holders and the banks, as folks learn that it is OK to fight back. Its not about who's right or wrong, its about seeing whats going on. Corporations vs individuals. This battle has occured before. In the 70ties. Its just a sign of a secular bear.

[IndexTrader]

Lenders take risks as much as the borrower. There needs to be a happy medium.

This whole mess has taught folks that banks are willing to back down, as the whole subprime mess has shown. There are people who are squatting in their foreclosed homes for years now.

At first the banks were kicking them out, now they aren't. I assume similar compromise will be made between card debt holders and the banks, as folks learn that it is OK to fight back.

Its not about who's right or wrong, its about seeing whats going on. Corporations vs individuals. This battle has occured before. In the 70ties. Its just a sign of a secular bear.

Sure, it's about right and wrong. The problem here is this girl decides she's not paying for what she consumed, and all of us end up paying for her, via direct bailouts, higher interest rates, or no credit at all.

IT

[dasein]

IT - that is reframing the question - I agree with Maryanne, there has to be a limit to the punitive interest a bank can charge - there used to be usury laws that addressed just this. Most corporate arrangements are something over Libor, most people could live with this, but this choice is only given to corporations.

[cgnx]

They should not be able to raise the rate after you made a deal with them under contract. Changing the deal would nullify the contract in my opinion. A trapped card holder's only defense is to refuse payment. I agree with her and all who are in similiar position. Go back to the agreed upon rate if all other terms were met.

[dcengr]

Sure, it's about right and wrong. The problem here is this girl decides she's not paying for what she consumed, and all of us end up paying for her, via direct bailouts, higher interest rates, or no credit at all.

IT

welcome to the government system. I'm paying more taxes while everyone shares the same benefit.

right and wrong are just perceptions in a given time, at least as far as issues like these are concerned. but its something we can argue for days, if not years, so no use in going there.

[jack]

Debtors revolution? Think it through. Now Savers........A savers revolution.... that be the dreaded truth