Forum
|
|
Forum
|
     | Thursday, October 19, 2000 - 02:32 pm  So I get this offer in the mail. IT's for a Fusion card. It takes a little redaing, but it is offered by Fleet Bank. I know this is a big East Coast bank. Are they a shady company when it comes to Credit cards(like capitol one, providian are)?? It is a real good offer, I just don't want anymore headaches with these credit card companies. So Far, Discover and Citibank I have found to be the best I've had. MBNA was the pitts, and Whoever administered AT&T Universal was not so great either. So I have 2 cards right now, my Citibank MC, and my Private Issue (Discover) cards. I don't think adding a third will be awful, just want to know if Fleet is an OK bank to do that with. Also, it's a smart card. What does that chip do anyway? As far as I can tell, it works like a regular CC anyway. -Dan
|
| | Thursday, October 19, 2000 - 02:48 pm Fleet Bank is a large issuer of credit cards. I have heard some bad things about them, but the person complaining just didn't seem to be that savvy. Anyway AT&T Universal Card is administered by Citicorp. It's amusing that you'd find Citibank nice and AT&T Universal annoying.
|
| | Thursday, October 19, 2000 - 02:50 pm That is quite amusing..... Hmmm intereseting..... I guess maybe they all suck -Dan
|
| | Friday, October 20, 2000 - 05:36 pm Fleet Fusion
|
| | Wednesday, January 10, 2001 - 04:46 pm Hi, daniel I work for fleet bank...I just would like to tell you that is one of the big ten, the fusion offer is pretty good... let me know if you want to know more about the offer.
|
| | Thursday, January 11, 2001 - 04:13 am Fleet Bank is being sued for promising customers a fixed-rate and then raising it. (See http://board.creditnet.com/read.php3?num=1&id=14694&thread=14694) Also, I read somewhere it has a reputation for monitoring your credit reports and jacking its rates sky-high if it sees anything it doesn't like.
|
| | Thursday, January 11, 2001 - 08:08 am I've read several places by several different people that Fleet raised intro rates of 7.9 - 9.9 up to 24+ APR for no reason and with no written 15 day warning. And this for people with perfect credit, pay history, etc... All of this has happened systematically in the past 2-3 months.
|
| | Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 04:48 am I've had a Fleet Platinum for 1.5 years. Same low rate as when I opened it (7.9). Never late, never over limit. Never a problem. Online account access. Set it up so that they email me whenever a payment is posted, or whenever something is charged over $300 (my choice). Great so far. AT&T Universal - never a problem (6 years). Was at 16.9% for years (never carried a balance). When we were going to close it, they gave us 2.9% for the $2k balance we wanted to transfer, good until the balance was paid off. Never a problem.
|
| | Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 10:04 am Can we all detect a pattern here? "Never a problem" as long as you never pay late, never go over limit, i.e. you don't have financial problems, you don't reach a certain balance/limit ratio, you don't fit a certain profile. Obviously, people don't sue because they're IMAGINING that their rate went up.
|
| | Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 01:39 pm Never paying late and never going over the limit are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ISSUES versus having financial problems. Once can have MASSIVE financial problems, but still never pay late or go over the limit. The key: Don't charge someone if you can't pay for it. If you can't pay for it, you've got no business charging it in the first place. If you made $100 a month income, have a credit card and charge $20 a month on it and pay it on time, you will (a) never be over your limit and (b) never pay late fees or get nailed on your credit histories. People sue because they spill coffee on themselves while driving a car out of the McDonald's drive-thru, so I would not be suprised at the other billion piddly reasons that they sue, especially regarding credit.
|
| | Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 03:17 pm Yeah, and I say, RIGHT ON! Sue the bastards! There is NO reason to hand somebody sitting in a car in a DRIVE THROUGH boiling coffee or to raise someone's interest rate after promising a fixed rate. YOU don't have to sue, but I will certainly do whatever I can to encourage and support law suits against corporate scum.
|
| | Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 10:22 pm I am so sick of hearing what a frivilous lawsuit this was. If you don't mind I would like to post the details. "The McDonald's Coffee Case Sorting through fact and fiction.... Myth: An opportunistic old woman launched a frivolous lawsuit when she spilled her McDonald's coffee on her lap. Truth: Lieback was sitting in the passenger seat of her grandson's car holding a coffee after purchasing it from a drive-through window of a McDonald's. When she opened the lid to add cream and sugar, she spilled the coffee. The simple accident caused third-degree burns on more than 6 percent of her body. She was treated in a hospital for a week. McDonald's served coffee 20 or so degrees hotter than the industry standard. The woman, Stella Liebeck, underwent numerous skin-graft surgeries as a result of her third-degree coffee burns to her thighs and groin area. She had permanent scarring on more than 16 percent of her body. McDonald's had already ignored more than 700 similar claims of coffee burns, many involving children. The company even ignored a request from the Shriner's Burn Institute in Cincinnati to turn down its coffee. McDonald's refused to pay the then 79-year-old woman's initial medical expenses totaling $11,000. McDonald's actually countered with an offer of $800. And they also refused to turn down the heat on their coffee. Left with $20,000 unpaid bills, she finally hired a lawyer. A mediator later recommended the parties settle for $225,000. Again, McDonald's refused and the case went to trial. McDonald's representatives lied to the court and jury about the existence of other claims. A jury reduced the original verdict of $200,000 to $160,000 for contributory negligence - Liebeck spilled it on herself. Based on McDonald's annual profits of more than $1 billion annually, and more than $1.3 million gross daily coffee sales, the jury levied two days of coffee sales receipts as punitive damages for a punitive damage award of $2.7 million. A judge later reduced the $2.7 million jury award to $480,000. McDonald's later settled the case for an undisclosed amount, requesting the deal be kept sealed. Most major newspapers ignored the judge's reduction and the final outcome of the case. Punitive damage awards are not currently allowed under Washington law. Juries undoubtedly return verdicts when faced with a large corporate defendant who has ignored reasonable pleas to resolve such situations or grievances. In this case, McDonald's simply refused to turn down the heat, so the jury turned it up on McDonald's. This text comes from The Washington Center for Consumer Law. I'm reproducing it here because their website doesn't respond. The text was retrieved from Google. No author is cited on the page. This text is Copyright (C) 2000 WSTLA."
|
| | Tuesday, January 16, 2001 - 11:42 pm Amy, thank you very much!
|
| | Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 01:38 pm Bottom line, anybody who orders and drinks coffee knows it's going to be hot -- 2 degrees, 10 degrees, 20 degrees - it does NOT matter. COFFEE IS #$%^ing HOT when you serve it! If it wasn't hot, the old lady would have been bitching because the coffee was too damn COLD. If you're stupid enough to order hot coffee in a moving vehicle and then OPEN it in a moving vehicle without letting it cool down (my coffee ALWAYS sits in the cup holder for 10-12 minutes before I even THINK about touching it), then it's your own damn fault for spilling it on yourself. The @#$%ing car is MOVING, people, don't open a HOT drink or you might SPILL it on YOURSELF! Who the hell needs to be taught THAT, and why the hell should McDonald's be liable because some old lady was an idiot ?? This world has way too many trial lawyers, chasing ambulances, advertising on TV ("did you fall down and get a boo-boo? We can get you a ba-gillion dollars!"), etc. The problem with the world today is that a vast majority of the people refuse to blame THEMSELVES for their own stupidity, and simply sue anybody and everybody they can, just because the current legal system is a joke and it ALLOWS them to file bullshit suits. People need to stand up and say, "HEY, I did something stupid. HEY, it was MY fault for being an idiot." Unfortunately, most are looking for a free ride on the "Big Business Corporate Bank Account Express Train" instead.
|
| | Wednesday, January 17, 2001 - 05:59 pm John, please go post elsewhere.
|
| | Thursday, January 18, 2001 - 05:38 am Sorry if I offended anyone whilst voicing my opinion. I'll refrain from commenting on this subject any more.
|
| | Thursday, January 25, 2001 - 10:48 am I actually straddle both sides on this. I can see both sides. There certainly was some negligence on the lady who opened the coffee lid in a moving car. On the other hand, why is McDonalds serving coffee 20 hotter than normal? The crutch of the case seems to be the following: McDonalds has repeatedly refused to lower the temperature of their coffee, knowing that others had suffered burns from it. This can be seen as negligence on their part. I hope that I am not to be shut down in saying the following, but come on Christine, John was only voicing his opinion. You have made it clear that it is not in line with yours. While I know the board is moderated by you, there was no misinformation spread, and isn’t it disagreements that get people to think about issues? I don’t think posters who contribute valuable information and opinions (regardless of your agreement of the opinion) should be shouted down. I agree with the way I’ve personally seen you deal with posters who propagate misinformation, or half truths (even if it’s unintentional), but I personally don’t agree with the way you treated John in this instance – I think it fosters resentment, and I don’t think that’s what you’re trying to accomplish. -Dan
|
Credit Forum CreditCourt Forum 2003 Credit Suit CreditFactors Order Credit Reports |