A lawsuit was recently filed against Bank of America by a California consumer who claims the bank confiscated the cash rewards earned by her with her BofA credit card when the bank chose to close her account.
The consumer, Christy Ngo, says in the lawsuit that last September her debit card stopped working because the bank told her they had frozen her account and would close her checking and savings account by the end of the month. Preemptively, she withdrew all the money. How these account closings are related to her losing her accumulated credit card rewards is not explained in the lawsuit. We questioned her lawyers directly about that too, but they did not respond. And BofA declined to comment about the case to another media outlet.
For simplicity sake, let’s assume that the bank closed her credit card as well. Certainly the bank has a right to do that. But why didn’t they give her whatever amount of cash back she had already earned on her cards (assuming she had paid off her balance)?
*MOUSE PRINT:
The terms and conditions statement of BofA’s current “cash rewards” credit cards says that any unredeemed cash rewards at the time of closure, whether the closing was voluntary or not, would be forfeited.
Bank of America is not alone including fine print in their credit card agreements like this. Recently, after a TV reporter’s 98-year-old mother passed away, a California bank did the same thing. See story.
Most people don’t read the fine print of credit card agreements, and if they did, would any accountholder even remember this restriction perhaps years later? And is it fair for banks, even with proper disclosure, to confiscate already earned cash back that had not been redeemed rather than to automatically refund it?
Earlier this spring the Boston Red Sox announced a number of improvements to Fenway Park including that the venerable sport stadium was going cashless. That means if you want one of those famous Fenway franks or a beer or a souvenir you are going to have to pay with a credit or debit card.
Immediately MrConsumer knew that something was amiss here because Massachusetts law requires all retail establishments to accept cash.
*MOUSE PRINT:
No retail establishment offering goods and services for sale shall discriminate against a cash buyer by requiring the use of credit by a buyer in order to purchase such goods and services. All such retail establishments must accept legal tender when offered as payment by the buyer. — MGL c.255D, Sec. 10A
A number of states and cities have similar laws. It is often argued that the basis for this requirement is to prevent discrimination against the poor and minority groups that are more likely to be unbanked or underbanked. Despite the law, and apparently with only a cursory review, the Massachusetts Attorney General blessed this payment scheme after the Red Sox had already implemented it.
Federal law does not require the acceptance of cash irrespective of the “legal tender” language on our paper money.
At Fenway, three ReadyCARD kiosks have been installed to serve the one in 10 people who traditionally pay with cash. At these machines, those without a credit or debit card can insert cash ($5 minimum) and out pops a debit Mastercard. According to Red Sox management, there is no charge for the card. The card can then be used to pay for anything at the ballpark or anywhere else that Mastercard is accepted. The card is not refillable.
Demonstration of similar machine from the same company
MrConsumer suspected there were some hidden charges and other issues with these cards, but getting that information has proven almost impossible. Multiple requests to the Red Sox PR folks went unresponded to. Strike one. Multiple requests to Ready Credit Corporation, the provider of the reverse ATMs, also went unresponded to except for a terse statement advising us to contact the Red Sox because they themselves “don’t reply to media requests.” Strike two.
However, piecing together information gathered from Ready Credit’s website and one email from a Sox executive, prospective purchasers of these cards might be surprised to learn that there appears to be a $3.95 monthly “dormancy fee” automatically deducted from the card’s balance after just 92 days of non-use. [While Ready Credit would not confirm that this charge is from the applicable card agreement for the Fenway card, it appears to be.]
*MOUSE PRINT:
This is a big deal since you may not get full value for the cash you put on the card because of both the monthly fee and the general difficulty of using up small balances on any prepaid card.
Let’s say you have $8.12 left on the card and you want to buy a $10 item. Most online sellers don’t allow you to use a second debit or credit card to pay for the difference. (Amazon will allow you to transfer any remaining balance to your Amazon account, however.) Alternatively, you would have to find a retailer that will accept multiple forms of payment in one transaction known as a “split tender.” And if none of those options works for you, after a few months, don’t worry, the monthly fee will kick in, and the card’s balance will be wiped clean automatically in no time.
Under the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) relatively new rules, most vendors of prepaid cards have to disclose the costs of any card before purchase. It is unclear how reverse ATMs do this at Fenway Park, but the one above requires users to press an onscreen “terms and conditions” button to learn full details.
*MOUSE PRINT:
And even if you don’t click it, in fine print it says you have automatically agreed to the terms by buying a card or checking your balance.
Because of the unusual nature of these reverse ATM machines, and their location inside a private venue, the CFPB declined our request to confirm that the agency’s prepaid card rule actually applies in a case like this (although it probably does). And one of the most important provisions of that law prohibits card issuers from imposing a dormancy fee until the card has not been used for at least a year. Remember, this card charges a fee after just 92 days. Strike three.
So, we struck out in getting the full inside story about these cards. But, if you have used one of these machines at stadiums around the country, please tell us your experience in the comments below, and include if fees were disclosed to you prior to purchase.
American Express is known for promoting very generous cash back offers such as ones that provide $10 back if you spend $10 or more at a small business. Here are some other recent examples, good deals for sure:
Last week, however, people on a bargain discussion board couldn’t believe their eyes when some of them found this offer in their AMEX account:
*MOUSE PRINT:
That’s right, spend $1,000 in one or more purchases and American Express will give you back a $1,000 statement credit. And you could do it three times! People couldn’t believe it. Then it got even crazier as other people checked their accounts. Most got nothing or a promise of bonus points. But others hit the jackpot, like this lucky cardholder.
*MOUSE PRINT:
Holy ****. Spend $3,000 and get back $6,000!? Keep in mind, this is on the genuine American Express website on a page of offers you see only after you log in to your account. People speculated that the company had been hacked, or there was a typo because the payback was probably meant to be “points” rather than “dollars,” or that some rogue employee decided to maliciously take revenge on the company. Others thought it was real, kept screenshots of the offer they signed up for, and hoped that AMEX would make good on it.
We asked the PR folks at American Express for an explanation. A spokesperson for the company told Consumer World:
“Due to a technical error, a small number of American Express Card Members were shown and subsequently enrolled in a statement credit offer for an incorrect amount. We quickly caught the error and removed the offer. American Express will honor this offer for the limited number of Card Members who enrolled.”
Wow! Hat’s off to American Express for honoring the erroneous offers. And merry Christmas to the several hundred cardholders who were lucky enough to get and enroll in them before they were pulled.
A lawsuit was recently filed against Bank of America by a California consumer who claims the bank confiscated the cash rewards earned by her with her BofA credit card when the bank chose to close her account.
