many of these provisions don’t change anything really, because the major credit card companies already adhere to the provisions–that is, universal default, double cycle billing, grace period, and interest rate without reason. the only real change is the application of payments rather than to the lowest rate first. Every card i have received, it is very clear that the cc company applies payment to the lowest rate. i simply didn’t see this as a problem. what this is to me is that people who have probably benefited from a lower interest BT or promo rate are still charging on the same card. personally, if they did a promo or bt rate, they shouldn’t be continuing to charge on the card anyways.

fluffy words like “reasonable and “unfair” are used towards fees, because the Supreme Court has already ruled that cc companies can charge fees and interest rate limits according to the State of the company’s HQ. This doesn’t change how much the fee can be, presumably because of the supreme court ruling. so, basically, it limits cc companies to whatever the state law is, which they already are abiding by. those fees, therefore, will not change.

if people are angry at the credit card industry, they really need to look at themselves first. you don’t need a credit card. if you think you need a credit card, you definitely don’t need to carry a balance. if you don’t carry a balance, you have nothing to worry about. people want all their free credit still. Hello people, free and loose credit are the reasons why we are in the current economic situation. Get your personal finances under control and stop worrying about your credit entitlement.

Personally, I don’t like that this bill passed. It protects irresponsible math-challenged people who carry balances and it will hurt those of us who’s always been responsible, who lived within our means, paid our balances in full every month, and saved money. Every index fund owns financial stocks. Lower profits for financial companies = lower stock value — you are going to lose money because of this bill as will all of the “savers”.

Yes, some practices like double cycle billing were bad. So? Easy way around it – don’t carry balances or don’t have a card if you are unable to keep your card in your wallet. As to universal default, I think it made a lot of sense. Not paying any bill on time anywhere means one is a risky customer. Higher risk = higher reward. This happens all the time with corporate credit: when a corporation’s financial situation gets worse, Finch reduces its credit rating. Then company’s bonds value goes down and consequently bond yields go up. The company needs to pay higher interest on new bonds. Why should it be any difference with individuals?

If my credit card company changed a policy, and did not bother to inform me I would probably never use their card again, and take my business elsewhere.

This item sounds like a great idea: “Credit card can’t choose to move your payment to the lower interest one letting the high interest accumulate.” However, that is what zero interest (or super low interest) balance transfers/checks were all about. I used these smartly — to obtain free money. If I used one of those offers to make a large purchase, that CC went into the safe until that balance was paid off. However, this law may put an end to these offers because the ROI to the CC companies was based upon this principle that has now been outlawed. It was always written in the fine print (which was easy to find and understand IMO) that this is how these offers worked.