aisleorwindow

What about the 5K EQM? Did you get those?

mahasamatman

I certainly hope so - that's why I just got a new card instead of renewing my old one. The 5K EQM are not listed under the first-time cardmember restriction.

Marathon Man

yes yes yeah I know... but you know what I mean. here's an example, clearly meant to dupe the other party, even if legally:

this is folklore but I actually heard it may be true too... Van Halen (band) was always getting in trouble for trashing backstage after their rock concerts in the 70s & 80s. They once rewrote their contract and in fine print it reportedly said, " if there's food and snacks available and they include brown M&Ms, then we have the right to null & void the clause that makes us responsible for any and all clean up"

No one like SAW THAT really, because it was like the only line changed! They got away with it a bunch of times thereafter.

The point I am making is this: While you should always read contracts of things, why do they have the right--beyond LEGAL--i am talking "person to person, right way to be to people, etc--to effectively HIDE the new little change on ya?

it's worse than those annoying ads that sometimes entice people with big bold letters that say, "FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!*" and then in fine print, the "*" has all these rules about how you need to have spent like $200 first to get the item for free.

ok maybe that's business but I just think there are better "ways" to put forth such things.

I have many times had issue with businesses who hide things that they know gitcha. One such case was a gas station I went to that did not take credit cards anymore but they must have forgotten to scrape the Visa/MC logos off the window. This was a couple years ago when not all places had the option at the pump even if they did take them, and so I pumped my gas and then went inside to pay. I honestly had NO cash on me and so I gave the guy all the change in my dirty old car and said, hey, sorry but I will have to come back with more cash when next I pass by here.

I did end up sending them the difference in a mailed letter by check. So be it.
they were lucky, I think. So was I.

Many stores or companies change policy and they hide the whammy. I hate it. I think especially when their own customer service reps KNOW that 99% of all the callers who are complaining this week or month are calling about exactly THAT problem, whatever it may be! This means they SHOULD just make it better for both THEM and YOU and simply BOLDLY DISCLOSE the notice of change! After all, they have a staff of marketers and lawyers at their disposal to work in conjunction with CS and PR groups in house. We do not. To me, that makes it rather unbalanced against us, and a bit unfair, right?... So I say DISCLOSE IT! It is a known 'big one" that makes people take notice. So, make it SEE-ABLE!!!!!!
It's the freakin right thing to do!

I am not wrong on that one. Again, they could legally be "right" about whatever things they do, but does that make me a happy customer? Well, if 10,000 others thought the same way I do on this stuff, I bet they'd start to come around to my ideas here... (maybe this is why I have not opened my own business lately)


MM

aisleorwindow

Exactly why I'm asking
I was going to get a new card to get the 5K EQM, but if people aren't getting it I won't bother.

chitownflyer

Why do you not read my posts clearly stating that I enquired about multiple card eligibility offer with Chase reps and whether the offer is valid for mutliple accounts?

I stated in post 86. "I also contacted Chase customer service several times via phone, and I enquired on whether there was a limit to the number of cards and the number of times you can receive the 25K offer for the Platinum Visa. I was told, ' you are welcome to apply for as many cards as you would like, and you can receive this offer for each application, as we(Chase) know it is a great offer.'"

Secondly, do NOT accuse me of not reading the terms and conditions before my application. I thoroughly read the pricing and terms of the card at this address located below the link for the application.

http://www.firstusa.com/cgi-bin/webc..._type=appterms


Nowhere in pricing and terms of the card, does it state for first time members only.

You are the one whom stated this in a previous post.

"See the link near the bottom titled "Click here for additional Rewards program information."
http://www.firstusa.com/cgi-bin/webc...cont&mkid=60FW

This is where the new applicants only clause is located in an obscure location. Notice this is not the terms and pricing of the card: they are additional Rewards program information located in an obscure location.

Furthermore, my example about changing the terms of a fixed interst rate loan is absolutely analogous to what Chase has done: they have engaged in fraud. Deceptive advertising is not acceptable by the state and federal attorney general's offices. FRAUD is FRAUD. I play by the rules, but I will not be cheated or deceived by unscrupulous personal or business practices. I am a proponent of honesty and clear disclosure.

chitownflyer

Chase will not award you the 5K EQM for opening another account even when they print the 5K EQM first bonus use on your statement. This is why I state they are engaging in deceptive advertising and fraud.

CPMaverick

My card was not a platinum so the 5k EQM was never offered to me.

mahasamatman

Because what a rep says is irrelevant. Many are ignorant of the rules. What's in writing is all that matters. It's a basic tenet of contract law.

And to yell right back at you, Nowhere in pricing and terms of the card does it state you earn any miles at all. Therefore, you should receive none, and Chase is in violation of its T&C by giving you any. Only the link about "additional rewards information" provides that fact.

There is no deceptive advertising, and no fraud. They never changed the terms. You are simply ignoring the data being provided and trying to blame someone else for your lack of due diligence.

mahasamatman

False.

chitownflyer

No mate, the bonus miles offer is listed on this page from which you apply.
http://www.firstusa.com/cgi-bin/webc...cont&mkid=60FW

Then read the pricing terms and conditions listed on this page.
http://www.firstusa.com/cgi-bin/webc..._type=appterms

Furthermore, employees act as agents of their companies, so their words do have meaning. I guess fraud, deception, lying, cheating, and thievery are all acceptable by "contract law." Maybe we can print some items in the contract that are written in invisible ink and can only be read by a special back light. Oops, you should have known it was in the contract.

aisleorwindow

So you're saying you were denied the 5K EQMs for the Platinum card?

I've done this a few times in the past and it never printed on my statement - it just posted to my account automatically without any notification.

Just want to double check as the other folks who were denied the RDMs did end up getting their EQMs. If you're saying they are not doing that anymore, then that could be very bad for my requalification efforts

lkohawaii

I know this must be common knowlege...but what is 5K EQM people are after?

cepheid

Come on people, let's all calm down, shall we? The salient point here is that there are two pages of T&Cs linked from the main offer page. The main offer page includes a synopsis of the offer, but the actual details of the card and the bonus promo are listed in the T&Cs, and there are two pages of such. The first is the T&Cs for pricing, rates, and creditworthiness in general, and does not cover the promo or mileage-earning program. The second is the T&Cs for the sign-up promo offer and the mileage-earning program in general, and does not cover the pricing and rates. The topics covered in both pages do not overlap and thus both pages of T&Cs are applicable, nonredundant, and do not contradict one another.

chitownflyer, you are correct that the first page of T&Cs does not mention that the promo offer is for first-time cardholders only, but that page of T&Cs doesn't cover the bonus offer. The second link is the page of T&Cs for the promo offer and therefore is the relevant page in this particular case, as mahasamatman pointed out.

Yes, the second link is somewhat hard to find and is not easy to distinguish. However, all fine print is that way and that's the nature of the beast here - there is no credit card company I know of that makes it easy to find and read the fine print, and that goes even for cards that don't offer any rewards! It's true that we would all be better served if there were some legislation forcing card companies (and any other companies that require contracts, e.g. telecom, etc.) to take the fine-print and make it (a) easy to find, (b) easy to read, (c) understandable, and (d) not so darn long. However, until that happens, I'm sorry to say that Chase engaged in common, acceptable, and totally legal business practices because the T&Cs for the promotional offer were there and clearly stated the first-time cardholder clause. The fact that the T&Cs were on a separate page and hard to find is regrettable but not illegal (and not uncommon either).

Can we please stop shouting now?

The Chase Platinum Class VISA (the one with a $140 annual fee) offers 5000 Elite Qualifying Miles (EQM) when you sign up for the card. This is to what the "5K EQM" refers. The Chase Signature VISA (with a $60 annual fee, waived for the first year) does not come with EQM.

CPMaverick

Ignorance

of the law

Is no excuse.

Honestly, it is unreasonable to be angry about this. Sure, it's dissapointing, but it shouldn't be a suprise.

If you've been churning (and I have), be happy that they aren't retro-actively taking back the miles you've gotten for next to nothing.

Marathon Man

2 things:

1) I wonder if this thread is about MILES or about whos the best arguer and legal expert?

2) what is wrong with churning anyway? (from a business standpoint)

Simple question, that #2...