Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Credit card debt collection

bitsaboutmoney.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

551–560 of 568 posts

Re: Credit card debt collection

#551

Post by jkaplowitz »

Tijdreiziger wrote: post #548
jkaplowitz wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most payment terminals now accept MasterCard/Visa as well as Maestro/VPay, though due to EU/EEA legislation, some may only accept debit cards as well as credit cards issued outside the EU/EEA (but not credit cards issued inside the EU/EEA). Why is this? If this is about the fee-capping rules, I would have expected that they’d disallow foreign credit cards and allow EU/EEA credit cards, since the foreign credit card…

Apparently it ends up being the intersection between the MasterCard/Visa ‘honor all cards’ rule (i.e. ‘if you accept MasterCard, you must accept all MasterCards’) and EU legislation saying ‘actually, you’re free not to accept cards with higher fees’. I’m not really sure why said legislation doesn’t end up applying to foreign cards, though. Another interesting point about fees is that when retiring the old domestic PI…

I’ve definitely seen some places in Europe that only take credit cards from within Europe, such as the French mobile phone provider SFR, and others that charge extra fees for non-European cards, such as the German airline Lufthansa. So whatever set of conditions leads to the outcome you’re describing might be specific to the Netherlands. Most merchants I’ve seen within Germany don’t treat European credit cards any differently from foreign ones, but some do reject cards without a 3D Secure system.

Re: Credit card debt collection

#552

Post by flangola7 »

drekipus wrote: post #453
flangola7 wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Not to your definition of morals. Surely you can see that, right?

Morality is not subjective. There are definitions of that are more correct than others. Otherwise laws and prosocial behavior would be impossible to define.

Re: Credit card debt collection

#553

Post by PrimeMcFly »

Aardwolf wrote: post #316
beaviskhan wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is zero chance that I, a US resident, will ever use debit cards for anything. The reason is that in the event of a fraudulent charge (which still happens surprisingly often, given that chips were supposed to put an end to that): - With a debit card, I am out $X of my own money, until the bank can be bothered to agree that the charge is fraudulent and refund my money, which can take weeks or months, if at all. G…

> The reason is that in the event of a fraudulent charge Not sure if a fraudulent charge of a debit card is a thing I ever heard of in Europe. These cards have also been using chips for over 20 years. Maybe they work differently here. To me credit cards sound less secure than debit cards: debit cards have chips and pin codes. With credit cards, knowing the number is in theory enough (they have digital verification no…

Chips don't make the cards more secure. They just shift liability back to the consumer making it cheaper for credit card companies.

If someone steals your card and can guess your pin, then you're out of luck in filing any claim because obviously you disclosed your pin.

Re: Credit card debt collection

#554

Post by kaygrog »

I appreciated reading this because I work in the collections department at a large bank, and it was interesting to see a lot of what I already know confirmed while also learning a lot of new things about what happens to the debt after it leaves the bank. But come on... After all that griping, just two pathetic little paragraphs at the end under "What can be done about this?" that basically say "I'll leave it to the lawmakers." The writer is a lawyer; he couldn't come up with ANY solutions himself?

Re: Credit card debt collection

#555

Post by verall »

wizerdrobe wrote: post #336
elteto wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like pedantry on the USAA part. They should add some small fraction of a point to your rate and move on. I understand you probably get extra benefits with USAA but this would be an automatic disqualification for me and I’d move kn to a different servicer. However, that is _painful_ in the middle of a closing.

Truth be told - we’re looking at ditching them but with banking, home, and auto we are likely stuck with them for the fact of inertia. Our mortgage was immediately sold to another firm, so there’s no nicety on the part of having a consistent firm there. The process was painful, our processor was impossible to get in touch with, often a 48 hour lag for a reply. Shortly before moving I was side-swiped by a man sufferin…

They are fantastic for banking and insurance but there's no particular reason to get your mortgage from them. When I looked their rates weren't any better.

Re: Credit card debt collection

#556

Post by Tijdreiziger »

jkaplowitz wrote: post #551
Tijdreiziger wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently it ends up being the intersection between the MasterCard/Visa ‘honor all cards’ rule (i.e. ‘if you accept MasterCard, you must accept all MasterCards’) and EU legislation saying ‘actually, you’re free not to accept cards with higher fees’. I’m not really sure why said legislation doesn’t end up applying to foreign cards, though. Another interesting point about fees is that when retiring the old domestic PI…

I’ve definitely seen some places in Europe that only take credit cards from within Europe, such as the French mobile phone provider SFR, and others that charge extra fees for non-European cards, such as the German airline Lufthansa. So whatever set of conditions leads to the outcome you’re describing might be specific to the Netherlands. Most merchants I’ve seen within Germany don’t treat European credit cards any di…

That's interesting; major Dutch banks ING [1] and Rabobank [2] say that acceptance of non-EEA credit cards will be mandatory, with ING explicitly stating that this is due to MasterCard and Visa rules:

> 5. What if I don’t want to accept credit card payments?

> While there is no immediate need to make this change, by the end of 2024 all merchants will be obliged to accept all card products from Mastercard and Visa, under the Honor All Cards Rule, which states that if a merchant accepts one type of that brand’s cards, they must accept them all. Merchants who accept Visa and Mastercards’ debit cards are also required to accept Visa and Mastercard’s credit cards (if they are issued outside EEA)

> This means that if you as a merchant accept any kind of Mastercard or Visa card, you must accept all Mastercards or Visa cards: debit, credit, prepaid and commercial. However, legislation does allow you, as a merchant, to refuse acceptance of credit cards issued in the EEA that are in scope of the Interchange Fee Regulation, article 10; if you wish to arrange this, you can reach out to your terminal supplier.

Strangely though, the third major bank (ABN AMRO) actually doesn't seem to mention this and only mentions EEA debit cards [3].

[1] https://www.ingwb.com/en/service/corporate-cards/debit-maste...

[2] https://media.rabobank.com/m/6ac771022c42bd61/original/Wat-g...

[3] https://www.abnamro.nl/nl/zakelijk/producten/betalen/winkels...

Re: Credit card debt collection

#557

Post by [deleted] »

FireBeyond wrote: post #546
leereeves wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Meanwhile, a "website designer" who's never deployed a website, was never hired to create one and who suffered zero injury gets a ruling. This SCOTUS is invalid. Where did you get the idea that she's never deployed a website? I've never heard anyone say that. (And at the very least, she has her own site, https://303creative.com/ )

You should read this: https://newrepublic.com/post/173675/supreme-court-just-used-... > Puzzlingly, before she actually filed the first suit in 2016, Smith had apparently never designed a wedding website. Even weirder: She had never apparently been asked to provide services to a same-sex couple up to that point either. And the customer who "requested" the site was fake, too: > But after The New Republic reached out t…

[deleted]

Re: Credit card debt collection

#558

Post by hiatus »

FireBeyond wrote: post #546
leereeves wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Meanwhile, a "website designer" who's never deployed a website, was never hired to create one and who suffered zero injury gets a ruling. This SCOTUS is invalid. Where did you get the idea that she's never deployed a website? I've never heard anyone say that. (And at the very least, she has her own site, https://303creative.com/ )

You should read this: https://newrepublic.com/post/173675/supreme-court-just-used-... > Puzzlingly, before she actually filed the first suit in 2016, Smith had apparently never designed a wedding website. Even weirder: She had never apparently been asked to provide services to a same-sex couple up to that point either. And the customer who "requested" the site was fake, too: > But after The New Republic reached out t…

That whole case seems like a mess.

> It was later discovered by The New Republic that Smith had made a wedding website for a heterosexual couple in 2015, which had been removed from her business's profile prior to her filing the case but remained visible in the Wayback Machine archives

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2023/jul/25/lgbtq-rights-sup...

Re: Credit card debt collection

#559

Post by hiatus »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #394
hiatus wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like that might not be possible these days. > On June 25, 2021, the Supreme Court of the United States held that a plaintiff must suffer a concrete injury resulting from a defendant’s statutory violation to have Article III standing to pursue damages from that defendant in federal court. The Court also held that plaintiffs in a class action must prove that every class member has standing for each claim asserted…

> that might not be possible these days You’re most likely making these claims in state courts. Federal cases start at $25k.

Yeah this does not impact cases brought before state courts:

> Article III, § 2 of the U.S. Constitution limits federal court jurisdiction to cases and controversies. But the Supreme Court has held “the constraints of Article III do not apply to state courts, and accordingly the state courts are not bound by the limitations of a case or controversy or other federal rules of justiciability even when they address issues of federal law, as when they are called upon to interpret the Constitution or, in this case, a federal statute.” ASARCO Inc. v. Kadish, 490 U.S. 605, 617 (1989).

https://library.nclc.org/article/bringing-federal-consumer-c...

Re: Credit card debt collection

#560

Post by me-vs-cat »

brewdad wrote: post #549
me-vs-cat wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think those employers want to turn away qualified people and keep the positions vacant?

No, but they might want to turn away a specific employee for an otherwise protected reason. Don't want to hire a black employee? Run a credit check. Statistically, black individuals have lower credit scores than white individuals. Deny them a job based on their credit score.

While that makes some sense, I'm apparently having a hard time getting over my conception that a private business would ever give the rejected candidate a specific reason they weren't offered the position. Surely this is cultural on my part.
Post reply on HN