Chase Ink Credit Card Services Suck

On March 6, I contacted Chase Ink MasterCard about a charge on my card from Enterprise Car Rental of approximately $600 for a rental charge that should have been about $75.

Chase Ink told me they would put the disputed amount in abeyance and contact the vendor and that I could deduct the amount from my bill until the matter was resolved.

I was on a business trip last week and noticed on my on-line Chase.com Ink account that my card was overdue.  I also got a message from Enterprise that they had made an error on my account and that I would receive a credit for approx. $525 since they had made an error.

I called Chase to clarify the situation since my payment should not be delinquent.  I was informed that not only was my payment delinquent, but also that my charging privileges had been suspended.

I explained the information above and that I was traveling on the road and that I would greatly appreciate removing the suspension until I resolved the matter with them when I returned home in 2 days.

They informed me that the first thing was to discuss the matter with the folks in the disputed transactions department. I was transferred to the disputed charges department and I was told that Chase had unilaterally and without notice to me reversed the suspension of the charges associated with the transaction two days after they had spoken to me in March and that there was a late charge of $39 on my account in addition to everything else.  I told them I wanted to get the suspension of charging privileges lifted. They told me I must speak with the customer service department and that they would transfer me to them again.

I waited on hold for 1/2 hour for someone to get to me while I was on the phone.  I gave up and called back.  I spoke to the customer service department and explained the situation again.  They read the notes, found the credit for $39.  They informed me that they could not lift the suspension of the charging privileges.

I usually carry more than one credit card with me when traveling.  In this case I also had my American Express card.  Unfortunately, the magnetic stripe on the back of the card had worn down enough that I could not use the card.  So, I was temporarily without any credit cards in New York City.  A precarious situation.

I have now returned home. I called Chase Credit Card Services.  They have acknowledged again that my disputed charge was not properly handled but my charging privileges would remain suspended until such time as I made a payment to bring my account current by paying for the disputed charges.

I have gone to the local Chase bank branch and explained the situation.  No action so far.

I have now called Chase Credit Card Services and spoken to a supervisor from both the Customer Service Department and the Disputed Charges Department in a conference call.  After about 3 hours of discussion Chase has finally decided to re-suspend the disputed charge, bringing my account current and I will have charging privileges reinstated in two business days. However, I note that it is already time for my next monthly payment, so the matter will, in fact, not be resolved until after I make my next payment.

Thank you Chase for the approximately 10 hours of my time that you wasted on this matter and the suspension of my charging privileges while on a business trip without even a hint that you were going to do so.

Now the plot thickens.  I was waiting the two days for my credit charging privileges to be reinstated by checking my on line account.  After two days, today, the final day for payment, I noticed that while my charging privileges have been reinstated, they show that I still owe them a tidy sum of money that is due by today the latest.  Now, if I had not looked on line, I suppose I would have become delinquent again and they would have suspended my charging privileges in another few days.

A call back to Chase has confirmed by deepest fear.  No one can explain the charges, Yes, the disputed charges are still suspended.  I called my local branch again.  They called Chase Credit Card Services for me.  After another few hours on the phone it became apparent that I had two choices.
1. not pay the sum that I didn't owe and incur late charges and card suspension, which would be reversed (so, they say) if I were to call them in a few days, or
2. pay the sum they demanded and that in a few months this would all work out.

I don't like being put into this kind of a situation. What I don't like is the fact that the very same kind of suspension of charging privileges would have occurred again, without any notice to me beforehand about the situation and the fact that their system has a glitch in it.

Sorry, JP Morgan Chase, I will find another credit card company with which to do business.  In fact, I will find another bank to do business with.
*******************************
9/6/15 Update.
Yes, in fact, I now have a new credit card, but I thought it necessary to explain what else has happened in the meantime.  I got a notice from Chase that they were cutting my credit limit in half. No matter, I will not be using it. I am switching everything out of Chase.  My only reason for staying right now is to cash out my rewards points.
I just looked on line and Chase has me with four credit cards with outstanding balances on all.  Sorry, I have only one account.  What is this?  I called Chase to find out that they cannot recognize me because I could not answer the security questions correctly. I have to go down to a branch and identify myself before they will deal with me.  Done that. I have no idea what their problem was.  I spoke to the billing department about the 3 phantom credit card accounts.  They say that they have been having problems with their on line system lately.  I should say so.  Chase cannot get their act together.  I cannot chance this kind of screw up, especially on business trips.  Good bye Chase.

Abuse of Power by the Police

CHP Officer R Torres (ID 14455)

Recently, there have been a spate of reported abuse of power incidents by police.  We have the incident in Ferguson MO and the one in New York City, just to mention a few. Police abuse does not have to be racial, and it doesn't have to be physical.  Please read the following incident and decide for yourself if there is a problem of abuse of power by police

On a midweek day in September of this last year, at approximately 11:05 am my wife and I were in our son’s parked vehicle in a construction zone just off an exit of US 101 in Petaluma CA. I was the driver. My wife was in the passenger seat. The car’s engine was not running. My wife and I are respectable looking and were dressed well and we were in a fairly new vehicle. There was nothing suspicious to provoke a police inquiry, except, perhaps, that we were on the side of the road and that motorist assistance would have been a good reason for the police officer to approach the vehicle.

CHP Officer R. Torres (ID 14455) approached the vehicle on a motorcycle from the front of our vehicle on the driver’s side and inquired as to what I was doing.  I indicated that since I was not from the area and unsure of the way to the location we were attempting to go that we had pulled over to the side of the road.  The officer asked for the driver’s licenses for both myself, the driver, and my wife, the passenger, and for the vehicle registration. Upon inspection of their driver’s licenses he noted that both of us were from out of state, and then inquired as to who the owner of the vehicle was since it had CA plates.  I indicated that the vehicle is owned by our son, who we were visiting and who lives in CA, and that we had borrowed the car from him. The last names were both the same.   All documents requested by Officer Torres were provided to him promptly and we were very polite.  Officer Torres indicated that the vehicle should not have been parked in the construction zone.  He also noted that my wife did not have a safety belt fastened and issued her citation for violation of VC 27315 (e) --passenger not wearing a safety belt.

At all times from the time the officer saw and approached the vehicle until the time that the citation was issued, the vehicle was in a stationary position, located off the road, and with the engine not running.

VC 27315, the CA seatbelt safety law, is an important and useful law that was enacted to protect motor vehicle drivers and their passengers. Both my wife and I believe that the law, as enacted, is appropriate and we wear seat belts when traveling in a vehicle on the road.  I still had my safety belt on at the time Officer Torres approached.  My wife uses her safety belt whenever she is either a driver or passenger within a moving motor vehicle on the road.

In this situation, the prerequisite conditions necessary for the issuance of a citation were not present.  The vehicle was not on the road, it was not moving, and the engine was off.  Upon pulling off the road and stopping the vehicle my wife had merely removed her seat belt to have enough flexibility to reach a roadmap which was located in the back seat of the car.  The removal of the safety belt occurred while we were stationary, off the road, and with the engine not running.  If the law were intended for this type of situation then any driver or passenger entering a vehicle and sitting in that vehicle in preparation for driving or to be transported in that vehicle would be in violation of the code until such time as they got their seatbelt fastened before the vehicle was actually started and moving.

Also, on the citation document itself in the box labelled :”Speed Approx.” is the symbol “S”.  If the symbol “S”, as we suspect it is, presumedly meaning “Stationary” or “Stopped” it further confirms the facts.

To add insult to injury, Officer Torres, upon noting that our state of residency was very liberal on gun laws, said that for all he knew we had a trunk load of guns, but that he was not permitted to ask us to open the trunk without further suspicion.

Okay, it wasn't even a parking ticket, but the fine in CA for this offense is about $175. We decided to go to court and protest the ticket. In court my wife stated her case, reciting all the facts above. The judge dismissed the case. But, Officer Torres won in this case. We had set aside an entire day (December 30) that we could have been with our family for this matter. In fact, it only took us about 5 hours to and from the court, not counting the time to prepare what was going to be said. We traveled almost 100 miles round trip, not to mention the stress of a court appearance. How fortunate that we could be with our son at Christmastime so that we did not have to travel more than 500 miles to answer the complaint.

Shame on you Officer Torres. You should be reprimanded by your supervisors for this. You knew that the offense would not hold up. In the best scenario for him we would have not contested the citation and paid the $175. Do the police in CA have a quota?

Anyone else being harassed by the California Highway Patrol in California

PayPal Isn't Ready for Prime Time as the Premier Mobile Credit Payment System

I just spent about six hours on the phone with PayPal and PayPal Credit.  They ARE the same company, but they don't act like it (different operations centers, and they apparently don't share any information).  Let me set the record straight. I have a PayPal account.  I have had it for years. I do NOT have a PayPal Credit Card, nor have I ever applied for one. I have always found it mildly annoying that they default to my bank account for an EFT transaction for payments instead of the Credit Card I have on file with them, but that is not the issue here, and I think the issue with that is obvious.

Today we received a letter from Comenity Capital Bank c/o Pay Pal Credit out of Timonium, MD.  We were informed:

"This letter is in response to your recent request to open a PayPal Credit account.  Our records show that you requested a PayPal Credit account on 10/21/2014 in connection with a purchase of $16.63 at eBay-Turbo Checkout.
We regret that we are unable to approve you for the service at this time for the following reason:
There was limited recent credit history in the credit file provided to us.
Our credit decision was based in whole or in part on information obtained in a report from the consumer-reporting agency listed below.  You have  a right under the Fair Credit Reporting Act to know the information contained in your file at the consumer reporting agency.  The reporting agency played no part in our decision and is unable to supply specific reasons why we have denied credit to you.
You also have the right to a free copy of your report from the reporting agency if you request it no later than 60 days after you receive this notice.  In addition , if you find that any information contained in the report you receive is inaccurate or incomplete, you have the right to dispute the matter with the reporting agency.

Trans Union

2 Baldwin Place

PO Box 1000

Chester,PA 19022

(800) 888-4213"

Now, I think it would be fair to assume that the most likely scenario is that someone was trying to commit identity theft and/or credit card fraud using my name, especially since we have an excellent credit history.

I called PayPal.  After an incredibly long wait on hold I was told, after explaining the situation, that I was going to have to speak with the PayPal Credit Department.  I was transferred and waited on hold for another half hour.  I spoke with the PayPal Credit Card Department and they really didn't want to deal with me because I did not have a PayPal Credit Card.  I asked to speak to their Fraud department. I was given the run around (I don't think they have a Fraud department).  After 5 calls back to them over the course of the day, They said that it was not clear what happened.  They have no record that I, or anyone posing as me, had applied for a PayPal Credit Card. 

So, then I wanted to make sure that there was no damage done to my credit report as a result of their denial of credit.   I called Trans Union about the matter.  They assured me that for neither me nor my wife was there a credit inquiry by anyone anywhere near the dates that Comenity Bank claimed to have made the inquiry.  Further, there was no inquiry by either Comenity Bank or PayPal Credit at any time in the past in our files.

I think it was reasonable for me to take the letter at face value and make sure that there was no identity theft in progress. Little did I suspect that PayPal had fabricated the transaction and allegations out of thin air.  What I think is reprehensible is that they put me through about six hours of work for absolutely nothing, AND in the process in response to any of my questions alway answering with hypothetical reasons as to what could have been the reasons as to what really happened.  No one at PayPal could offer any concrete explanation for why they sent me the letter or any facts to even affirm that they really sent the letter.

What a bunch of turkeys.  I sure am glad that Apple Pay is out there providing a real service for mobile payments.  

Zestimates from Zillow are Worthless

Zestimates are what  Zillow calls its market estimate of a real estate parcel's value.  And Zestimates aren't worth as much as the electrons it takes to get them sent to you over the Internet.
In other words -- they are worthless in most cases.  For those instances that they are accurate, you have no way to judge that to be the case without some independent method being applied to the property at hand, so it is worthless in all cases.

According to Zillow, "Nationally,...Zestimate has a median error rate of 8.3%."  To put that in more concrete terms, "half of the Zestimates in an area are closer than the error percentage and half are farther off."  But note that a Zestimate may be above or below by that 8.3% to qualify for being within 8.3%. Note also that the maximum error off the median on the closer side cannot be more than 8.3%, but the error on the farther side could be considerably greater.  In other words, the price differencial between the Zestimate and your true market value (appraisal) may be very significantly more than 8.3%.

In my case, I looked at the value of my house on Zillow and I think I have figured out what they think they are doing.  My house was put on the market for a rental and the real estate broker inadvertently listed the monthly rental price as the sale price. Two days later, realizing the mistake, the realtor removed the listing.  Now, you can well imagine that the monthly rental price is only an infinitesimal fraction of the selling price.  But, then the Zillow Zestimate took a nose dive in value.


I have reported the error to Zillow on a number of occasions and, try as I might, the folks at Zillow have never corrected the error, nor the Zestimate, nor have they tried to contact me, nor go to the public records to see if the house was ever listed at that price for sale.

Look at this Zestimate chart below.  The line on top is the Zestimate from mid 2008 through 2013 for my home.  You can see that it has fluctuated from a low of around $800k to a high of almost $1.4m.  What is most notable is the precipitous drop in 2012.  The coincident lines below are the Zestimate values for the town and Zip Code for this home.  Nothing dramatic there, and there was nothing dramatically different at this home other than the slip up on the part of the realtor who put the rental price in as a sale price.  How do you explain this kind of variation? By the way, the large increase at the end of 2009 was caused by a change in the property taxes on the property (due to an error by the assessor).  So, the comment that only a trained professional can appraise a house is very apt.  That appraisal can weed through the erroneous data and come to a reasonable number for the market value.  Obviously a Zestimate is fraught with problems in this regard.

*************************************************************
Insert update.  This insert was placed here on 4/25/15
I have had so many communications with Zillow on this matter that I am not even counting anymore.
They have altered the erroneous data and the Zestimate has now changed.  Unfortunately, the system still appears to have some other kind of flaw.  Here is the same chart as above except with today's date and the history:

What I can't figure out is that the Zestimate, when corrected, showed just over $1.1m, and then, mysteriously, and precipitously it dropped to just under $1.0m.  I also find it curious that the Zestimate for the period of time before the original error was introduced into Zillow is different.
I have to conclude that they have little elves in their Zestimate factory making up these numbers.

**************************************************************


Insert Update.  This insert was placed here on 5/3/15 (about one week after the previous insert)

I happened to take another look at the Zestimate chart.  It has changed again!

This is absurd.
**********************************************************************
Insert Update.  This insert was placed here on 5/3/15 (about 5 hours after the previous insert).
It seems that the Zestimates are changing more than once a day now.

Absurd isn't even the correct way to describe this!
************************************************************************



I suppose, in a way, a Zestimate is sort of like a FICO score.  For those of you who are unfamiliar with what a FICO score is you can look it up, but it is the in reality the report card score of your financial health.  Every loan, morgage, car loan, credit card interest rate, is based upon your FICO score.

You could argue, no, it's not like the FICO score because the FICO score is based upon accurate experience information on the consumers' use of credit. The FICO score can have a significant impact upon a consumers' life, every financial or credit decision involving that consumer usually boils down to what his or her FICO score is. It's like that pesky SAT score that was on your forehead when you applied to college.

If your home is your largest financial investment and the Zestimate is the alleged "score" that you have achieved with that investment, it could materially affect the decisions that are made that involve your financial condition. Zillow is the first to point out in their terms and conditions that financial institutions cannot use the Zestimate as a basis for a loan. This makes me think of the porn sites that say that if you are under 18 years of age that you are not allowed to use the site. When was the last time you thought a teenager would heed such a notice?

 If the Zestimate is lower than it should be it could influence a potential buyer for your home should you want to sell it. If you are contemplating the purchase of a home it could impact your decision about whether to buy that home. Perhaps, you have applied for a business loan and as part of your Net Worth statement you list the equity in your home. No loan officer in the world is going to perform a CMA (Certified Market Analysis) on your home under those circumstances. It is too costly and takes too much time. A quick and easy Zestimate is available to check the number on that Net Worth statement.

Do we really believe that this computed value has any accuracy? This is easily measurable. Take a community and find every sale during a given period of time and compare the sale price to the Zestimate that was in effect at the time of the sale. Just how accurate can such a crude Zestimate actually be?

According to Carol Augustus, a Realtor with Pacific Union in Marin County California, Zillow itself cites the following figures as interpreted for Marin County:

1. 88% of Marin homes are in Zillow

2. 80% have Zestimates

3. 20% are within 5% of a recent 3 month sales price (80% are NOT)

4. 38% are within 10% of a recent sales price (68% are NOT)

5. 64% are within 20% of a recent sales price (36% are NOT)

I, quite frankly, don't know what to make of these numbers. Does this mean that a given home has a 20% chance that another home in the county sold within 5% of the price within the last 3 months? If so, what does that mean? It sounds almost meaningless.

Alternatively, if it means that 20% of the homes are within 5% of a hypothetical sales price, this would be dreaming of a dream. I don't have any other interpretations that could make sense of these cited statistics.

So, now the big question is, what if products like Zillow and their Zestimates become more pervasive and can meaningfully affect your daily life (either positively or negatively)?

Will you have the ability to redress your grievances if you feel you have been maligned? Will there be the equivalent of the Fair Credit Reporting Act to protect consumers from erroneous data being used negatively against them in these new financial marketplaces?

What other products are there out there now, or can reasonably be expected to appear on the web near you in the not too distant future? I'd like to hear from you. Please let me know your thoughts on this issue.

And shame on you Zillow.

(Note: I have subsequent to the writing of this post, written a few other posts on this subject, most notably one called The Zillow Bump, which I think you might enjoy reading.)

New York Times Sucks

Much to my amazement today I discovered that I have an online subscription to the Digital New York Times.  I called the credit card company to find out why.  Turns out I have been billed for this for about 8 months now.  I do recall receiving an offer for 12 weeks for 99 cents. I tried the service and found it not worth the $15 a month fee so I did not sign up for it.  Well they signed me up anyway.
I called to cancel the service.  They did everything in their power to waste my time on the phone, putting me on hold a number of times for prolonged periods.  In the end they cancelled the service after they tried to get me to sign up for the same 99 cent special. What kind of a cheap shot is that.

Sunset Magazine Customer Care Woes

For two years now I have had great difficulty paying my Sunset Magazine subscription charges.
This year I received a bill from Sunset. I use an electronic bill payment service.  The bill was promptly paid electronically with an ACH transaction by the bill pay service.  For those of you unfamiliar with this type of transaction, it is a checkless transaction where the money is electronically debited from your account and credited to the recipient's account.    I thought I was done with the matter for another year.
About two weeks later I received yet another bill. Upon research, I confirmed that I had, in fact, paid the bill earlier.  I call the customer care number and tried to resolve the matter.  They confirmed, a full two weeks after the electronic transfer that they had not received payment.  Upon further examination, for some reason I do not understand quite yet, they had billed me with a different account number than the account number I had with them during the previous year.  Therefore, I had paid to an account different than the account they had billed me for.  I pointed this out to them.  Upon completion of their research they assured me that I had not paid the bill.  I assured them that I had paid the bill.
They wanted to know the check number for the payment.  I explained to them that there was no check number, since it was an ACH electronic transaction.  They said that they could not help me and that I would have to pay the bill again. Poppycock!
Using their website I sent them an email with all the details and I also got a "proof of payment" from the bill pay service demonstrating that I had, in fact, paid the bill.  In response I got an email that they would get back to me within two business days.   At the end of the second business day I received an email that they had reviewed the matter and that I still owed the money and that if I had any questions I should contact their customer care unit at the telephone number given.
I called the customer care unit and learned that no one at that unit has the ability to see any of the email correspondence. They wanted me to start all over again as if there were no history to the problem.
After much shuffling around from one person to another and repeating the story over and over again, I was told that there just was no record of a payment and that I would just have to pay the bill.  If I wanted to get a refund for the other payment I would have to bring that up with my bill pay company.  This was getting preposterous!
After spending more than three hours going around in circles I resigned myself to the fact that I would just not be getting this subscription any longer.
The very next day I received an email from them saying that they have now received the payment I made and that I am paid in full.  What I find so surprising is that they claim that the payment was received a full two weeks after it was sent electronically!
Something is wrong at Sunset.
Have you had trouble with paying for your subscriptions? Please let me know. I'd like to hear about it.

Rite Aid Ain't doing it Right

I must confess that I have a passion for pistachio ice cream.  The only place around here where I can get my fix is at the local Rite-Aid store.  I usually try to buy it when it is on sale (usually, 2 for $6.00).  Then, sometimes, they have manufacturer's coupons right on the package (35 cents). Through time I have noticed that the ice cream with the manufacturer's coupons were manufactured earlier and it is the way the manufacturer can get rid of their older stock. I have also noticed that both the date of manufacture and the expiration date are on the bottom of the package.  One final observation is that the ice cream with the manufacturer's coupon on it does not taste as good as the ice cream that is fresher (what a surprise!).  In fact, the older ice cream has frozen crystals of ice within the ice cream, making it unsmooth.  Not very tasty.

So, this evening I went down to the store to get my fix.  No sale, no coupons.  I picked up the first package and turned it over: manufactured almost 5 years ago, freshness expiration about 3 years ago. Give me a break. I went looking for other expiration dates. They were all over the place. Many expired.  I even found one that was manufactured within the last 30 days! (this is the one I bought).

I have mentioned to the staff a few times, my findings that the expiration dates have passed on some of the ice cream.  Once, I actually saw them removing the ice cream.  Were they moving it to the rear so that after I left some other uninformed sucker got stuck with it.  I really can't imagine that they removed the ice cream from the freezer and put it into the garbage can, or on the shelf for the next deliveryman to return the ice cream to the manufacturer.

This evening I got a novel answer when I informed the staff that the ice cream freshness date was expired by a few years.  "Oh, the delivery people who bring the ice cream are supposed to check the dates and remove the stale product."   "Sure!" I said.

Look at CVS. They just announced last week that they will no longer be selling cigarettes in their stores and take a major hit on their bottom line for that decision.  The reason they state it that selling cigarettes is inconsistent with the health care objectives that they want to project to the public.  And what image does Rite Aid want to project onto the public with their de facto policy on stale food removal? And then again, if they do it with the food, what are they doing with the pharmaceuticals that they sell?  They have "sell by" dates on them too.  Exactly what is their policy?

Shame on you, Rite Aid.