Friday, September 24, 2010

Credit card vs Prepaid Debit card

There are many differences and similarities between credit cards and prepaid debit cards.  Depending on your situation may determine which is the most beneficial to you based on your usage.  This article from Yahoo Finance does a great job explaining the differences.  Hopefully, you will be able to figure out what will work best in your situation.

Yahoo Finance:


Sporting the Visa and MasterCard logos, reloadable prepaid debit cards are marketed as an affordable alternative to fee-laden bank accounts.
In the last decade, they have proliferated everywhere -- online, in grocery stores, drug stores and big box chains such as Wal-Mart. But consumer advocates argue that prepaid debit cards are brimming with an array of pricey fees and lack the regulatory protection of traditional debit cards.
Prepaid debit cards are not connected to a specific bank account. Cardholders deposit money with the card's issuer to "load" the card. Usage has grown sharply: Last year $28.63 billion was loaded onto prepaid debit cards, up 47 percent from 2008, according to Ben Jackson, senior analyst with Mercator Advisory Group.
The cards were initially designed for the millions of consumers who have bad credit or no access to traditional bank accounts. Up to 10 percent of American families are "unbanked," according to a 2008 study by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Prepaid debit cards allow these consumers to shop online, pay bills online and do other activities they can't do with cash. Some card issuers report bill-paying activity to smaller credit bureaus, helping consumers rebuild tarnished credit scores.
But the cards are also gaining popularity among consumers who are fed up with bankoverdraft and penalty fees. The industry is marketing the cards to people who routinely overdraw their accounts, arguing that a prepaid debit offers a less costly option.
Anna Daugherty, 23, an editor at a public relations firm in Michigan, starting using a prepaid debit card 18 months ago after racking up $250 in overdraft charges. "My bank always cleared the most expensive thing first, it wasn't chronological," she says, so several smaller purchases made on her debit card would push the account into overdraft, even if the transactions took place the day before a large bill, such as a rent check, was presented for payment.
"I was so angry with that bank it kind of woke me up, and I decided I had to start taking control of my finances," says Daugherty. "I use the card for my gas, so I know I'm not spending my gas money for other things; and if I know I have a group of friends coming over and have to make a big dinner, I take the money out of my normal grocery budget and set it aside on the card."
The biggest player in the pre-paid industry is Green Dot, which raised $164 million in an initial public offering in July and has 3 million active users. It offers cards and reload services at some 50,000 retail stores nationwide, and it offers co-branded cards through Wal-Mart, Kmart and Meijer. Competitors include NetSpend, AccountNow and RushCard.
"Banked customers come into a prepaid card very much around the issue of control," says Mark Troughton, president, cards and network, for Green Dot. "Using their debit cards on their bank accounts, they get into overdraft and penalty fees. On the prepaid debit cards, you spend what you load, which helps you stay on budget. There are no penalty or overdraft fees."
But consumer advocates say the cards contain a variety of fees that can make them equally expensive -- including overdraft fees. A study updated last week by Consumers Union found 12 different charges associated with pre-paid debit cards. They may include fees to acquire the card, a monthly maintenance fee, an ATM fee, a fee to use the card to pay a bill online or at point of sale (especially for PIN-transactions), a fee to check the balance on the card, inactivity fees and a fee to load money onto the card (the exception is typically people who have their paychecks direct-deposited onto the card, or load $1,000 a month).
The report reviewed 19 prepaid cards, comparing their costs using a hypothetical consumer's activity. It found costs in the first month ranged from $16.59 to use a Wal-Mart Money Card, to $17.60 for an AccountNow card, to $43.75 for a RushCard.
Moreover, some cards do indeed charge overdraft or "shortage" fees, says Michelle Jun, staff attorney with Consumers Union and author of the report. Many customers do signature transactions rather than enter a PIN because the latter sometimes triggers a fee.
"Those signature transactions are not in real time most of the time, so they don't get processed until the end of the day," Jun explains. "So you may have that amount on the card at one time, but at end of day you might not have sufficient funds because a transaction hasn't cleared yet. The terms and conditions say you need to make up that negative balance -- and some charge a shortage fee." Jun suggests consumers who have a checking account use a bank debit card and simply opt out of overdraft protection, so the transaction is denied if the funds are insufficient.
Mercator's Jackson says part of the problem is that fees are based on customer usage. "The cost varies from card to card and cardholder to cardholder, so it's caveat emptor," he explains. "If the buyer knows what he needs the card for, and compares the fees, then he can come out ahead. But if it's willy-nilly 'I want this because it has the Visa logo and I can buy stuff online' -- but someone is not paying attention to what it costs to reload or do transactions -- it's going to become difficult."
The other issue is what costs are being compared. "Consumers Union typically compares prepaid cards to free checking accounts, and prepaid cards lose," says Jackson. "Prepaid card advocates compare their products to the cost of going to a check cashing store and paying for a bunch of money orders to pay your bills -- and prepaid cards win."
Aside from the issue of fees, consumer advocates are concerned that the cards don't offer the same protections as debit cards tied to a bank account, which are regulated by the Electronic Funds Transfer Act (EFTA) and Regulation E. If consumers contact a debit card issuer about a lost or stolen card within two business days, liability is limited to no more than $50. If a lost or stolen debit card is not reported to the issuer within two business days, a consumer's liability is capped at $500.
The industry says it offers similar protections in its terms and conditions. But consumer advocates say these can be changed or rescinded because companies reserve the right to change the terms of the contract at any time for any reason. Reloadable prepaid debit cards are also not covered by the new restrictions of the CARD Act, such as the rule prohibiting gift cards from expiring before five years, and banning inactivity fees in the first 12 months.
"We take it for granted that it is safe to use a debit card under the EFTA. Those same rules should apply to prepaid debit cards," says Jean Ann Fox, director of consumer protection with the Consumer Federation of America. In addition, "it's hard to tell from card to card which ones are structured so there is FDIC insurance" and if the consumer's funds would be protected if the institution issuing the cards failed.
"I think it's a valid concern," says Troughton of Green Dot, which sells FDIC-insured cards. "As far as I know, the vast majority is FDIC-insured, but consumers need to look program by program."
Perhaps the most contentious issue is that some companies link the prepaid debit card to an expensive line of credit -- a cash advance that essentially works like a payday loan. "A cash advance on a prepaid debit card has triple-digit interest rates, and is repaid by deducting the next deposit to the card all at one time, so consumers don't get an installment repayment schedule," says Fox. "This is a debt trap for consumers who might use these cards."
Troughton says Green Dot has no plans to expand into this service. "We don't believe there is a way to offer short-term credit today in a fair and value-oriented way," he says. "I don't think it's a good value to customers."

Monday, September 20, 2010

Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against American Express

I think as we see more credit card companies violating the interest rate laws recently passed, there will also be an increase in class action law suits against them.  This law firm has started one against American Express and put out a press release.


Atlanta, GA (PRWEB) September 17, 2010 -- Atlanta law firm Webb, Klase & Lemond, LLC has filed a class action lawsuit against American Express alleging that the company unilaterally increased consumer interest rates in violation of the applicable credit card agreements. The complaint asserts that these increases were contrary to American Express' long-standing practice of tying its rates on many credit card accounts to the Prime Rate, the interest rate charged by banks to their most creditworthy customers. This commitment was established in the company's form contracts and through years of consistent dealings with customers according to the suit. The complaint states that American Express raised rates even for consumers who have always maintained their good standing by satisfying all account requirements, such as making required payments and not exceeding credit limits. Furthermore, the plaintiff claims American Express has taken such action even against those whose credit scores and general creditworthiness have not declined. The suit requests that customers be refunded all excessive interest charges in addition to several other forms of relief. The case, styled Meeks v. American Express Centurion Bank, Inc., is pending in the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia and has been assigned Case Number 2010CV190851.
According to the suit, for several years Mr. Meeks was charged a "fixed-variable" interest rate equal to the Prime Rate plus a "marginal rate" of 2.99 percent. In this manner, the plaintiff claims the company's interest rates tracked the Prime Rate, moving up when the Prime Rate climbed and down when the Prime Rate fell. The complaint asserts that the company unilaterally ended this practice in late 2008 and throughout 2009 by periodically increasing customers' marginal rates such that - even as the Prime Rate fell to historic lows - customers suffered higher and higher interest charges. For example, Mr. Meeks' marginal rate went from 2.99 percent to 11.99 percent and thus, even with the Prime Rate at 3.25 percent, American Express charged him interest of over 15 percent, according to the lawsuit. Mr. Meeks claims the improper and excessive rate hikes have cost him hundreds of dollars and more than doubled his monthly payments.
The lawsuit asserts that American Express imposed these higher rates even on existing customer balances. In addition, the suit alleges that American Express's offer that customers could reject this interest rate increase by freezing or closing their credit card accounts is inadequate because, as the company is well aware, most consumers rely on their credit card accounts and closing any credit line has a negative impact on a consumer's credit score. As a result, the complaint contends that customers have been forced to accept American Express' unilateral rate increases.
If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this press release, please contact Webb, Klase & Lemond by e-mail at contact(at)webbllc(dot)com or by calling (770) 444-9325.