Consumer complaint received 2021-03-05
Company: BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
State: MA
Product: Credit card or prepaid card
Sub-product: General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Trouble using your card
Sub-issue: Credit card company won't increase or decrease your credit limit

Complaint:
I am reporting what I consider to be unfair and deceptive practices on the part of Bank of America ( the Bank ) in connection with three ( 3 ) credit cards issued to me by the Bank. Two ( 2 ) are XXXX cards and one is a preferred XXXX. By way of background, I have been a customer of the Bank for approximately forty years through its predecessor banks. I am also a XXXX of the Bank. I have had deposit accounts with the Bank for all of those years as well as credit cards, home mortgages, and home equity lines for significant periods of those years. During that time, there have been no payment defaults on these loan products. Late charges have been assessed only rarely when I have been on vacation or on military deployment with the XXXX XXXX. 

The basis of my complaint of unfair and deceptive practices by the Bank as well as possible violations of various consumer protection acts arises from the Banks unilateral cancellation of one credit card and its reduction of credit availability on the other two cards to little more than the respective outstanding balances. This action was taken immediately and without notice to me despite the fact that I had automatic deductions scheduled in the future for two of those cards. The immediate cancellation and/or reduction of credit availability gave me no time to change these deductions, thereby risking my scheduled payments to other creditors and vendors.

The unilateral action by the Bank was allegedly prompted by two late payments of {$25.00} each on both cards, even though payments had been mailed before the Bank notified me of its actions. In my 40 years as a customer of the Bank, I have never had consecutive late payments. Prior to COVID, I would always make my credit card payments in person at the local branch of the Bank, but, after COVID, I began to use the U.S. Postal System as I do with my other payment obligations. During the time that these late payments occurred ( XXXX and XXXX ), I was hospitalized several times and had to have intensive physical therapy. I am unmarried, live alone, and am solely responsible for my business affairs. 

The bases for my complaint of unfair and deceptive practices, as well as capricious and unreasonable actions on the part of the Bank, follow. 

The instances of alleged late payments each involved {$25.00}. In the almost 40 years that I have had these credit cards, I have always paid either the outstanding balance, in excess of the outstanding balance, or multiples of the minimum payment due. In light of this payment history, the likelihood of non-payment on these cards was nil. 

At the time of the alleged non-payment, I had a minimum of {$50000.00} in my checking account and, for a period of time, in excess of XXXX against which the Bank could have set-off the {$25.00}, which the Bank had the legal right to do without taking the draconian actions that it did. Indeed, one of those credit cards was linked to my deposit account. Accordingly, the Bank had absolutely no credit risk based on funds in its possession. 

The Bank did not take into consideration possible delays in the delivery of both statements and payments caused by the U.S. Postal System in XXXX and XXXX. It was widely known and broadly reported in the media that the Postal System was overwhelmed even apart from the increase in mail during the holiday season. I believe, but can not prove, that statements from the Bank and my payments sent to the Bank were delayed during this time. 

As I mentioned above, I had several automatic payments to other vendors and creditors tied to these credit cards. The automatic payments from the two credit cards for which the Bank reduced my credit availability would have exceeded the new credit limit and would have resulted in a payment default. I am a military retiree and Navy veteran, and one of these vendors is XXXX XXXX, the prescription drug insurance company for many military retirees. Because of the several hospitalizations discussed above, my need for prescription medications has skyrocketed over the past several months. One prescription alone costs in excess of {$400.00} per month. The unfair and unreasonable actions on the part of the Bank could have denied me, a military veteran, access to much needed medications had I not had the resources to immediately pay in excess of my balances to insure that I had a significant credit balance on these cards to cover the automatic payments that may have been charged for my prescriptions after the Banks unreasonable actions. 

When I called the Banks customer service department to inquire about this arbitrary action on the part of the Bank, particularly the lack of any notice whatsoever, I was told the Bank had a legal right to do so. I would dispute that assertion. The Bank may have a contractual right to do so, but, under applicable law, every provision in a contract must be exercised fairly and in a commercially reasonable manner. In this case, the Bank did not do so. My position is supported by the facts, namely that ( i ) my history of paying in excess of the credit balance or multiples of the minimum payment due on these cards as well as my timely payments of mortgage and HELOC loans, and ( ii ) the availability of collateral in deposit accounts, which more than covered, not only payments due, but the outstanding balances as well. 

The closure of my accounts, the reduction of my credit availability, and the immediate commencement of collection efforts were unwarranted under these particular circumstances and constituted unfair and deceptive practices on the part of the Bank. These arbitrary proceedings could have resulted in non-payment, and a delay in availability, of critical prescription medications as well as defaults in other payment obligations. Accordingly, I am filing this complaint against the Bank for its egregious actions in this regard.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation