Anti Bank of America Lawyer Goes MSM on Their Asses, Hits the Today Show

Wednesday, January 06, 2010 , , , 1 Comments

Pic credit: jason.e via Flickr

Have you heard about this guy? His argument seems slightly more valid than the idiot who sued Bank of America for $1.784 billion, trillion but we'll let that one go...


A California attorney is fed up with his high interest credit card -- and he's not going to take it anymore.

Ben Pavone, of San Diego, is saying he will not pay his credit card payments until his creditor Bank of America lowers his high interest rate, which is currently set at 27.99 percent.

Pavone said on "The Early Show" he is also angry that his credit limit has been decreased.

But what will happen if he doesn't pay his credit card bill?

Pavone says that if the bank damages his credit for not paying, he will sue them.

The lawyer says he's been a good customer, and has paid his credit card bill on-time for 13 years. The bank, he claims, raised his interest rate and lowered his spending limit without warning or explanation.

"I think that's what a lot of people are frustrated about," Pavone said. "A lot of feedback coming into my office is these are people with good payment records. Excellent payment records. They've been paying consistently, and have paid for 10, 15, 20 years -- in my case 13 years -- there's really no cause for it. The spread from 28 percent to what they're paying, which is maybe a half percent to 1 percent, is simply opportunism."

And you people expect better behavior out of Bank of America WHY?

Jr Deputy Accountant

Some say he’s half man half fish, others say he’s more of a seventy/thirty split. Either way he’s a fishy bastard.


Anonymous said...

Going to go out on a little limb here.

First – Is the rate charged within the limits where the card issuer is located? If it is Delaware or South Dakota (quite likely), there may not be a cap.

Second – Were the terms disclosed? The guy is a lawyer so he should understand contract law even if he is a run of the mill ambulance chaser.

Third – Some segments of banking are in the shape they are in because “consumers” pushed for laws that would grant them credit on terms that they never would have received from conventional lenders in the 50’s, 60’s, early 70’s, etc. They have fought the war by proxy by enlisting their representatives in the war for cheap and easy credit – because they deserved it (yeah right). Guess what? – Often, that is like letting the inmates run the asylum.

Fourth – if the guy is such a terrific risk, there are several lenders who would be willing to do a transfer of balance to their program with a drastic reduction in the interest rate. I’m writing personal lines of credit for people “that I deem credit worthy” for one over the Prime Rate fixed for one year intervals. Yeah, my standards are pretty high but then that’s why I closed my books in December with three loans over 60 days past due. I don’t lend money to people who I don’t believe have a Chinaman’s chance in hell of repaying same.

Fifth – the dude is a lawyer IN CALIFORNIA. I’d say it would be prudent to take everything he says with a large grain of salt.

Sixth – if the dude is so smart, why doesn’t he use his energy toward getting the usury law changed? Instead of having the rate capped based upon where the card issuer is located, why not a new set of rules that caps the interest rate based upon where the borrower is located? Duh.

All done for today. Jeff