Consumer complaint received 12/19/2015 about Credit card () with BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE (PA).
Issue: Credit line increase/decrease

Complaint: I am a XXXX year old, full-time employed male. I purchased my first home at a conservative price point, and I live well within my means. 

Like any other XXXX year old, I have college student loan debt, revolving credit card debt, and now a mortgage ; however, my credit report, despite the high credit card balances to credit limit ratio would show that I have 100 % on time payment history. 

So naturally, after purchasing a home, I would accrue additional credit card debt in the following months. 

Just as I have in the past, I created a spreadsheet of all my credit card balances v. credit limits, interest rates, promo balances and expirations, etc. I have strategically mapped out the way I would spend and allocate my income to pay down high interest rate balances sooner, then promos with expirations, then low interest rate balances, until I have an overall credit card usage between XXXX and 20 %, just as any financial planning expert would advise. I did the same thing prior to taking a first mortgage when I bought my house, and I have decided to do the same thing again to get my credit score back up to where it used to be. 

That being said, one of my highest interest rate cards is Barclay Card Us / XXXX XXXX XXXX with an approximate 23 % APR. 

As of my XXXX statement, I had a high balance of over 90 per cent credit usage. Of that usage, a little under {$500.00} was subject to the high interest rate. 

In strategizing what cards I would make bulk payments first, I started with my high interest rates that were also in usage above 70 per cent per card. I made a lump payment of {$500.00} to Barclay Card US XXXX XXXX in order to effectively kill my high interest balance, so that I could continue to make minimum payments over the long term while I continue to blitz other high interest balances. I would make a lump payment on XXXX card, minimum payments on the remaining cards one month, and then do a lump payment on another card the following month. I would repeat this until my high interest balances were paid down, and my debt to income ratio would be stabilized. 

After processing my {$500.00} payment, Barclay Card US / XXXX XXXX arbitrarily, and without notice, lowered my credit limit by {$500.00} approximately, thus rendering my bulk payment null and void. I paid them {$500.00}, just to have them remove {$500.00} off my available credit. And to add insult to injury, the {$500.00} payment did n't even affect the high interest balance that I was paying off in the first place. 

If I had known they were going to throttle my credit limit, I would n't have started my credit card blitz with this account. I would 've just continued to make my above-minimum payments, on-time ( as ALWAYS ), until all my other high interest balances were paid. 

When I contacted customer service, their feeble excuse was that their portfolio managers ( Who the XXXX knows who that is? ) decided that my debt to limit ratio was too high, so they lowered my limit ... which, in my mind, is completely counter-productive, because they took my near 70 per cent usage and thrusted it back up to above 90 % by throttling my credit limit. Furthermore, they 've brought my overall credit usage back up to where it was before I started blitzing, AND they left the balance subject to the high interest rate in the first place untouched. Who 's to say that they are n't going to continue throttling my limit as I make high payments to keep my usage high and my credit score overall low? 

I demand that this practice be stopped. The credit card companies were forced to disclose how long it would take to pay off balances making only the minimum payments ... but now this company is allowed to arbitrarily reduce my credit limit and render my high cash payments ( my LIQUID funds ) null and void? 

I am disgusted right now. Thank you for your patience and consideration in understanding my dilemma.

Company public response: Company chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation