Consumer complaint received 2015-04-29 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — 
Issue: Credit line increase/decrease — 
Company: U.S. BANCORP
State: PA

Complaint narrative:
CFPB DISPUTE XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX with Elan Financal VISA # XXXX REASON : NO resolution after contacting bank on Saturday, XXXX XXXX My ELAN Financial Visa x XXXX experienced this cycle to lower my credit limitbased on a missed debit by Elan 's Autopay, which supposed to have drawn my minimum due ( of {$190.00} ) on XXXX XXXX. I activated XXXX XXXX earlier last month. It had shown " active '' and gave me no indication of any delay in processing this setting either. Yet after I contacted Elan supervisor XXXX, XXXX XXXX to inquire, nothing resolved. I ask my my credit limit to be re-instated. 


By the way, last month this same Autopay feature had malfunctioned in the opposite direction, in other words, debited XXXX the need for my minimum payment by not recognizing my satisfying such payment weeks before it was due! My minimum, due by XXXX XXXX -- but paid on XXXX XXXX -- I learned this amount was processed again on XXXX XXXX via my Autopay selected. Despite my contacting Elan first, I had to call my XXXX instead to intercept its processing to resolve this. Elan supervisor resisted to help the transaction still in processing, argued lamely that their system technically could n't recognize a payment made which satisfies the minimum due before it IS due. After my pointing out that XXXX Autopay recognizes payments this way, THEN Elan supervisor claimed that IF ELAN Autopay had recognized a payment made, this would hinder a cardholder 's paying more than the minimum, which is absurd. Irony is, that upon my setting up Elan Autopay originally on XXXX XXXX, my inquiry had consisted to ask my rep about the possibility of the system XXXX debiting a minimum amount which is due, after it was satisfied, but without minimum showing anymore as due for that respective cycle. She gave me a false answer, to say that it would not do so. ( I had even asked her again, XXXX! ) When this subject was discussed XXXX, XXXX XXXX Elan supervisor explained a policy of payments not recognized, when they are paid within 3 days of due date ( mine, XXXX XXXX ) but that did not take place here, nor was that part of the question! 

I did ask for my request to re-instate my credit limit to be notated, # XXXX yet I was also told the " credit department '' would not talk to me, its cardholder without a reference number printed on a postal letter, which could take weeks. He apologized -- BUT UNFORTUNATELY ... .. 


COMMENTARY Such unfair bank practices should become unlawful. Practices which allow banks to escape accountability to its customers ; to proffer false answers frequently, or set up 'electronic traps '' for us to fall into, should become unlawful. A way to pave a path for a a bank to levy undeserved fees, which may go unnoticed, only to encounter some knowing apology " on cue '' ( yet no refund ) should become unlawful. No customer who pays regular on-time payments should suffer a loss simply because banks have " more buttons than we do "!! 

A proverbial lesson somewhere in some gym class : " Children, we must teach you today, that in order to become a winner in the game of tennis - - AS IN LIFE - everybody 's gon na need ... A RACQUET!!! XXXX XXXX XXXX

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