Consumer complaint received 2025-12-15 00:00:00
Product: Credit card — General-purpose credit card or charge card
Issue: Getting a credit card — Application denied
Company: DISCOVER BANK
State: NY

Complaint narrative:
On or around XX/XX/year>, I applied for a Discover it credit card ( XXXX XXXX XXXX : XXXX ). My application was denied, and I received an adverse action notice dated XX/XX/year>, from Discover ( a division of XXXX XXXX, XXXX. ). The notice cited the following reasons for denial : INCREASE IN TOTAL BALANCES ON CREDIT FILE INCREASE IN UTILIZATION ON BANK REVOLVING ACCOUNTS NUMBER OF MONTHS SINCE MOST RECENT INQUIRY It also disclosed an Experian FICO credit score of XXXX, pulled on XX/XX/year>, with key factors affecting the score : % OF BALANCE TO HIGH CREDIT ON BANKING REVOLVING OR ALL REVOLVING ACCT ; LENGTH OF TIME ACCOUNTS HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED ; LACK OF RECENT INSTALLMENT LOAN INFORMATION ; TOO FEW ACCOUNTS CURRENTLY PAID AS AGREED ; NUMBER OF INQUIRIES ON CREDIT BUREAU. The notice referenced XXXX XXXX XXXX as well. 
I believe this denial and the adverse action notice violate federal laws, including the Equal Credit Opportunity Act ( ECOA, 15 U.S.C. 1691 ) and Regulation B ( 12 CFR 1002.9 ), as well as the Fair Credit Reporting Act ( FCRA, 15 U.S.C. 1681 ). Specifically : ECOA/Regulation B Violations : The reasons provided are overly vague and generic, failing to meet the requirement for " specific reasons '' in an adverse action notice. Regulation B mandates that creditors provide clear, detailed explanations that identify the precise factors used, such as specific accounts, balances, limits, dates, or underwriting thresholds. Generic phrases like " increase in total balances '' do not specify which accounts or amounts were considered, preventing me from understanding or addressing the issues. This lacks the transparency required by law ( see CFPB guidance and cases like XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ). 
FCRA Violations : The decision was based in part on my consumer reports from XXXX  and XXXX. While the notice disclosed the score and some key factors, it did not identify which specific items or accounts in the reports ( beyond the score factors ) influenced Discover 's internal credit decision. FCRA requires full disclosure of adverse information used and allows for re-evaluation upon dispute ( 15 U.S.C. 1681m ( a ) and 1681g ( g ) ). 

On XX/XX/year>, I sent a formal demand for reconsideration to Discover via certified mail ( addressed to XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, UT XXXX ), disputing the denial basis, requesting a compliant explanation, and demanding manual re-review and approval with a {$11000.00} credit limit. I attached a copy of this letter and the original adverse action notice for your reference. As of today ( XX/XX/year> ), I have not received any response. 
My credit profile includes a FICO score of XXXX, which is within typical approval ranges for this product, stable income, and responsible credit management. I believe the denial may stem from non-compliant underwriting practices, and the vague notice hinders my ability to improve my credit or seek alternatives. 
I have not been discriminated against on any prohibited basis ( e.g., race, age, etc. ), but the lack of specificity suggests potential uneven application of standards. This has caused me financial harm, including missed opportunities for credit utilization and rewards. 
Please investigate these violations and require Discover to comply fully.

Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation