Consumer complaint received 2022-07-30 00:00:00
Product: Credit card or prepaid card — Store credit card
Issue: Trouble using your card — Can't use card to make purchases
Company: SYNCHRONY FINANCIAL
State: OH

Complaint narrative:
I was checking my credit report and noticed the company Synchrony Bank decreased my credit limit. This adversely affected my credit score by diminishing it by 3 points at both XXXX and XXXX. According to their terms " Credit Limit. You will be assigned a credit limit on your account that we may increase or decrease from time to time. If we approve a purchase that makes you go over your credit limit, we do not give up any rights under this Agreement and we do not treat it as an increase in your credit limit '' they do not notify you of such action and the reason for the action. I received no notification whatsoever, other than marketing offers emailed to shop with offers such as 6 months SAC, and this was AFTER the action of lowering my credit limit. 

I find this interesting when my credit score is in the 800 range. The only thing I could imagine is that my account has not been used in a year, as they do not offer anything apppealing to purchase at this time. Is that my fault they offer XXXX merchandise at inflated prices? 

I have since taken the action to close my account so that it does not appear like I am some deadbeat who didn't pay their bill and lost the credit line. Synchrony 's ADVERSE ACTION has now possibly cost me the advantage to getting good rates if I should decide to make a real estate purchase or make a car or other loan. 

This has got to stop. They have, under Regulation V, the permissable purpose to review accounts AND the credit score of the account holder by making a soft inquiry, as a regular credit risk review of all accounts. Why did they not exercise this soft credit review? Had they done so they would have seen my impeccable credit history and score. 

I find this action an attack on me, the consumer, to denegrade my credit ability which I have painstakingly built over the years, and a real kick in the XXXX for all the many purchases I have made at QVC for over 30 years. They have lost me as a credit card customer and as a purchasing QVC customer. I will spend XXXX dollars ar QVC and wil ensure that everyone I know hears how both Synchrony ( Formerly GE credit ) and QVC " values '' their customer. I have other credit cards with Synchrony and those will be replaced post haste, as there are other credit card companies who are more than happy to have good customers, and will provide better service. Since I always pay my statement balances in full, they were probably XXXX hurt they get, nor have ever gotten finance charges paid to them by me. 

Trying to resolve the issue, and question the reason for the action is a " XXXX by a XXXX IVR number optons '' that never get you to a real customer service representative, but instead runs you all around the tree for 20 minutes, so that when you finally get the option and are in line waiting, the phone muzac stops and the line goes dead. You are never sent to a real person to discuss your concern. The online chat is a BOT, that is triggered by word algorithims, so that doesn't get you any answers either, but lucky me, I get promted to do a survey when I stop the chat, that is structured to make me feel like I made a difference, but no one really sees or cares about it. It is a mental psyop. 

I would like the CFPB to investigate and make it a regular part of the examination process to stop this practice of lowering credit limits arbitrarily, without prior warning, and in so doing damaging the credit reputation of the consumer. The credit card companies should be doing regular credit reviews under Regulation V, soft reviews of credit bureaus to determine if the action is appropriate, which would still allow for them to mitigate their credit risk. We have regulatory compliance in place, I suggest you make sure these institutions are using it appropriately.

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