1/19/2023 I purchased an item online and used my Discover card, thinking they protect you if there is a problem. The item came and it did not work. I sent the item back following the instructions. After disputing the item I was told by Jessica in Delaware that the reason the dispute was not honored was due to company saying I did not fill out the warranty. After pain staking research and emails, phone calls. I found that the company in question had on their website first page and on the warranty page that they were ASE Certified Mechanics. Well come to find out that was a lie. The individual who performed the check on the engine was not certified infact he was the junk yard that sold the engine to Remanns Used Auto Parts (they go by tons of names). They also sent a letter that showed there was a checkmark indicating that I checked the box but in small print it said "Not the customers actual mark".
After sending Discover all this information from emails from employees etc. They refused to listen infact second Supervisor, Stephanie from Utah, couldn't rasp the information that I had uploaded on their website, infact she said she read it all but could not talk intelligentially about the information that I had provided.
Discover stand by fraudlent vendors/merchants over their credit card customer. I am trying to get a lawyer and I will hopeful take Remann to court and add Discover along with the lawsuit.
Do not use Discover and please share this to everyone you know. With much gratitude.
I opened up a credit card account with Discover Card in the beginning of 2017. My credit line was approved $10,000.00 U.S.D.. I paid on time, paid the statement amount, and was never late. During this time from 2017 to 2018, I only charged no more than $350.00 and paid off the card two times. Never went over the limit.
Obviously, I proved that I was an on time paying client with a pattern of excellent payment history for close to a year. I received my statement for April 2018 and my credit line was reduced to $500.00 without ANY notification and was given lies and excuses as to why they reduced my credit line in written letter format by Discover-dispicable, disgusting!!! I called them immediately and demanded that they increase the credit line to $10,000.00 as agreed upon. Plus, the credit analyst(s) violated TILA (Truth In Lending Act) and COVERED IT UP by back dating a letter that was not sent on they date they claimed it was sent. That's a cover-up CRIME, Discover Card!!! That's breach of verbal contract, fraud, THEFT, and lying by ommission on Discover's Credit Analyst(s) and some other elements within Discover's management. This includes blatant violation of TILA on Discover's part ENTIRELY-100 PERCENT.
They increased my credit line to $1,500.00 after arguing my case. I still DEMAND that my credit line to be increased to $15,000.00 U.S.D. IMMEDIATELY due to ALL of this wrong-doing on Discovers' part!!! I want ALL the late fees waived, credit reports corrected, and ALL credit points FULLY restored. Discover Card will NOT assist those financially,like myself, who have been fleeing the wildfires in SD and NE since August 2018 to current. It's dispicable, financial services like this from Discover Card Services that ought to make people's blood boil.
It ought to make people's blood boil in regards to not helping those fleeing the massive wildfires in the midwest since 2018. These Discover Card, credit analysts know exactly what they did and it was deliberately done on purpose!!!! These stupid, dumb, idiot credit analyst(s) followed immoral orders from their higher chain of command. They have ZERO spine to say NO to cutting off credit lines on excellent clients like myself who are fleeing the massive wildfires since 2018 and have ZERO moral compasses. GET AS OFFENDED AS YOU LIKE-DISCOVER CARD SERVICES!!! How's that for the inconvenient TRUTH?!!! I am NOT required to be nice, prim, and proper about this situation at ALL!!! THEY DON'T DESERVE TO TRUSTED AT ALL AT THIS POINT BECAUSE THEIR PATTERN OF CONDUCT is rather OBVIOUS. They are helping to create the Hunger Games Society(a documentary NOT a MOVIE) in increments and that pattern is so OBVIOUS. THEY will not get any more payments until they admit to their wrong doing. They correct all the above 100 percent as stated and increase my credit line as requested with 0.1 percent interest rate IMMEDIATELY using the same card on file. This will include extremely low repayment plan of $5.00 per month depending on the wildfires and spot fires going on to include other legitimate, accurate, causal factors beyond my control!!! THEY HAVE TO PROVE that they are helping wildfire refugees and are serious about doing so instead of assisting with making wildfire refugees lives extremely difficult financially.
DISCOVER CARD WILL NOT PUT ME IN DEBT using victim shaming and blaming and COVER IT UP!!!! DISCOVER WILL NOT take advantage of on-time paying clients with excellent pay histories such as myself!!!! PLUS, THEY HAVE TO SIGN A WRITTEN CONTRACT.-PERIOD PLUS, THEY HAVE take A LIE DETECTOR test and take several, morality tests. I have passed two lie detector tests and 2-3 morality tests. I have already sent them 1-2 letters regarding the massive wildfires, extreme, dangerous, high crime rates of HOT SPRINGS,SD and RAPID CITY,SD as to the REAL, main CAUSAL FACTORS affecting my ability to repay since April 2021 to current. I had to move from these locations, due to these situations that are beyond MY CONTROL!!!
Discover Card Services will NEVER receive CURES for stroke, TBI, brain injury, and bone regeneration until my demands stated above ARE MET IMMEDIATELY AND IN IT'S FULL ENTIRETY!!! THEY HAVE TO PROVE THAT THEY ARE SERIOUS about helping those fleeing ECOCIDE, wildfires, spotfires, and towns mentioned with high, extreme crime rates by significantly increasing my credit lines. AND-THEY ARE SERIOUS ABOUT RESTORING THEIR REPUTATION!!! NOT MINE!!!!!!!! I am NOT going to remove this!!!!-PERIOD!!!
They contunally year after year deny credit limit increases depsite on time payments and no late payments and total responsible useage. They continue to supply a bogus reason for denials and I feel that they do this deliberately due to other factors such as discrimination and credit profiling. This company has to be known for it's ill credit practices it demonstrates to good credit paying people. They should be ashame!
`Discover Financial Services is a company that has been around for decades before it made a website. When I opened accounts at Discover, their website was functional. Now it is not. I must close my accounts at Discover because I am unable to sign into my dashboard successfully without any issues.
Every time I sign in ... EVERY time ... It gets intercepted with a SMARTAUTH.
Calling Discover by Telephone requires VOICE ONLY not any NUMBERS to press to select a department. Despite all their telephone numbers, they do not actually have a direct connection to any departments. And of course there are not any Extensions. I wait for not very long. However, it adds up after talking with several people lying or just simply doing what ever they can to not solve the problems.
I am appalled that they tell me lies about a faulty automated system is For My Security. I do not need to go through the verification, especially EVERY time. They have the nerves to tell me to deal with it as it is basically smarter than they are and clearly knows best, as if I ought to be loyal and worship an Artificial Intelligence as if it was a Deity.
It is also a problem that people are not Boycotting companies such as Discover. And there are also companies WORSE. One customer service person told me that it should not be necessary to be intercepted by SMARTAUTH every time I attempt to sign in to my Dashboard and tried to assist me with the problems. The rest did not.
One person denied the existence of their Web Support Department. Indeed. They do not seem to do much aside from making things bad and making bad problems worse. And of course there is not any Support Ticket Number nor Reference Number.
I signed in with their App successfully which is not any better. The Website Dashboard has the ability to save Statements with a proper name. Example: Discoverbank-Statement-YYYYMMDD-XXXX This is very important as I have Three accounts with them: Credit, Checking, and Savings. With the App it saves statements as MONTH YYYY
I doubt that I can simply avoid the Dashboard as I do not want to tell Artificial Intelligences I am not one of them. Their App also has plenty of different problems. There are Banks and Financial Services that are much worse than Discover. I was not expecting this very low quality from Discover and am insulted by what they tried to tell me.
The below is taken from Class Action Lawsuit that Discovery Settled in regards to Payment Protection, Identity Theft Protection, Wallet Protection that lays out in details the details of what transpired in my report.
I. INTRODUCTION
1. Defendants DFS Services LLC and Discover Bank are referred to collectively in this complaint as “Discover” unless otherwise specified.
2. This is a class action lawsuit brought by, and on behalf of, Discover credit card customers throughout the country who were enrolled in the Defendants’ “Payment Protection
Plan,” (formerly known as “Account Guard”) (hereinafter referred to as “Payment Protection” or “DPP”), Identity Theft Protection (formerly known as “Profile Protect”) (hereinafter referred to as “Identity Theft Protection” or “ITP”), Wallet Protection (formerly known as “The Register”) (hereinafter referred to as “Wallet Protection” or “WP”) and Credit Score Tracker (hereinafter referred to as “Credit Score Tracker” or “CST”) products. (collectively referred to herein as the “Products”).
3. The proposed class representatives bring claims against Discover under state deceptive trade practices laws and the federal Truth in Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq., for claims for breach of contract and unjust enrichment, and seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. These claims arise from Discover’s deceptive marketing practices and business practices in connection with the marketing, sale, and claims practices associated with the Discover products identified in the preceding paragraph.
4. Discover is one of the nation's largest credit card issuers. Discover earns nearly $300 million in annual revenue from the sale of several optional fee-based financial products. Discover markets these add-on products as ways for consumers to protect themselves from fraudulent or unauthorized charges or to enhance their financial security against such hazards or hardships like job loss or sickness, identity theft, lost wallets, or low credit scores. Yet Discover often enrolls consumers in these products based on highly deceptive and misleading telemarketing calls, even charging some consumers for the products without the consumer’s consent or understanding that their credit card will be charged for these products. Discover is in a position to do this because, unlike a typical telemarketer, it is the consumer's credit card company and already has their credit card number and detailed confidential information about its customers.
II. PARTIES
5. Defendant DFS Services LLC is a limited liability company duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, having a principal place of business in the State of Illinois. Because limited liability companies are deemed citizens of the State where they have their principal place of business (Illinois), the State under whose laws it is organized (Delaware), and every state of which a member is a citizen (Delaware and Illinois), Defendant DFS Services LLC is a citizen of the States of Delaware and Illinois.
6. Defendant Discover Bank is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, having a principal place of business in the State of Delaware.
7. At all times herein mentioned, Defendants, and each of them, were the agents, principals, employees, servants, partners, joint venturers, and representatives of each other. In doing the acts hereinafter alleged, they each were acting within the scope and course of their authority as such agents, principals, employees, servants, partners, joint venturers, and representatives, and were acting with the permission and consent of the other co-Defendants.
8. Plaintiffs are represented by proposed class representatives who purchased one or more of the identified Discover products (Payment Protection Plan, Identity Theft Protection, Wallet Protection and Credit Score Tracker). A statement of facts for each proposed class representative is set out in detail below.
III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
9. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331 because this action arises under the Constitution or laws of the United States and §1332(d)(2) because the matter in controversy exceeds $5,000,000, exclusive of interest and costs, this is a class action in which at least one member of the Plaintiff class is a citizen of a State different from at least one
Defendant, and the proposed Classes are composed of thousands of members throughout the United States.
10. Venue is proper before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, as this Court is the transferee court for all actions consolidated into MDL 2217 by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation’s order creating this multidistrict litigation on February 27, 2011. Venue is also proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 inasmuch Defendants do business in this District, a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims occurred within the district in which this Court sits, and a portion of the proposed class resides in it.
11. To the extent there is any contractual or other impediment to pursuit of these claims on a class action basis, Plaintiffs specifically allege, and will prove, if necessary, that any bar to class action proceedings is unconscionable, unfair and against public policy.
IV. STATEMENT OF FACTS
12. Discover markets several purportedly optional fee-based products to its Cardholders. One such product is the “Payment Protection Plan.” These products generate substantial revenue for Discover. Discover sells at least four optional financial products for a monthly fee. Discover touts all four optional fee-based plans as ways for consumers to increase their financial security, whether by protecting the customer from fraud or unauthorized charges, or insuring them against a loss of income. These products are currently called the "Payment Protection Plan," "Identity Theft Protection," "Wallet Protection," and "Credit Score Tracker" (the "Plans"). Discover charges $0.89 for every $100 of outstanding balance on the cardholder's account each month for Payment Protection; $12.99 per month for Identity Theft Protection; $2.99 per month for Wallet Protection; and $7.99 per month for Credit Score Tracker.
13. Annualized, a consumer with a $5,000 credit card balance each month would be charged $534 for the Payment Protection Plan. Furthermore, Identity Theft Protection costs $155.88 per year; Wallet Protection costs $35.88 per year; and Credit Score Tracker costs $95.88 per year. Cardholders who are enrolled in these plans do not receive a separate invoice for these monthly fees. Instead, Discover charges the fee directly to the consumer's Discover credit card each month.
a. Payment Protection - Deceptive Marketing Claims
14. The Payment Protection Plan purports to temporarily suspend the cardholder's obligation to make regular monthly payments on their Discover card in the event of certain qualifying events. The qualifying events include involuntary unemployment, disability, hospitalization or natural disasters. If a cardholder maintains an outstanding balance on their credit card experiences a qualifying event and otherwise meets the requirements of the plan's terms and conditions, they may qualify for a temporary suspension of their monthly payment obligations.
15. The Payment Protection Plan is similar to credit insurance in the sense that it purports to protect the borrower from defaulting if an unanticipated event disrupts the borrower's source of income. Unlike credit insurance, however, the debt suspension portion of Payment Protection does not actually make monthly payments as they come due each month. Instead, Payment Protection only suspends the borrower's obligation to make monthly payments temporarily.
16. These types of plans have been subject to criticism from consumer advocates on several fronts. For example, it may not be disclosed to consumers that under the terms and conditions of the plan, the cardholder may not be permitted to use their credit card while they have invoked the debt suspension benefits -- even though the qualifying events that trigger the debt suspension benefit, such as unemployment, may be when the cardholder needs their credit card the most. Under Discover's Payment Protection Plan, a cardholder cannot use the card when monthly payments are suspended due to a hardship.
17. Critics also point out that debt suspension agreements are sometimes marketed to elderly consumers, for whom material benefits of the Plan may be of little or no value. The main benefit of debt suspension plans is that they suspend payment obligations when the borrower's income stream is lost due to unemployment, disability or natural disaster; elderly retired persons rely on savings and fixed income to survive, rather than normal income from employment, so they could rarely benefit from Discover’s unemployment or disability benefits.
18. Unlike credit insurance, Payment Protection plans are generally not regulated by state insurance regulators. With credit insurance, state insurance regulators at least set basic minimum terms and conditions, and also are required to regulate premiums to insure that costs are reasonable in relation to the benefits of the product. By contrast, payment protection plans are generally unregulated as to terms, conditions, and fees, making the plans highly profitable for Discover.
19. Discover markets and sells its “Payment Protection” product (“Payment Protection”) as a product that will provide benefits to Cardholders if certain events occur, such as unemployment or disability. Discover charges the Cardholders $.89 per hundred dollars of their monthly account ending balance, and in return tells the cardholder that it will defer minimum payments on account balances for a period of time when the cardholder is unemployed or disabled. These promises are illusory.
20. Discover sells Payment Protection through misleading statements, incomplete statements and misrepresentations. The product is sold through print ads and direct telemarketing to existing Cardholders who are generally in the “subprime” credit category.
21. Discover manipulates the Payment Protection sales process by either 1) enrolling Cardholders in Payment Protection without advance notice or consent by the cardholder, or 2) misrepresenting to Cardholders that Payment Protection will “Preserve your lifestyle – and protect your Discover Card payment history – when life’s events disrupts your finances” by putting their account on hold during the benefit period.
22. At the time of sale, Discover does not ask the cardholder any qualifying questions
to determine if the cardholder is eligible for Payment Protection benefits, or to determine if the cardholder will ever be eligible for Payment Protection benefits. There is a lengthy list of exclusions or grounds for denial of benefits that are not revealed to the cardholder until the customer submits a claim for benefits, when Discover grants itself ultimate and unchallengeable discretionary power to deny benefits if it “determines that [the cardholder] do[es] not qualify for benefits for any reason.” (emphasis added). Discover fails to disclose the terms of Payment Protection until after the consumer accepts or is charged for the product.
23. The Payment Protection claims process is so difficult, onerous and discretionary that, upon information and belief—based on The Impact of Debt Cancellation Contracts on State Insurance Regulation, A Report to the FIRST By the Center for Economic Justice dated July 2003—only 3-5% of premiums paid by Cardholders are ever paid out as benefits. Cardholders who are denied benefits do not receive refunds of premiums paid. They have therefore paid Discover for a product that is entirely worthless to them. Cardholders are rarely able to overcome the multiple bureaucratic hurdles and incomprehensible and contradictory preconditions that are confusing and that were not disclosed to the cardholder at the time of sale (or imposition of charges). When Discover’s discretionary process results in the ultimate denial of claims, there is no objective process for a cardholder to appeal Discover’s decision.
24. Payment Protection is a “mass” marketed product, that is, the marketing,
management and claims handling processes are applied in a uniform manner so that all members of the proposed class were marketed in a virtually identical manner and members of the class received standardized responses from Discover in response to claims for benefits.
25. Discover’s sales materials tell Cardholders that they will give Cardholders “the time [they] need to get back on your feet” because “[t]here are no payments, no periodic finance charges, no late fees, no over limit fees, and no Payment Protection fees” when a triggering event, such as unemployment or disability occurs. Discover, in its marketing material, tells Cardholders that, should the need arise, “One call puts Payment Protection to work...When you need us, simply call... and a thoughtful, knowledgeable Payment Protection specialist will take the time to activate your benefits.” Discover’s statements are misleading because thousands of Cardholders had a similar experience to the Plaintiffs here, such as Devavani Conroy, a woman who lost her job and asked for benefit payments or coverage under the Program, and who was not given “time to get back on [her] feet”, but instead was denied “Payment Protection” coverage despite having paid for it.
26. In order to increase profits, Discover manipulates the claims payment process in its favor by limiting the chances of having to honor or pay Payment Protection claims. Discover relies upon a deceptive practice known as “post claims underwriting” to accomplish this strategy. This is the practice of asking few or no questions of the cardholder at the time of sale to determine if the customer is likely to qualify for benefits should the need arise. When the customer attempts to use the “benefits” of Payment Protection, Discover denies the benefits for reasons that were not disclosed at the time of sale. For example, numerous retired senior citizens are charged for Payment Protection even though they are excluded from ever receiving unemployment benefits. 27. As a result of Discover’s deceptive and unfair marketing schemes and claims practices, Plaintiffs and class members purchase a product that is virtually worthless to them, and are charged excessively for the product even if one assumes that product has some value to the cardholder. The ratio of premiums charged is excessive when compared to the actual value of claims paid.
b. Defendants’ False Advertising Relating to Pricing of the Plan
28. The marketing materials and telephonic solicitations offering the Plan mislead consumers to believe that the fee associated with the Plan is assessed as “89¢ per every $100.00 of your total Discover Card account balance at the end of each monthly billing period in which you're enrolled in Payment Protection.” In reality, the fee is not incremental – as suggested by Discover’s marketing materials – but a percentage fee of 0.89% of their monthly ending balance.
29. Thus, according to the information presented through the marketing of the plan, if a Card Member’s total account balance at the end of a billing period in which he/she is enrolled in the Plan is $100.00, Discover may contractually charge a fee of 89¢.
30. Such marketing and advertising lead Card Members to believe that if their total Discover Card account balance at the end of a billing period in which he/she is enrolled in the Plan reached the next $100.00 increment, i.e., $200.00; Discover may contractually charge a fee of $1.78.
31. Such marketing and advertising further lead the Card Members to believe that if their total Discover® Card account balance at the end of a billing period in which he/she is enrolled in the Plan is $110.00 (i.e., more than $100.00, but less than the next $100.00 increment of $200.00), Discover may only contractually charge a fee of 89¢ because the next $100.00 increment has not yet been reached.
32. In contrast with the misinformation provided through the marketing and
advertising of the Plan, Defendants actually charge .0089 of the Card Member’s total Discover card account balance at the end of each a billing period in which the Card Member is enrolled in the Plan.
33. Therefore, when a Card Member carries a balance of $110.00 on the statement closing date while he/she is enrolled in the Plan, Defendants’ charges a fee of 97.9¢ (i.e., .0089 x $110.00), as opposed to the 89¢ as advertised.
34. Additionally, the Plan creates an “endless cycle” whereby the resulting fees are exacerbated and compounded as a result of the interest that accrues when Card Members do not pay their account balances off in full.
35. Furthermore, the fees associated with the Plan cause many Card Members to exceed their credit limits, resulting in additional excessive fees and penalties.
c. Payment Protection - Slamming Claims
36. Discover enrolls far more Cardholders through telemarketing than through the mail or online, the latter two of which require an affirmative act by the consumer to enroll, such as initialing their monthly statement in the designated place, authorizing enrollment, and mailing it back to Discover.
37. Most of Discover's Cardholders are enrolled in the Products through Discover's aggressive and deceptive telemarketing efforts and card activation calls. Some of these calls are made internally by Discover, and others are made by telemarketing firms that Discover hires.
38. In addition to Discover's financial motive to enroll as many of its customers as possible into its highly lucrative fee-based products, individual Discover telemarketers are incentivized to enroll as many Cardholders as possible, either because their compensation is commission-based or because their performance is otherwise compensated on the number of Cardholders they enroll.
39. Discover's telemarketing scripts attempt to lull the cardholder into believing they are receiving a courtesy call from Discover rather than a sales call. Discover telemarketers are instructed to tell family members who answer the phone that it is just a "courtesy call" rather than disclose that it is in fact a sales call.
40. After reading product descriptions and disclosures, if the telemarketer can elicit some affirmative response from the cardholder, such as “ok” or “'yes” after the “disclosure,” the telemarketer treats the affirmative response as the cardholder's agreement to enroll in the plan, regardless of whether the consumer understands that they are supposedly agreeing to purchase a product and that their credit card will be charged.
41. Discover's telemarketers employ numerous deceptive tactics to elicit an affirmative response from the cardholder without the cardholder actually understanding that they are supposedly agreeing to purchase an optional product for a monthly fee, thereby tricking some consumers into unknowingly signing up for the plans. One common tactic is for the telemarketer to selectively read, or substantially alter the text of the “disclosure” in an effort to make the “disclosure” sound like incomprehensible legalese and to hide the fact that a sale is taking place. In a traditional telemarketing call, the consumer must read their credit card number to the telemarketer in order to purchase a product. Here the telemarketer is the credit card company. As a result, Discover can post charges on a consumers' account even when there has been no clear and knowing consent given by the consumer.
42. Some of Discover's telemarketers read the script so quickly that Cardholders cannot understand the text or do not understand they are allegedly being sold a product. The telemarketer then says to the cardholder “Ok, Ms. Smith?” as if the telemarketer is wrapping up the call. Some Cardholders reflexively respond “Ok,” not to indicate their consent to purchase a product but to end the phone call, which they still believe is a courtesy call regarding the benefits of the Discover card. Discover later relies on this “affirmative response” as “proof” that the cardholder knowingly agreed to purchase the plan.
43. In addition to deceptively inducing Cardholders to say “yes” or “ok” during the call, Discover enrolls some Cardholders who did not give an affirmative response.
44. Sometimes the telemarketer's deceptive tactics fail and the cardholder tells the telemarketer he or she is not interested. Undeterred, Discover's telemarketers sometimes assure these Cardholders that Discover is simply going to send the cardholder a "packet of information" about the plan. When these skeptical Cardholders state that it is “ok” for Discover to send them information about the plan to look over, the telemarketer treats this affirmative response as the cardholder's authorization for paid enrollment, even though the consumers do not believe they have agreed to purchase anything.
45. When Cardholders later contact Discover to complain that they have been enrolled without their authorization, Discover purports to review the partial recordings of their conversations with the telemarketers. Discover sometimes concludes that the cardholder gave their authorization, even when the cardholder never actually states that he or she agrees to be enrolled in the paid plan. Discover routinely refuses to reimburse Cardholders the amounts that have been billed to their Discover card for the plan, even when Cardholders are adamant that they only gave approval to have information about the plan sent to them, not for enrollment.
46. Cardholders who receive the packet sometimes disregard it because they may assume that the packet is just another piece of junk mail from a credit card company. In addition to its deceptive outbound telemarketing practices, Discover enrolls some Cardholders in the plans without their knowledge during the card activation process. When a new Discover cardholder receives their credit card in the mail, the card has not been activated. Instead, the cardholder must call Discover from their home phone number to activate their card. Discover may also issue new cards to existing Cardholders which require the cardholder to call in order to activate.
47. Discover routinely transfers card holders calling to activate their card to a live operator. At some point during these activation calls, the Discover representative turns on a recording device and says to the consumer “I need to record your enrollment.” The representative then reads to the cardholder one of the “disclosures” like those discussed above. Cardholders who are calling to activate a credit card are particularly susceptible to believing that the “disclosure” is some legal text that must be read to the cardholder, rather than an alleged contractual agreement to purchase an optional paid product. Given all the disclosures and fine print that consumers receive when they open a new credit card account, reading the disclosure to Cardholders in the card activation context can mislead Cardholders about the purpose of the disclosure. Accordingly, many Cardholders who receive the disclosure during the card activation process and reply “ok” have no idea that they have supposedly purchased some optional product.
48. Discover experiences high cancellation rates for these products, from which it may be inferred that the customers did not agree to buy the products at the time of sale.
49. Many Cardholders have no idea they are enrolled in a plan and do not notice or appreciate the meaning of the line-item charge for the plan that Discover bills to their Discover account each month. Some Cardholders pay this inconspicuous charge month after month for many months before they become aware of the purpose of the charge.
d. Identity Theft Protection, Credit Score Tracker and Wallet Protection - Deceptive Marketing Claims
50. Discover also deceptively enrolls its customers in the Credit Score Tracker, Identity Theft Protection, and Wallet Protection products. With Discover's Credit Score Tracker, the cardholder is given a copy of their Experian credit report. (Experian is one of the three major credit reporting agencies.) In addition, enrollees are given access to tools that allow them to track their credit score on a daily basis and to receive e-mail alerts if there are changes to their credit score. A main selling point Discover uses to market this plan is the Experian credit report consumers receive. Discover charges enrollees an additional $19.99 (in addition to the monthly fee) if they want credit reports from the other major credit reporting agencies. Experian and the two other major credit reporting agencies, however, are required by federal law to provide consumers one free credit report each year. Discover charges the Cardholders’ accounts $7.99 per month for this product.
51. Discover's Identity Theft Protection plan purports to monitor the enrollee's credit score for indicia of identity theft and will alert the enrollee if something suspicious happens to their credit score. Discover enrolls its customers into this plan without their knowledge or consent and fails to withdraw customers from the plan upon request in order to continue billing them for the product. Discover charges the Cardholders’ accounts $12.99 per month for this product. This product was previously called “Profile Protect.”
52. Under Discover's Wallet Protection plan, if the enrollee's wallet is lost or stolen, Discover will contact the issuers of the enrollee's credit cards to cancel the card. In addition, Discover represents that it will monitor a customer’s credit for 90 days after their wallet is lost or stolen and wire the customer up to $1,000 in emergency cash. Discover enrolls Cardholders in this plan without their meaningful, knowing authorization and charges the Cardholders’ credit cards $2.99 per month. This product was previously called “The Register.”
53. Discover employs aggressive and deceptive telemarketing, as alleged in the preceding paragraphs of this complaint, with respect to each of these Products, and enrolls customers in these Products without their affirmative consent.
On April 8, 2020 at 9:08 PM CST, I received an email from Discover telling me that they closed my credit account. I was confused and concerned. I was a Discover cardholder since 2008 and have never been late on a payment. On April 9, 2020 at 9:33 PM CST, I called the number listed on the email to find out exactly why my account was closed and to try to get the decision reversed based on my length of account and perfect payment history.
I spoke to a representative in Utah who told me that they closed my account due to non-use, which was the main factor. The last time I made a payment to pay my card off in full was September 2019, so it hadn't been used in 7 months. I pleaded with the representative and reminded them about my history with the bank and never missing a payment. The representative was apathetic and told me that they can't reverse the decision.
I explained that there have been several periods during the last 12 years where I have gone much longer without any card use and never had this happen before. The representative would only say that their non-usage periods change. At the end of the call, the representative said that I could re-apply. This made no sense to me because I already was approved and had the account for 12 years plus it would drop my score for unnecessarily going through the entire process again.
I have other credit cards with other companies and I have received notifications in advance about non-use and that I would need to use the card soon to avoid account closure. Discover should have done this, especially if the non-use period keeps changing. Discover has effectively wiped $15,300 worth of available credit which will tank my credit score for no good reason. We are in the middle of a pandemic and with the uncertainty of everything going, the last thing you want to do is close the account of a customer who was responsible with their credit and never missed a payment.
All I am asking for is that my credit account and line be restored as it shouldn't have been closed. I also want Discover to do the responsible thing and notify customers when they are approaching their arbitrary non-use time limit which would avoid all of this in the first place.
I am writing this to let Americans know how this company is abusing its customers. I lost my job and got behind on bills. I entered into debt management. Every other company that I owe is working with me and we are getting squared away, but this company, Discover... oh no.
They WANT to sue! If you are thinking about taking out a credit card with these folks, please don't! I even tried to work out a payment plan with them (hardship) plan, for just 84 dollars a month which I could hardly afford but was willing to do in order to stay out of court.
THEY OFFERED THIS PLAN for two years. Payment was sent and WELL...that was 4 weeks ago and they referred me to an attorney for lawsuit ANYWAY. They lied to me to get a little bit of money out of me, which they turned around and used to retain and attorney for the 8,300 I owe that they AGREED could be settled for 3200 dollars!!!!
They are LIARS!!! They just want to sue me. They do not care about Americans. They are using and abusing Americans. I won't go down though. I will expose them. Join me and pray for their downfall. They should NOT be in business.
What they are doing is straight up abuse. A toast to Karma, because they deserve every bit of what is coming for them!!!!!!
I am posting to inform everyone of your loss of rights under Binding Mandatory Arbitration or BMA clauses and how credit card companies use this to their advantage to exploit you.
Binding Mandatory Arbitration Clauses (called BMA clauses) aren't designed to help you or save you moneythey are designed to hurt you.
BMA clauses strip you of your rights. They are virtually always written to help the other partynot you.
BMA clauses are so bad that few consumers try to use them to solve a dispute. Instead, the consumer walks away from the disputeeven when the consumer has been terribly hurt. One study shows that in 50,000 arbitrations, consumers brought only fifty of those arbitrations. Companies brought the rest.
Most credit cards issued by national banks have BMA clauses. If your credit card has a BMA clause, transfer your balances to cards without these clauses and consider closing your account with the offending companies. Send a letter, such as the one below, explaining why when you close your account.
Should you close your credit card accounts with BMA Clauses? One of the most powerful tools consumers have is their pocketbook. If you have more than one credit card, why not move your balances to the credit card without a BMA clause and support the business that treats you fairly?
Here's the plan:
1. Make sure you have a credit card without a BMA clause. If you have a credit card from AARP, you are setAARP credit cards don't have BMA clauses. If you have a credit card from a credit union, you are probably okay. Most credit unions do not have BMA clauses. Some small banks don't have BMA clauses, either.
2. Make sure the interest rate on your good credit card is as low or lower than the interest rate on your bad card.
3. Contact your good credit card company, and make sure they will approve transferring your balance from the bad card to their card.
4. Then send the following letter to your bad credit card company.
Dear (name of business): __________________________________ Date: __________
Unless this account is not covered by any binding arbitration agreement, please close my account number (insert account number): _________________________________
I want my right to go to court if we have a dispute. Our tax dollars have already paid for a justice system and mandatory binding arbitration is unnecessary. Thank you.
Arbitration is an alternative method of resolving disputes in which two parties present their individual sides of a complaint to an arbitrator or panel of arbitrators. The arbitrator, who is supposed to be neutral, then weighs the facts and arguments of both parties and decides the dispute. Arbitration may be voluntary or mandatory.
What is voluntary arbitration?
In voluntary arbitration, both sides in the dispute voluntarily agree to submit their disagreement to arbitration after it arises and after they have an opportunity to investigate their best options for resolving their claim.
What is binding mandatory arbitration?
In binding mandatory arbitration, a company requires a consumer to agree to submit any dispute that may arise to binding arbitration prior to completing a transaction with the company. The consumer is required to waive their right to sue, to participate in a class action lawsuit, or to appeal.
Are these clauses easy to find in the paperwork?
Generally not! Some companies print them in boxes, and a few have you sign a separate sheet of paper which contains the clause. But many companies simply make the clauses an extra paragraph of fine print in their contracts.
Is Binding Mandatory Arbitration always the name of the clause?
Definitely not! Some companies call these clauses Dispute Resolution Mechanism and other equally hard-to-understand names.
What's wrong with arbitration?
Nothing, if its voluntary arbitration! In fact, voluntary arbitration can be a great thing in preventing lawsuits and alleviating backlogs in the judicial system. In fact, you always have the right to arbitrate. But you never want to give away the right to sue if arbitration does not work. Companies want you to give away that right.
Do companies use binding mandatory arbitration in their own disputes with other companies?
No, most refuse to use binding mandatory arbitration in their own business dealings. As a matter of fact, car dealers were so afraid of mandatory arbitration for their own disagreements that they spent millions lobbying Congressmen and Senators to pass a federal law that prohibits automobile manufacturers from requiring binding mandatory arbitration in disputes related to dealership franchise clauses. The law passed in 2002.
Why are so many consumer groups opposing mandatory arbitration in automotive transactions?
Many mandatory binding arbitration clauses are written to protect the dealer. Here are problems and dangers noted by consumer advocates.
Consumers are often unaware they've agreed to binding arbitration. Whether the mandatory binding arbitration agreement is tucked in a paragraph of fine print or provided as a separate form, dealerships often don't mention it until the consumer is ready to sign and take the new vehicle home. A few dealers may "forget" to mention the arbitration requirement at all. These tactics deprive consumers of their right to make an informed decision.
Binding mandatory arbitration severely limits consumer options for resolving a dispute. Before any problem arises, you lock yourself into only one optionbinding arbitrationfor resolving all future disputes or problems. The contract typically also names the arbitration company that must be used.
Binding mandatory arbitration clauses generally bind the consumernot the company. The way most mandatory arbitration clauses are written, the seller retains its rights to take any complaint to court while the consumer can only initiate arbitration.
Arbitration does not follow clear, well-established, consistent rules and procedures such as those required for litigation in the court system. For example, arbitrators aren't required to follow procedures that enable one side in a dispute to request information from the other (what the courts call "discovery"). The result is that consumers, who usually have limited resources, may have difficulty getting information needed to support their claims. In addition, nothing absolutely requires arbitrators to take the law and legal precedent into account in making their decisions although they are supposed to do so. Most decisions cannot be appealed, and there are generally no review bodies or other oversight to ensure that arbitrators follow fair procedure or the law.
The seller generally picks the arbitration company"the judge." In theory, both parties agree to the selection of a neutral, independent arbitrator. In reality, the seller designates the arbitration company in the contract. This situation can definitely affect the impartiality of the arbitrator. Studies show that any time one company depends on another company for a large percentage of their business livelihood, some systematic bias in favor of that company may develop.
Binding mandatory arbitration frequently costs more than taking a case to court. One of the benefits usually claimed for binding arbitration is that it costs less than litigation. Frequently this is not true. In many cases, for instance, a consumer may have to pay a large fee simply to initiate the arbitration process. This can deter a consumer from even bringing a complaint. Or on a small claim total fees for arbitration can easily exceed the amount you might be awarded if you win the dispute.
Do companies require mandatory binding arbitration even with cash purchases?
Yes.
Are there companies that don't require mandatory arbitration clauses?
Yes. There are plenty of good businesses that refuse to require mandatory binding arbitration. These are usually the companies with the fewest consumer complaints.
What can I do about the problem?
Don't deal with any companies that require a mandatory binding arbitration clause. Before spending time with the sellerwhether in person or onlineask the seller if they require a mandatory binding arbitration clause. If the seller does require an clause, tell the seller you won't buy from them and why.
If a seller requires that you sign a mandatory binding arbitration clause, refuse to sign it. Stick with your decision. Be prepared to leave without completing the purchase.
Feb. 22, 2005 When American consumers sign contracts for credit cards, bank loans, mortgages or telephone service language in the fine print often waives their right to employ the full extent of the law should the company violate the contract.
"I feel completely violated, and that's the only term that I can use to explain it," said one woman who bought a car and says she got a lemon. "Had I known that arbitration clause existed in the contract, I would not have signed it."
"If you did a public survey, you would find that 99 percent of consumers are totally surprised that there's small print in there that doesn't allow them to go to court," said Joan Claybrook, president of Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy organization.
The fine print of many contracts says consumers "waive the right to go to court" to resolve any disputes about a product or service. They are instead committed to binding arbitration.
The process started with the Federal Arbitration Act of 1925, which gave companies a quicker way to resolve disputes. Instead of a judge or jury handing down a decision, the companies agree to go before arbitrators, who are typically practicing attorneys. They decide the amount of the arbitration award, if any.
During the 1980s and '90s, several courts ruled that arbitration should apply to individuals, as well.
'A Take-It-or-Leave-It Contract'
Many consumer advocates say mandatory arbitration means the consumer loses a fundamental right.
"It's a take-it-or-leave-it contract," said Claybrook. "You either sign it or you don't get the job or the credit card or the bank account."
Binding arbitration is just that. Except in very rare cases, there is no appeal, and arbitrators don't have to explain their decisions.
The American Arbitration Association, the oldest group that conducts arbitrations, says the law is a practical one.
"An average consumer arbitration through our organization takes about four, 4 months. Typically in court, if you're not going through small claims court, you're talking about years," said Richard Naimark, senior vice president at the arbitration association. The association also says there are guidelines to ensure fair play. "If the process is properly balanced so it's really a level playing field, neither side has an advantage," Naimark said. "There will be times when either the business or the consumer or employee will feel uncomfortable because they are on the losing end." But Claybrook says the system is flawed.
"The process completely favors the corporation," she said. "The corporation does repeat business with the arbitration company and if the company routinely finds in favor of consumers or gives large awards to consumers, they don't get used again."
I have been on time with my payments to Discover CC. I have requested numerous times if my APR can be lowered since I am a good customer, and I ALWAYS hear "we are unable to lower your APR at this time." The reason being?! Who knows?! It isn't because I pay late, because I don't. I haven't missed a payment.
They keep it high because they can. I haven't used this CC since the beginning of the year. How are we supposed to be able to pay off balances when the APR charge is nearly as much as your monthly payment, which is over $200 a month?!
My monthly payment has been around $224, and the total in interest fees they take is approx $168!! I'm shelling out to these people over $200 a month and only a quarter of that...$56... is even touching my balance. All I'm asking is for a lower APR so my family has a chance to pay this debt off as I'm making faithful payments monthly. I think this is thievery and it should be stopped.
I am not seeking to get out of paying, I'm seeking a lower APR so I can actually pay them the debt I've created.
They are TERRIBLE. The customer service is amazingly incompetent and won't do THEIR job. My card was hacked last week by someone who wasn't me. They issued me a new card. Took them forever to transfer my information and my transactions over to the new account number. On a completely different transaction, I returned an item back to B&H Photo for $59.95, and B&H Photo refunded my credit for $50.16 back to my card with the old account number. Discovercard REFUSES to fix it and TRANSFER THAT CREDIT TO MY NEW ACCOUNT NUMBER! IT IS *THEIR* JOB!!! They refuse to do it. Either they can't do their job required of them to fix, or they WON'T. I've contacted the Better Business Bureau, Consumer Affairs, the Illinois Attorney General, and my attorney...
This is totally UNACCEPTABLE. I should NOT be getting the runaround from customer service! They just refuse to do what is THEIR JOB! Instead, they give me some bogus phone number for "FRAUD" when it's NOT EVEN THE PROBLEM I HAVE WITH THIS ONE TRANSACTION! I just want my credit of $50.16 transferred (moved over) to my new account number, so that I can use it and then GET RID OF DISCOVER! THEY ARE A CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE that ONLY CARES ABOUT LINING THEIR OWN POCKETS THAN HELPING THE CUSTOMER!!!!
See above-Discover Financial Services repeatedly solicited me to transfer balances from other credit cards. After I did so, still remaining below my credit limit, they reduced my credit limit and said my balance was too high.
A Discover It card was sent to me and through a Ponzi Scheme my credit card was billed 3500.00 and I received NO BENEFIT from some shady company by the name Positive Strategies whom is a partner with internet based income business located in Utah and has a parent company in New Jersey and operates many different internet based home business opportunities under dozens of business identities to hide their complaints from consumers.
This company charged my Discover card and there was an element of 'Willfull Non-Compliance' in connection with any services. After three months, I stopped making payments to discover because the charge is a fraud. After the fourth month, I was informed this company who charged my card is no longer in business.
Discover is relentless demanding payments on this card for the fraudulent charges disputed as 'Goods Don't Conform to Contract' under TILA section 170. A law office contacted me and became very harassing demanding I agree this is my debt, I instructed this lawyer to go after the people whom charged this card. No civil action was ever filed against me because Discover cannot meet the burden of proof and has no preponderence of evidence to actually have the right to sue me in court.
I disputed the credit card debt with all three credit reporting agencies (CRA) and Discover sent me a large pack of statements and a letter stating that a contract is formed because
A credit card was issued to me
Charges were put on this card
A payment was made on this account
Its clear to me that Discover DOES NOT HAVE A BINDING LOAN AGREEMENT required to sue me in court or collect on this account. Their lawyer was assigned to intimidate me into an agreement this debt was mine to form a binding agreement to collect on bad debt.
A few months ago, Northland Group Inc (a collection agency) contacted me to collect on this debt demanding 4,588.89 and this statement is on their presentment: Due to the age of your account, Discover Bank is not able to file suit against you but if you take specific action such as making a written promise to pay, the time for filing a suit will be reset. We would like to work with you to resolve your account balance.
Since the debt is not enforceable per the foregoing information printed on a collection notice. I just responded with a Do Not Contact Letter including information the debt is disputed and it has previously been communicated to Discover and their attorney 'Presentment of this alleged debt is dishonored' including the fact 'Goods Don't Conform to Contract' and payment of any such goods are withheld under TILA § 170(a)
There is no evidence ever sent to me to believe Discover has a binding loan agreement to demand payment from me and I just sent a letter demanding the INSTRUMENT of INDEBTNESS in its original form in exchange for payment in full.
All three CRA bureaus report the credit card debt in question is verified by Discover and has not provided me with a copy of any binding contractual agreement as required by sections 609, 611 and 617 protections FCRA
The CRA is paid by lenders to report financial information and its grossly unfair for the CRA to accept questionable materials as accurate reporting information and not follow the law resulting in huge profits.
Discover has reported my discover card had charges as high as 8,031.66 and after some chargebacks from government agencies a disputed balance of 4,588 remains active on my credit report as DEROGATORY. This card was never used to generate any personal debt and is the result of credit card fraud.
A while back I purchased a steel building over the phone with my Discover Card. I purchased in September of 16 with a delivery date estimated at 12/2016 and a deposit of $6500.00. The building was supposed to be a home purchase and there were to be modifications , window placement , doors etc. done before the plans were drawn up.
Out of nowhere a set of plans was mailed to me on behalf of the merchant that I had not authorized and did not match the picture of what I purchased. THese were boiler plate drawings with no doors or windows specified.
I called Discover asking about my dispute window in November and was told I did not need to rush as I hade up to a year to dispute. I tried talking with the merchant as I was getting very suspicious of their practices and they would not refund me despite the fact I did not authorize thes drawings.
Finally I disputed the charge in January due to the fact that I never authorized the work and what was sent was not the same as what was contracted for. Discover denied my claim saying that the contract was an engineering deposit and that the services were rendered.
I reiterated that there was no authorization for the services, and that engineering was just a portion of the whole buidling and certainly would not amount to anything over $1000.00 The merchant still has not provided any proof of an invoice showing the cost of the engineering that was done by a third party nor did the merchant provide anything that I authorized this work to be done.
I filed with the CFPB as well and Discover still referenced the original contract and made no asknowledgement of the fact that the product was not delivered as described nor was it authorized to go to engineering in the first place.
I have been a long time discover customer and I am flabbergasted with their lack of support. I am out 6500.00 and all I have to show for it is a PDF of some drawings that cannot be used because they don't meet code and the house has no windows or doors.
As will happen from time to time, paydays will fall inconveniently. I have/had a payment due on the 14th, just several days from my payday. With some unexpected expenses hitting me, I called them and asked about them possibly holding off for a few days until I was secure about having good money in my account before sending them a payment.
I was told they can't--more factually won't--wait a couple of days, and that if I submitted a late payment, I could always call and ask for the late fee to be removed, and you know d**n well they won't do that. In asking to extend it a couple of days, they said that I could reset my payment date for a later date for future payments.
Stupid!! Not what I asked! They also said they would have to classify it as a "hardship" for me to qualify for holding off on it. Excuse me, morons at lovely Discover...you do NOT decide what a money hardship is for me. And it wouldn't send you into financial ruin to wait a few days until I knew I had secure funds (extra padding) in my bank account.
The bottom line is ultimately they have no good reason to do this, and "guidelines" don't mean anything if you can't justify them, it doesn't matter how big you think your company is. I guess grace periods don't mean anything anymore? It's all about lining the company's pockets no matter what it does to the customer.
I only have this card for emergencies, and if it wasn't for that, I would have never applied. Here's to the almighty profit margin huh, Discover. Thanks for absolutely nothing!!
In April, 2016 Discover Card called my number serveral times claiming to alert me to identity theft. I also received a letter dated April 18, 2016 stating that Federal Law requires them to verify and record all informtion that identifies each person who applies for credit. I did not apply for credit from Discover Card. They letter required me to call their Fraud Dept and suggested I notifiy the three credit agencies.
I called and asked for a copy of the application and I was told I had to "prove" who I was by sending certain documents, including a police report of identy theft. All these I did. I also sent a letter dated May 15, 2016. Still I did not receive the copy. I began calling asking for the report. I was told that it was "in archives". I asked why it would be in archives if we were currently working on it. I was told it would only take anywhere from 24 hours to two weeks to bring the document out of archives and send iit to me. I called in may, June, July and talked to various indivuals, all of whom told me the document was in archives and they would bring it out and send me a copy.
On 8/11/2016 I spoke with a supervisor, Josh Blanchfield who once again told me the application was "in archives". I asked how that could be since I had been calling for two months. He said he would take care of it. But no. Icalled on 8/16, and was told one day. I call on 8/17, 9/12 and talked to George in Utah, 9/12 talked to Erin and finally was transferred to the"security department" where I talked to Fran, and was told that they "never received the documents."
This makes me very concerned. Discover Card initiated the call and the letter and the fraud alert. Yet, its representatives have consistently given me the proverbial "run around." I believe that someone withing the organization is purpetrating this scam, but I doubt that I will ever get to the bottom of this. I can,of course , file a complaint with the FCC, and probably will. I do not believe that in the entire nation I am the only person who has encountered this.
Discover Financial Services Reviews
1/19/2023 I purchased an item online and used my Discover card, thinking they protect you if there is a problem. The item came and it did not work. I sent the item back following the instructions. After disputing the item I was told by Jessica in Delaware that the reason the dispute was not honored was due to company saying I did not fill out the warranty. After pain staking research and emails, phone calls. I found that the company in question had on their website first page and on the warranty page that they were ASE Certified Mechanics. Well come to find out that was a lie. The individual who performed the check on the engine was not certified infact he was the junk yard that sold the engine to Remanns Used Auto Parts (they go by tons of names). They also sent a letter that showed there was a checkmark indicating that I checked the box but in small print it said "Not the customers actual mark".
After sending Discover all this information from emails from employees etc. They refused to listen infact second Supervisor, Stephanie from Utah, couldn't rasp the information that I had uploaded on their website, infact she said she read it all but could not talk intelligentially about the information that I had provided.
Discover stand by fraudlent vendors/merchants over their credit card customer. I am trying to get a lawyer and I will hopeful take Remann to court and add Discover along with the lawsuit.
Do not use Discover and please share this to everyone you know. With much gratitude.
I opened up a credit card account with Discover Card in the beginning of 2017. My credit line was approved $10,000.00 U.S.D.. I paid on time, paid the statement amount, and was never late. During this time from 2017 to 2018, I only charged no more than $350.00 and paid off the card two times. Never went over the limit.
Obviously, I proved that I was an on time paying client with a pattern of excellent payment history for close to a year. I received my statement for April 2018 and my credit line was reduced to $500.00 without ANY notification and was given lies and excuses as to why they reduced my credit line in written letter format by Discover-dispicable, disgusting!!! I called them immediately and demanded that they increase the credit line to $10,000.00 as agreed upon. Plus, the credit analyst(s) violated TILA (Truth In Lending Act) and COVERED IT UP by back dating a letter that was not sent on they date they claimed it was sent. That's a cover-up CRIME, Discover Card!!! That's breach of verbal contract, fraud, THEFT, and lying by ommission on Discover's Credit Analyst(s) and some other elements within Discover's management. This includes blatant violation of TILA on Discover's part ENTIRELY-100 PERCENT.
They increased my credit line to $1,500.00 after arguing my case. I still DEMAND that my credit line to be increased to $15,000.00 U.S.D. IMMEDIATELY due to ALL of this wrong-doing on Discovers' part!!! I want ALL the late fees waived, credit reports corrected, and ALL credit points FULLY restored. Discover Card will NOT assist those financially,like myself, who have been fleeing the wildfires in SD and NE since August 2018 to current. It's dispicable, financial services like this from Discover Card Services that ought to make people's blood boil.
It ought to make people's blood boil in regards to not helping those fleeing the massive wildfires in the midwest since 2018. These Discover Card, credit analysts know exactly what they did and it was deliberately done on purpose!!!! These stupid, dumb, idiot credit analyst(s) followed immoral orders from their higher chain of command. They have ZERO spine to say NO to cutting off credit lines on excellent clients like myself who are fleeing the massive wildfires since 2018 and have ZERO moral compasses. GET AS OFFENDED AS YOU LIKE-DISCOVER CARD SERVICES!!! How's that for the inconvenient TRUTH?!!! I am NOT required to be nice, prim, and proper about this situation at ALL!!! THEY DON'T DESERVE TO TRUSTED AT ALL AT THIS POINT BECAUSE THEIR PATTERN OF CONDUCT is rather OBVIOUS. They are helping to create the Hunger Games Society(a documentary NOT a MOVIE) in increments and that pattern is so OBVIOUS. THEY will not get any more payments until they admit to their wrong doing. They correct all the above 100 percent as stated and increase my credit line as requested with 0.1 percent interest rate IMMEDIATELY using the same card on file. This will include extremely low repayment plan of $5.00 per month depending on the wildfires and spot fires going on to include other legitimate, accurate, causal factors beyond my control!!! THEY HAVE TO PROVE that they are helping wildfire refugees and are serious about doing so instead of assisting with making wildfire refugees lives extremely difficult financially.
DISCOVER CARD WILL NOT PUT ME IN DEBT using victim shaming and blaming and COVER IT UP!!!! DISCOVER WILL NOT take advantage of on-time paying clients with excellent pay histories such as myself!!!! PLUS, THEY HAVE TO SIGN A WRITTEN CONTRACT.-PERIOD PLUS, THEY HAVE take A LIE DETECTOR test and take several, morality tests. I have passed two lie detector tests and 2-3 morality tests. I have already sent them 1-2 letters regarding the massive wildfires, extreme, dangerous, high crime rates of HOT SPRINGS,SD and RAPID CITY,SD as to the REAL, main CAUSAL FACTORS affecting my ability to repay since April 2021 to current. I had to move from these locations, due to these situations that are beyond MY CONTROL!!!
Discover Card Services will NEVER receive CURES for stroke, TBI, brain injury, and bone regeneration until my demands stated above ARE MET IMMEDIATELY AND IN IT'S FULL ENTIRETY!!! THEY HAVE TO PROVE THAT THEY ARE SERIOUS about helping those fleeing ECOCIDE, wildfires, spotfires, and towns mentioned with high, extreme crime rates by significantly increasing my credit lines. AND-THEY ARE SERIOUS ABOUT RESTORING THEIR REPUTATION!!! NOT MINE!!!!!!!! I am NOT going to remove this!!!!-PERIOD!!!
They contunally year after year deny credit limit increases depsite on time payments and no late payments and total responsible useage. They continue to supply a bogus reason for denials and I feel that they do this deliberately due to other factors such as discrimination and credit profiling. This company has to be known for it's ill credit practices it demonstrates to good credit paying people. They should be ashame!
`Discover Financial Services is a company that has been around for decades before it made a website. When I opened accounts at Discover, their website was functional. Now it is not. I must close my accounts at Discover because I am unable to sign into my dashboard successfully without any issues.
Every time I sign in ... EVERY time ... It gets intercepted with a SMARTAUTH.
Calling Discover by Telephone requires VOICE ONLY not any NUMBERS to press to select a department. Despite all their telephone numbers, they do not actually have a direct connection to any departments. And of course there are not any Extensions. I wait for not very long. However, it adds up after talking with several people lying or just simply doing what ever they can to not solve the problems.
I am appalled that they tell me lies about a faulty automated system is For My Security. I do not need to go through the verification, especially EVERY time. They have the nerves to tell me to deal with it as it is basically smarter than they are and clearly knows best, as if I ought to be loyal and worship an Artificial Intelligence as if it was a Deity.
It is also a problem that people are not Boycotting companies such as Discover. And there are also companies WORSE. One customer service person told me that it should not be necessary to be intercepted by SMARTAUTH every time I attempt to sign in to my Dashboard and tried to assist me with the problems. The rest did not.
One person denied the existence of their Web Support Department. Indeed. They do not seem to do much aside from making things bad and making bad problems worse. And of course there is not any Support Ticket Number nor Reference Number.
I signed in with their App successfully which is not any better. The Website Dashboard has the ability to save Statements with a proper name. Example: Discoverbank-Statement-YYYYMMDD-XXXX This is very important as I have Three accounts with them: Credit, Checking, and Savings. With the App it saves statements as MONTH YYYY
I doubt that I can simply avoid the Dashboard as I do not want to tell Artificial Intelligences I am not one of them. Their App also has plenty of different problems. There are Banks and Financial Services that are much worse than Discover. I was not expecting this very low quality from Discover and am insulted by what they tried to tell me.
The below is taken from Class Action Lawsuit that Discovery Settled in regards to Payment Protection, Identity Theft Protection, Wallet Protection that lays out in details the details of what transpired in my report.
I. INTRODUCTION
1. Defendants DFS Services LLC and Discover Bank are referred to collectively in this complaint as “Discover” unless otherwise specified.
2. This is a class action lawsuit brought by, and on behalf of, Discover credit card customers throughout the country who were enrolled in the Defendants’ “Payment Protection
Plan,” (formerly known as “Account Guard”) (hereinafter referred to as “Payment Protection” or “DPP”), Identity Theft Protection (formerly known as “Profile Protect”) (hereinafter referred to as “Identity Theft Protection” or “ITP”), Wallet Protection (formerly known as “The Register”) (hereinafter referred to as “Wallet Protection” or “WP”) and Credit Score Tracker (hereinafter referred to as “Credit Score Tracker” or “CST”) products. (collectively referred to herein as the “Products”).
3. The proposed class representatives bring claims against Discover under state deceptive trade practices laws and the federal Truth in Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq., for claims for breach of contract and unjust enrichment, and seeking declaratory and injunctive relief. These claims arise from Discover’s deceptive marketing practices and business practices in connection with the marketing, sale, and claims practices associated with the Discover products identified in the preceding paragraph.
4. Discover is one of the nation's largest credit card issuers. Discover earns nearly $300 million in annual revenue from the sale of several optional fee-based financial products. Discover markets these add-on products as ways for consumers to protect themselves from fraudulent or unauthorized charges or to enhance their financial security against such hazards or hardships like job loss or sickness, identity theft, lost wallets, or low credit scores. Yet Discover often enrolls consumers in these products based on highly deceptive and misleading telemarketing calls, even charging some consumers for the products without the consumer’s consent or understanding that their credit card will be charged for these products. Discover is in a position to do this because, unlike a typical telemarketer, it is the consumer's credit card company and already has their credit card number and detailed confidential information about its customers.
II. PARTIES
5. Defendant DFS Services LLC is a limited liability company duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, having a principal place of business in the State of Illinois. Because limited liability companies are deemed citizens of the State where they have their principal place of business (Illinois), the State under whose laws it is organized (Delaware), and every state of which a member is a citizen (Delaware and Illinois), Defendant DFS Services LLC is a citizen of the States of Delaware and Illinois.
6. Defendant Discover Bank is a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, having a principal place of business in the State of Delaware.
7. At all times herein mentioned, Defendants, and each of them, were the agents, principals, employees, servants, partners, joint venturers, and representatives of each other. In doing the acts hereinafter alleged, they each were acting within the scope and course of their authority as such agents, principals, employees, servants, partners, joint venturers, and representatives, and were acting with the permission and consent of the other co-Defendants.
8. Plaintiffs are represented by proposed class representatives who purchased one or more of the identified Discover products (Payment Protection Plan, Identity Theft Protection, Wallet Protection and Credit Score Tracker). A statement of facts for each proposed class representative is set out in detail below.
III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
9. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331 because this action arises under the Constitution or laws of the United States and §1332(d)(2) because the matter in controversy exceeds $5,000,000, exclusive of interest and costs, this is a class action in which at least one member of the Plaintiff class is a citizen of a State different from at least one
Defendant, and the proposed Classes are composed of thousands of members throughout the United States.
10. Venue is proper before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, as this Court is the transferee court for all actions consolidated into MDL 2217 by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation’s order creating this multidistrict litigation on February 27, 2011. Venue is also proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 inasmuch Defendants do business in this District, a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claims occurred within the district in which this Court sits, and a portion of the proposed class resides in it.
11. To the extent there is any contractual or other impediment to pursuit of these claims on a class action basis, Plaintiffs specifically allege, and will prove, if necessary, that any bar to class action proceedings is unconscionable, unfair and against public policy.
IV. STATEMENT OF FACTS
12. Discover markets several purportedly optional fee-based products to its Cardholders. One such product is the “Payment Protection Plan.” These products generate substantial revenue for Discover. Discover sells at least four optional financial products for a monthly fee. Discover touts all four optional fee-based plans as ways for consumers to increase their financial security, whether by protecting the customer from fraud or unauthorized charges, or insuring them against a loss of income. These products are currently called the "Payment Protection Plan," "Identity Theft Protection," "Wallet Protection," and "Credit Score Tracker" (the "Plans"). Discover charges $0.89 for every $100 of outstanding balance on the cardholder's account each month for Payment Protection; $12.99 per month for Identity Theft Protection; $2.99 per month for Wallet Protection; and $7.99 per month for Credit Score Tracker.
13. Annualized, a consumer with a $5,000 credit card balance each month would be charged $534 for the Payment Protection Plan. Furthermore, Identity Theft Protection costs $155.88 per year; Wallet Protection costs $35.88 per year; and Credit Score Tracker costs $95.88 per year. Cardholders who are enrolled in these plans do not receive a separate invoice for these monthly fees. Instead, Discover charges the fee directly to the consumer's Discover credit card each month.
a. Payment Protection - Deceptive Marketing Claims
14. The Payment Protection Plan purports to temporarily suspend the cardholder's obligation to make regular monthly payments on their Discover card in the event of certain qualifying events. The qualifying events include involuntary unemployment, disability, hospitalization or natural disasters. If a cardholder maintains an outstanding balance on their credit card experiences a qualifying event and otherwise meets the requirements of the plan's terms and conditions, they may qualify for a temporary suspension of their monthly payment obligations.
15. The Payment Protection Plan is similar to credit insurance in the sense that it purports to protect the borrower from defaulting if an unanticipated event disrupts the borrower's source of income. Unlike credit insurance, however, the debt suspension portion of Payment Protection does not actually make monthly payments as they come due each month. Instead, Payment Protection only suspends the borrower's obligation to make monthly payments temporarily.
16. These types of plans have been subject to criticism from consumer advocates on several fronts. For example, it may not be disclosed to consumers that under the terms and conditions of the plan, the cardholder may not be permitted to use their credit card while they have invoked the debt suspension benefits -- even though the qualifying events that trigger the debt suspension benefit, such as unemployment, may be when the cardholder needs their credit card the most. Under Discover's Payment Protection Plan, a cardholder cannot use the card when monthly payments are suspended due to a hardship.
17. Critics also point out that debt suspension agreements are sometimes marketed to elderly consumers, for whom material benefits of the Plan may be of little or no value. The main benefit of debt suspension plans is that they suspend payment obligations when the borrower's income stream is lost due to unemployment, disability or natural disaster; elderly retired persons rely on savings and fixed income to survive, rather than normal income from employment, so they could rarely benefit from Discover’s unemployment or disability benefits.
18. Unlike credit insurance, Payment Protection plans are generally not regulated by state insurance regulators. With credit insurance, state insurance regulators at least set basic minimum terms and conditions, and also are required to regulate premiums to insure that costs are reasonable in relation to the benefits of the product. By contrast, payment protection plans are generally unregulated as to terms, conditions, and fees, making the plans highly profitable for Discover.
19. Discover markets and sells its “Payment Protection” product (“Payment Protection”) as a product that will provide benefits to Cardholders if certain events occur, such as unemployment or disability. Discover charges the Cardholders $.89 per hundred dollars of their monthly account ending balance, and in return tells the cardholder that it will defer minimum payments on account balances for a period of time when the cardholder is unemployed or disabled. These promises are illusory.
20. Discover sells Payment Protection through misleading statements, incomplete statements and misrepresentations. The product is sold through print ads and direct telemarketing to existing Cardholders who are generally in the “subprime” credit category.
21. Discover manipulates the Payment Protection sales process by either 1) enrolling Cardholders in Payment Protection without advance notice or consent by the cardholder, or 2) misrepresenting to Cardholders that Payment Protection will “Preserve your lifestyle – and protect your Discover Card payment history – when life’s events disrupts your finances” by putting their account on hold during the benefit period.
22. At the time of sale, Discover does not ask the cardholder any qualifying questions
to determine if the cardholder is eligible for Payment Protection benefits, or to determine if the cardholder will ever be eligible for Payment Protection benefits. There is a lengthy list of exclusions or grounds for denial of benefits that are not revealed to the cardholder until the customer submits a claim for benefits, when Discover grants itself ultimate and unchallengeable discretionary power to deny benefits if it “determines that [the cardholder] do[es] not qualify for benefits for any reason.” (emphasis added). Discover fails to disclose the terms of Payment Protection until after the consumer accepts or is charged for the product.
23. The Payment Protection claims process is so difficult, onerous and discretionary that, upon information and belief—based on The Impact of Debt Cancellation Contracts on State Insurance Regulation, A Report to the FIRST By the Center for Economic Justice dated July 2003—only 3-5% of premiums paid by Cardholders are ever paid out as benefits. Cardholders who are denied benefits do not receive refunds of premiums paid. They have therefore paid Discover for a product that is entirely worthless to them. Cardholders are rarely able to overcome the multiple bureaucratic hurdles and incomprehensible and contradictory preconditions that are confusing and that were not disclosed to the cardholder at the time of sale (or imposition of charges). When Discover’s discretionary process results in the ultimate denial of claims, there is no objective process for a cardholder to appeal Discover’s decision.
24. Payment Protection is a “mass” marketed product, that is, the marketing,
management and claims handling processes are applied in a uniform manner so that all members of the proposed class were marketed in a virtually identical manner and members of the class received standardized responses from Discover in response to claims for benefits.
25. Discover’s sales materials tell Cardholders that they will give Cardholders “the time [they] need to get back on your feet” because “[t]here are no payments, no periodic finance charges, no late fees, no over limit fees, and no Payment Protection fees” when a triggering event, such as unemployment or disability occurs. Discover, in its marketing material, tells Cardholders that, should the need arise, “One call puts Payment Protection to work...When you need us, simply call... and a thoughtful, knowledgeable Payment Protection specialist will take the time to activate your benefits.” Discover’s statements are misleading because thousands of Cardholders had a similar experience to the Plaintiffs here, such as Devavani Conroy, a woman who lost her job and asked for benefit payments or coverage under the Program, and who was not given “time to get back on [her] feet”, but instead was denied “Payment Protection” coverage despite having paid for it.
26. In order to increase profits, Discover manipulates the claims payment process in its favor by limiting the chances of having to honor or pay Payment Protection claims. Discover relies upon a deceptive practice known as “post claims underwriting” to accomplish this strategy. This is the practice of asking few or no questions of the cardholder at the time of sale to determine if the customer is likely to qualify for benefits should the need arise. When the customer attempts to use the “benefits” of Payment Protection, Discover denies the benefits for reasons that were not disclosed at the time of sale. For example, numerous retired senior citizens are charged for Payment Protection even though they are excluded from ever receiving unemployment benefits. 27. As a result of Discover’s deceptive and unfair marketing schemes and claims practices, Plaintiffs and class members purchase a product that is virtually worthless to them, and are charged excessively for the product even if one assumes that product has some value to the cardholder. The ratio of premiums charged is excessive when compared to the actual value of claims paid.
b. Defendants’ False Advertising Relating to Pricing of the Plan
28. The marketing materials and telephonic solicitations offering the Plan mislead consumers to believe that the fee associated with the Plan is assessed as “89¢ per every $100.00 of your total Discover Card account balance at the end of each monthly billing period in which you're enrolled in Payment Protection.” In reality, the fee is not incremental – as suggested by Discover’s marketing materials – but a percentage fee of 0.89% of their monthly ending balance.
29. Thus, according to the information presented through the marketing of the plan, if a Card Member’s total account balance at the end of a billing period in which he/she is enrolled in the Plan is $100.00, Discover may contractually charge a fee of 89¢.
30. Such marketing and advertising lead Card Members to believe that if their total Discover Card account balance at the end of a billing period in which he/she is enrolled in the Plan reached the next $100.00 increment, i.e., $200.00; Discover may contractually charge a fee of $1.78.
31. Such marketing and advertising further lead the Card Members to believe that if their total Discover® Card account balance at the end of a billing period in which he/she is enrolled in the Plan is $110.00 (i.e., more than $100.00, but less than the next $100.00 increment of $200.00), Discover may only contractually charge a fee of 89¢ because the next $100.00 increment has not yet been reached.
32. In contrast with the misinformation provided through the marketing and
advertising of the Plan, Defendants actually charge .0089 of the Card Member’s total Discover card account balance at the end of each a billing period in which the Card Member is enrolled in the Plan.
33. Therefore, when a Card Member carries a balance of $110.00 on the statement closing date while he/she is enrolled in the Plan, Defendants’ charges a fee of 97.9¢ (i.e., .0089 x $110.00), as opposed to the 89¢ as advertised.
34. Additionally, the Plan creates an “endless cycle” whereby the resulting fees are exacerbated and compounded as a result of the interest that accrues when Card Members do not pay their account balances off in full.
35. Furthermore, the fees associated with the Plan cause many Card Members to exceed their credit limits, resulting in additional excessive fees and penalties.
c. Payment Protection - Slamming Claims
36. Discover enrolls far more Cardholders through telemarketing than through the mail or online, the latter two of which require an affirmative act by the consumer to enroll, such as initialing their monthly statement in the designated place, authorizing enrollment, and mailing it back to Discover.
37. Most of Discover's Cardholders are enrolled in the Products through Discover's aggressive and deceptive telemarketing efforts and card activation calls. Some of these calls are made internally by Discover, and others are made by telemarketing firms that Discover hires.
38. In addition to Discover's financial motive to enroll as many of its customers as possible into its highly lucrative fee-based products, individual Discover telemarketers are incentivized to enroll as many Cardholders as possible, either because their compensation is commission-based or because their performance is otherwise compensated on the number of Cardholders they enroll.
39. Discover's telemarketing scripts attempt to lull the cardholder into believing they are receiving a courtesy call from Discover rather than a sales call. Discover telemarketers are instructed to tell family members who answer the phone that it is just a "courtesy call" rather than disclose that it is in fact a sales call.
40. After reading product descriptions and disclosures, if the telemarketer can elicit some affirmative response from the cardholder, such as “ok” or “'yes” after the “disclosure,” the telemarketer treats the affirmative response as the cardholder's agreement to enroll in the plan, regardless of whether the consumer understands that they are supposedly agreeing to purchase a product and that their credit card will be charged.
41. Discover's telemarketers employ numerous deceptive tactics to elicit an affirmative response from the cardholder without the cardholder actually understanding that they are supposedly agreeing to purchase an optional product for a monthly fee, thereby tricking some consumers into unknowingly signing up for the plans. One common tactic is for the telemarketer to selectively read, or substantially alter the text of the “disclosure” in an effort to make the “disclosure” sound like incomprehensible legalese and to hide the fact that a sale is taking place. In a traditional telemarketing call, the consumer must read their credit card number to the telemarketer in order to purchase a product. Here the telemarketer is the credit card company. As a result, Discover can post charges on a consumers' account even when there has been no clear and knowing consent given by the consumer.
42. Some of Discover's telemarketers read the script so quickly that Cardholders cannot understand the text or do not understand they are allegedly being sold a product. The telemarketer then says to the cardholder “Ok, Ms. Smith?” as if the telemarketer is wrapping up the call. Some Cardholders reflexively respond “Ok,” not to indicate their consent to purchase a product but to end the phone call, which they still believe is a courtesy call regarding the benefits of the Discover card. Discover later relies on this “affirmative response” as “proof” that the cardholder knowingly agreed to purchase the plan.
43. In addition to deceptively inducing Cardholders to say “yes” or “ok” during the call, Discover enrolls some Cardholders who did not give an affirmative response.
44. Sometimes the telemarketer's deceptive tactics fail and the cardholder tells the telemarketer he or she is not interested. Undeterred, Discover's telemarketers sometimes assure these Cardholders that Discover is simply going to send the cardholder a "packet of information" about the plan. When these skeptical Cardholders state that it is “ok” for Discover to send them information about the plan to look over, the telemarketer treats this affirmative response as the cardholder's authorization for paid enrollment, even though the consumers do not believe they have agreed to purchase anything.
45. When Cardholders later contact Discover to complain that they have been enrolled without their authorization, Discover purports to review the partial recordings of their conversations with the telemarketers. Discover sometimes concludes that the cardholder gave their authorization, even when the cardholder never actually states that he or she agrees to be enrolled in the paid plan. Discover routinely refuses to reimburse Cardholders the amounts that have been billed to their Discover card for the plan, even when Cardholders are adamant that they only gave approval to have information about the plan sent to them, not for enrollment.
46. Cardholders who receive the packet sometimes disregard it because they may assume that the packet is just another piece of junk mail from a credit card company. In addition to its deceptive outbound telemarketing practices, Discover enrolls some Cardholders in the plans without their knowledge during the card activation process. When a new Discover cardholder receives their credit card in the mail, the card has not been activated. Instead, the cardholder must call Discover from their home phone number to activate their card. Discover may also issue new cards to existing Cardholders which require the cardholder to call in order to activate.
47. Discover routinely transfers card holders calling to activate their card to a live operator. At some point during these activation calls, the Discover representative turns on a recording device and says to the consumer “I need to record your enrollment.” The representative then reads to the cardholder one of the “disclosures” like those discussed above. Cardholders who are calling to activate a credit card are particularly susceptible to believing that the “disclosure” is some legal text that must be read to the cardholder, rather than an alleged contractual agreement to purchase an optional paid product. Given all the disclosures and fine print that consumers receive when they open a new credit card account, reading the disclosure to Cardholders in the card activation context can mislead Cardholders about the purpose of the disclosure. Accordingly, many Cardholders who receive the disclosure during the card activation process and reply “ok” have no idea that they have supposedly purchased some optional product.
48. Discover experiences high cancellation rates for these products, from which it may be inferred that the customers did not agree to buy the products at the time of sale.
49. Many Cardholders have no idea they are enrolled in a plan and do not notice or appreciate the meaning of the line-item charge for the plan that Discover bills to their Discover account each month. Some Cardholders pay this inconspicuous charge month after month for many months before they become aware of the purpose of the charge.
d. Identity Theft Protection, Credit Score Tracker and Wallet Protection - Deceptive Marketing Claims
50. Discover also deceptively enrolls its customers in the Credit Score Tracker, Identity Theft Protection, and Wallet Protection products. With Discover's Credit Score Tracker, the cardholder is given a copy of their Experian credit report. (Experian is one of the three major credit reporting agencies.) In addition, enrollees are given access to tools that allow them to track their credit score on a daily basis and to receive e-mail alerts if there are changes to their credit score. A main selling point Discover uses to market this plan is the Experian credit report consumers receive. Discover charges enrollees an additional $19.99 (in addition to the monthly fee) if they want credit reports from the other major credit reporting agencies. Experian and the two other major credit reporting agencies, however, are required by federal law to provide consumers one free credit report each year. Discover charges the Cardholders’ accounts $7.99 per month for this product.
51. Discover's Identity Theft Protection plan purports to monitor the enrollee's credit score for indicia of identity theft and will alert the enrollee if something suspicious happens to their credit score. Discover enrolls its customers into this plan without their knowledge or consent and fails to withdraw customers from the plan upon request in order to continue billing them for the product. Discover charges the Cardholders’ accounts $12.99 per month for this product. This product was previously called “Profile Protect.”
52. Under Discover's Wallet Protection plan, if the enrollee's wallet is lost or stolen, Discover will contact the issuers of the enrollee's credit cards to cancel the card. In addition, Discover represents that it will monitor a customer’s credit for 90 days after their wallet is lost or stolen and wire the customer up to $1,000 in emergency cash. Discover enrolls Cardholders in this plan without their meaningful, knowing authorization and charges the Cardholders’ credit cards $2.99 per month. This product was previously called “The Register.”
53. Discover employs aggressive and deceptive telemarketing, as alleged in the preceding paragraphs of this complaint, with respect to each of these Products, and enrolls customers in these Products without their affirmative consent.
On April 8, 2020 at 9:08 PM CST, I received an email from Discover telling me that they closed my credit account. I was confused and concerned. I was a Discover cardholder since 2008 and have never been late on a payment. On April 9, 2020 at 9:33 PM CST, I called the number listed on the email to find out exactly why my account was closed and to try to get the decision reversed based on my length of account and perfect payment history.
I spoke to a representative in Utah who told me that they closed my account due to non-use, which was the main factor. The last time I made a payment to pay my card off in full was September 2019, so it hadn't been used in 7 months. I pleaded with the representative and reminded them about my history with the bank and never missing a payment. The representative was apathetic and told me that they can't reverse the decision.
I explained that there have been several periods during the last 12 years where I have gone much longer without any card use and never had this happen before. The representative would only say that their non-usage periods change. At the end of the call, the representative said that I could re-apply. This made no sense to me because I already was approved and had the account for 12 years plus it would drop my score for unnecessarily going through the entire process again.
I have other credit cards with other companies and I have received notifications in advance about non-use and that I would need to use the card soon to avoid account closure. Discover should have done this, especially if the non-use period keeps changing. Discover has effectively wiped $15,300 worth of available credit which will tank my credit score for no good reason. We are in the middle of a pandemic and with the uncertainty of everything going, the last thing you want to do is close the account of a customer who was responsible with their credit and never missed a payment.
All I am asking for is that my credit account and line be restored as it shouldn't have been closed. I also want Discover to do the responsible thing and notify customers when they are approaching their arbitrary non-use time limit which would avoid all of this in the first place.
I am writing this to let Americans know how this company is abusing its customers. I lost my job and got behind on bills. I entered into debt management. Every other company that I owe is working with me and we are getting squared away, but this company, Discover... oh no.
They WANT to sue! If you are thinking about taking out a credit card with these folks, please don't! I even tried to work out a payment plan with them (hardship) plan, for just 84 dollars a month which I could hardly afford but was willing to do in order to stay out of court.
THEY OFFERED THIS PLAN for two years. Payment was sent and WELL...that was 4 weeks ago and they referred me to an attorney for lawsuit ANYWAY. They lied to me to get a little bit of money out of me, which they turned around and used to retain and attorney for the 8,300 I owe that they AGREED could be settled for 3200 dollars!!!!
They are LIARS!!! They just want to sue me. They do not care about Americans. They are using and abusing Americans. I won't go down though. I will expose them. Join me and pray for their downfall. They should NOT be in business.
What they are doing is straight up abuse. A toast to Karma, because they deserve every bit of what is coming for them!!!!!!
I am posting to inform everyone of your loss of rights under Binding Mandatory Arbitration or BMA clauses and how credit card companies use this to their advantage to exploit you.
Binding Mandatory Arbitration Clauses (called BMA clauses) aren't designed to help you or save you moneythey are designed to hurt you.
BMA clauses strip you of your rights. They are virtually always written to help the other partynot you.
BMA clauses are so bad that few consumers try to use them to solve a dispute. Instead, the consumer walks away from the disputeeven when the consumer has been terribly hurt. One study shows that in 50,000 arbitrations, consumers brought only fifty of those arbitrations. Companies brought the rest.
Most credit cards issued by national banks have BMA clauses. If your credit card has a BMA clause, transfer your balances to cards without these clauses and consider closing your account with the offending companies. Send a letter, such as the one below, explaining why when you close your account.
Should you close your credit card accounts with BMA Clauses? One of the most powerful tools consumers have is their pocketbook. If you have more than one credit card, why not move your balances to the credit card without a BMA clause and support the business that treats you fairly?
Here's the plan:
1. Make sure you have a credit card without a BMA clause. If you have a credit card from AARP, you are setAARP credit cards don't have BMA clauses. If you have a credit card from a credit union, you are probably okay. Most credit unions do not have BMA clauses. Some small banks don't have BMA clauses, either.
2. Make sure the interest rate on your good credit card is as low or lower than the interest rate on your bad card.
3. Contact your good credit card company, and make sure they will approve transferring your balance from the bad card to their card.
4. Then send the following letter to your bad credit card company.
Dear (name of business): __________________________________ Date: __________
Unless this account is not covered by any binding arbitration agreement, please close my account number (insert account number): _________________________________
I want my right to go to court if we have a dispute. Our tax dollars have already paid for a justice system and mandatory binding arbitration is unnecessary. Thank you.
Signed: ____________________________________
Name: ____________________________________
Binding Mandatory Arbitration Frequently Asked Questions
What is arbitration?
Arbitration is an alternative method of resolving disputes in which two parties present their individual sides of a complaint to an arbitrator or panel of arbitrators. The arbitrator, who is supposed to be neutral, then weighs the facts and arguments of both parties and decides the dispute. Arbitration may be voluntary or mandatory.
What is voluntary arbitration?
In voluntary arbitration, both sides in the dispute voluntarily agree to submit their disagreement to arbitration after it arises and after they have an opportunity to investigate their best options for resolving their claim.
What is binding mandatory arbitration?
In binding mandatory arbitration, a company requires a consumer to agree to submit any dispute that may arise to binding arbitration prior to completing a transaction with the company. The consumer is required to waive their right to sue, to participate in a class action lawsuit, or to appeal.
Are these clauses easy to find in the paperwork?
Generally not! Some companies print them in boxes, and a few have you sign a separate sheet of paper which contains the clause. But many companies simply make the clauses an extra paragraph of fine print in their contracts.
Is Binding Mandatory Arbitration always the name of the clause?
Definitely not! Some companies call these clauses Dispute Resolution Mechanism and other equally hard-to-understand names.
What's wrong with arbitration?
Nothing, if its voluntary arbitration! In fact, voluntary arbitration can be a great thing in preventing lawsuits and alleviating backlogs in the judicial system. In fact, you always have the right to arbitrate. But you never want to give away the right to sue if arbitration does not work. Companies want you to give away that right.
Do companies use binding mandatory arbitration in their own disputes with other companies?
No, most refuse to use binding mandatory arbitration in their own business dealings. As a matter of fact, car dealers were so afraid of mandatory arbitration for their own disagreements that they spent millions lobbying Congressmen and Senators to pass a federal law that prohibits automobile manufacturers from requiring binding mandatory arbitration in disputes related to dealership franchise clauses. The law passed in 2002.
Why are so many consumer groups opposing mandatory arbitration in automotive transactions?
Many mandatory binding arbitration clauses are written to protect the dealer. Here are problems and dangers noted by consumer advocates.
Consumers are often unaware they've agreed to binding arbitration. Whether the mandatory binding arbitration agreement is tucked in a paragraph of fine print or provided as a separate form, dealerships often don't mention it until the consumer is ready to sign and take the new vehicle home. A few dealers may "forget" to mention the arbitration requirement at all. These tactics deprive consumers of their right to make an informed decision.
Binding mandatory arbitration severely limits consumer options for resolving a dispute. Before any problem arises, you lock yourself into only one optionbinding arbitrationfor resolving all future disputes or problems. The contract typically also names the arbitration company that must be used.
Binding mandatory arbitration clauses generally bind the consumernot the company. The way most mandatory arbitration clauses are written, the seller retains its rights to take any complaint to court while the consumer can only initiate arbitration.
Arbitration does not follow clear, well-established, consistent rules and procedures such as those required for litigation in the court system. For example, arbitrators aren't required to follow procedures that enable one side in a dispute to request information from the other (what the courts call "discovery"). The result is that consumers, who usually have limited resources, may have difficulty getting information needed to support their claims. In addition, nothing absolutely requires arbitrators to take the law and legal precedent into account in making their decisions although they are supposed to do so. Most decisions cannot be appealed, and there are generally no review bodies or other oversight to ensure that arbitrators follow fair procedure or the law.
The seller generally picks the arbitration company"the judge." In theory, both parties agree to the selection of a neutral, independent arbitrator. In reality, the seller designates the arbitration company in the contract. This situation can definitely affect the impartiality of the arbitrator. Studies show that any time one company depends on another company for a large percentage of their business livelihood, some systematic bias in favor of that company may develop.
Binding mandatory arbitration frequently costs more than taking a case to court. One of the benefits usually claimed for binding arbitration is that it costs less than litigation. Frequently this is not true. In many cases, for instance, a consumer may have to pay a large fee simply to initiate the arbitration process. This can deter a consumer from even bringing a complaint. Or on a small claim total fees for arbitration can easily exceed the amount you might be awarded if you win the dispute.
Do companies require mandatory binding arbitration even with cash purchases?
Yes.
Are there companies that don't require mandatory arbitration clauses?
Yes. There are plenty of good businesses that refuse to require mandatory binding arbitration. These are usually the companies with the fewest consumer complaints.
What can I do about the problem?
Don't deal with any companies that require a mandatory binding arbitration clause. Before spending time with the sellerwhether in person or onlineask the seller if they require a mandatory binding arbitration clause. If the seller does require an clause, tell the seller you won't buy from them and why.
If a seller requires that you sign a mandatory binding arbitration clause, refuse to sign it. Stick with your decision. Be prepared to leave without completing the purchase.
=================================================================
ABC News Original Report Aired on February 22, 2005 and reported by Peter Jennings.
"Fine Print May Waive Legal Rights"
Mandatory Arbitration Clauses Reduce Consumer Rights"
Feb. 22, 2005 When American consumers sign contracts for credit cards, bank loans, mortgages or telephone service language in the fine print often waives their right to employ the full extent of the law should the company violate the contract.
"I feel completely violated, and that's the only term that I can use to explain it," said one woman who bought a car and says she got a lemon. "Had I known that arbitration clause existed in the contract, I would not have signed it."
"If you did a public survey, you would find that 99 percent of consumers are totally surprised that there's small print in there that doesn't allow them to go to court," said Joan Claybrook, president of Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy organization.
The fine print of many contracts says consumers "waive the right to go to court" to resolve any disputes about a product or service. They are instead committed to binding arbitration.
The process started with the Federal Arbitration Act of 1925, which gave companies a quicker way to resolve disputes. Instead of a judge or jury handing down a decision, the companies agree to go before arbitrators, who are typically practicing attorneys. They decide the amount of the arbitration award, if any.
During the 1980s and '90s, several courts ruled that arbitration should apply to individuals, as well.
'A Take-It-or-Leave-It Contract'
Many consumer advocates say mandatory arbitration means the consumer loses a fundamental right.
"It's a take-it-or-leave-it contract," said Claybrook. "You either sign it or you don't get the job or the credit card or the bank account."
Binding arbitration is just that. Except in very rare cases, there is no appeal, and arbitrators don't have to explain their decisions.
The American Arbitration Association, the oldest group that conducts arbitrations, says the law is a practical one.
"An average consumer arbitration through our organization takes about four, 4 months. Typically in court, if you're not going through small claims court, you're talking about years," said Richard Naimark, senior vice president at the arbitration association. The association also says there are guidelines to ensure fair play. "If the process is properly balanced so it's really a level playing field, neither side has an advantage," Naimark said. "There will be times when either the business or the consumer or employee will feel uncomfortable because they are on the losing end." But Claybrook says the system is flawed.
"The process completely favors the corporation," she said. "The corporation does repeat business with the arbitration company and if the company routinely finds in favor of consumers or gives large awards to consumers, they don't get used again."
I have been on time with my payments to Discover CC. I have requested numerous times if my APR can be lowered since I am a good customer, and I ALWAYS hear "we are unable to lower your APR at this time." The reason being?! Who knows?! It isn't because I pay late, because I don't. I haven't missed a payment.
They keep it high because they can. I haven't used this CC since the beginning of the year. How are we supposed to be able to pay off balances when the APR charge is nearly as much as your monthly payment, which is over $200 a month?!
My monthly payment has been around $224, and the total in interest fees they take is approx $168!! I'm shelling out to these people over $200 a month and only a quarter of that...$56... is even touching my balance. All I'm asking is for a lower APR so my family has a chance to pay this debt off as I'm making faithful payments monthly. I think this is thievery and it should be stopped.
I am not seeking to get out of paying, I'm seeking a lower APR so I can actually pay them the debt I've created.
They are TERRIBLE. The customer service is amazingly incompetent and won't do THEIR job. My card was hacked last week by someone who wasn't me. They issued me a new card. Took them forever to transfer my information and my transactions over to the new account number. On a completely different transaction, I returned an item back to B&H Photo for $59.95, and B&H Photo refunded my credit for $50.16 back to my card with the old account number. Discovercard REFUSES to fix it and TRANSFER THAT CREDIT TO MY NEW ACCOUNT NUMBER! IT IS *THEIR* JOB!!! They refuse to do it. Either they can't do their job required of them to fix, or they WON'T. I've contacted the Better Business Bureau, Consumer Affairs, the Illinois Attorney General, and my attorney...
This is totally UNACCEPTABLE. I should NOT be getting the runaround from customer service! They just refuse to do what is THEIR JOB! Instead, they give me some bogus phone number for "FRAUD" when it's NOT EVEN THE PROBLEM I HAVE WITH THIS ONE TRANSACTION! I just want my credit of $50.16 transferred (moved over) to my new account number, so that I can use it and then GET RID OF DISCOVER! THEY ARE A CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE that ONLY CARES ABOUT LINING THEIR OWN POCKETS THAN HELPING THE CUSTOMER!!!!
See above-Discover Financial Services repeatedly solicited me to transfer balances from other credit cards. After I did so, still remaining below my credit limit, they reduced my credit limit and said my balance was too high.
A Discover It card was sent to me and through a Ponzi Scheme my credit card was billed 3500.00 and I received NO BENEFIT from some shady company by the name Positive Strategies whom is a partner with internet based income business located in Utah and has a parent company in New Jersey and operates many different internet based home business opportunities under dozens of business identities to hide their complaints from consumers.
This company charged my Discover card and there was an element of 'Willfull Non-Compliance' in connection with any services. After three months, I stopped making payments to discover because the charge is a fraud. After the fourth month, I was informed this company who charged my card is no longer in business.
Discover is relentless demanding payments on this card for the fraudulent charges disputed as 'Goods Don't Conform to Contract' under TILA section 170. A law office contacted me and became very harassing demanding I agree this is my debt, I instructed this lawyer to go after the people whom charged this card. No civil action was ever filed against me because Discover cannot meet the burden of proof and has no preponderence of evidence to actually have the right to sue me in court.
I disputed the credit card debt with all three credit reporting agencies (CRA) and Discover sent me a large pack of statements and a letter stating that a contract is formed because
A credit card was issued to me
Charges were put on this card
A payment was made on this account
Its clear to me that Discover DOES NOT HAVE A BINDING LOAN AGREEMENT required to sue me in court or collect on this account. Their lawyer was assigned to intimidate me into an agreement this debt was mine to form a binding agreement to collect on bad debt.
A few months ago, Northland Group Inc (a collection agency) contacted me to collect on this debt demanding 4,588.89 and this statement is on their presentment: Due to the age of your account, Discover Bank is not able to file suit against you but if you take specific action such as making a written promise to pay, the time for filing a suit will be reset. We would like to work with you to resolve your account balance.
Since the debt is not enforceable per the foregoing information printed on a collection notice. I just responded with a Do Not Contact Letter including information the debt is disputed and it has previously been communicated to Discover and their attorney 'Presentment of this alleged debt is dishonored' including the fact 'Goods Don't Conform to Contract' and payment of any such goods are withheld under TILA § 170(a)
There is no evidence ever sent to me to believe Discover has a binding loan agreement to demand payment from me and I just sent a letter demanding the INSTRUMENT of INDEBTNESS in its original form in exchange for payment in full.
All three CRA bureaus report the credit card debt in question is verified by Discover and has not provided me with a copy of any binding contractual agreement as required by sections 609, 611 and 617 protections FCRA
The CRA is paid by lenders to report financial information and its grossly unfair for the CRA to accept questionable materials as accurate reporting information and not follow the law resulting in huge profits.
Discover has reported my discover card had charges as high as 8,031.66 and after some chargebacks from government agencies a disputed balance of 4,588 remains active on my credit report as DEROGATORY. This card was never used to generate any personal debt and is the result of credit card fraud.
A while back I purchased a steel building over the phone with my Discover Card. I purchased in September of 16 with a delivery date estimated at 12/2016 and a deposit of $6500.00. The building was supposed to be a home purchase and there were to be modifications , window placement , doors etc. done before the plans were drawn up.
Out of nowhere a set of plans was mailed to me on behalf of the merchant that I had not authorized and did not match the picture of what I purchased. THese were boiler plate drawings with no doors or windows specified.
I called Discover asking about my dispute window in November and was told I did not need to rush as I hade up to a year to dispute. I tried talking with the merchant as I was getting very suspicious of their practices and they would not refund me despite the fact I did not authorize thes drawings.
Finally I disputed the charge in January due to the fact that I never authorized the work and what was sent was not the same as what was contracted for. Discover denied my claim saying that the contract was an engineering deposit and that the services were rendered.
I reiterated that there was no authorization for the services, and that engineering was just a portion of the whole buidling and certainly would not amount to anything over $1000.00 The merchant still has not provided any proof of an invoice showing the cost of the engineering that was done by a third party nor did the merchant provide anything that I authorized this work to be done.
I filed with the CFPB as well and Discover still referenced the original contract and made no asknowledgement of the fact that the product was not delivered as described nor was it authorized to go to engineering in the first place.
I have been a long time discover customer and I am flabbergasted with their lack of support. I am out 6500.00 and all I have to show for it is a PDF of some drawings that cannot be used because they don't meet code and the house has no windows or doors.
As will happen from time to time, paydays will fall inconveniently. I have/had a payment due on the 14th, just several days from my payday. With some unexpected expenses hitting me, I called them and asked about them possibly holding off for a few days until I was secure about having good money in my account before sending them a payment.
I was told they can't--more factually won't--wait a couple of days, and that if I submitted a late payment, I could always call and ask for the late fee to be removed, and you know d**n well they won't do that. In asking to extend it a couple of days, they said that I could reset my payment date for a later date for future payments.
Stupid!! Not what I asked! They also said they would have to classify it as a "hardship" for me to qualify for holding off on it. Excuse me, morons at lovely Discover...you do NOT decide what a money hardship is for me. And it wouldn't send you into financial ruin to wait a few days until I knew I had secure funds (extra padding) in my bank account.
The bottom line is ultimately they have no good reason to do this, and "guidelines" don't mean anything if you can't justify them, it doesn't matter how big you think your company is. I guess grace periods don't mean anything anymore? It's all about lining the company's pockets no matter what it does to the customer.
I only have this card for emergencies, and if it wasn't for that, I would have never applied. Here's to the almighty profit margin huh, Discover. Thanks for absolutely nothing!!
In April, 2016 Discover Card called my number serveral times claiming to alert me to identity theft. I also received a letter dated April 18, 2016 stating that Federal Law requires them to verify and record all informtion that identifies each person who applies for credit. I did not apply for credit from Discover Card. They letter required me to call their Fraud Dept and suggested I notifiy the three credit agencies.
I called and asked for a copy of the application and I was told I had to "prove" who I was by sending certain documents, including a police report of identy theft. All these I did. I also sent a letter dated May 15, 2016. Still I did not receive the copy. I began calling asking for the report. I was told that it was "in archives". I asked why it would be in archives if we were currently working on it. I was told it would only take anywhere from 24 hours to two weeks to bring the document out of archives and send iit to me. I called in may, June, July and talked to various indivuals, all of whom told me the document was in archives and they would bring it out and send me a copy.
On 8/11/2016 I spoke with a supervisor, Josh Blanchfield who once again told me the application was "in archives". I asked how that could be since I had been calling for two months. He said he would take care of it. But no. Icalled on 8/16, and was told one day. I call on 8/17, 9/12 and talked to George in Utah, 9/12 talked to Erin and finally was transferred to the"security department" where I talked to Fran, and was told that they "never received the documents."
This makes me very concerned. Discover Card initiated the call and the letter and the fraud alert. Yet, its representatives have consistently given me the proverbial "run around." I believe that someone withing the organization is purpetrating this scam, but I doubt that I will ever get to the bottom of this. I can,of course , file a complaint with the FCC, and probably will. I do not believe that in the entire nation I am the only person who has encountered this.