Citi cards closed, TYP confiscated, reasons not disclosed.
May 15, 2013, 2:36 pm
#346
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 29,772
Not sure about the "Churner theory" because all my TYP cards are from 2006. I do not have any new TYP cards in the past 6 years. I frankly am not interested to get TYP bonuses. My AA cards took the 20 months route, and my HHonor cards remain the first pair from last Summer. If Citi wants to ferret out churners, there are plenty of folks way ahead of me on this line.
May 15, 2013, 2:52 pm
#347
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LAS
Programs: DL PM, UA PS, Hyatt Globalist, Marriott Titanium
Posts: 4,904
Well, my 2nd statement just closed, and my TYP account went from 5 digits to 6 digits (that's all I'll say ...). Worth it to cash out now? Was going to get the student loan/mortgage check ...
May 15, 2013, 2:55 pm
#348
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,944
But we don't really know.
I will be in the same (5 digits to 6 on second statement) position next week or so. Before all the warnings, I was planning to keep points for travel using my Premier. Now not so clear...
May 15, 2013, 3:13 pm
#350
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2008
Programs: AA PLT 2MM
Posts: 2,026
Not sure about the "Churner theory" because all my TYP cards are from 2006. I do not have any new TYP cards in the past 6 years. I frankly am not interested to get TYP bonuses. My AA cards took the 20 months route, and my HHonor cards remain the first pair from last Summer. If Citi wants to ferret out churners, there are plenty of folks way ahead of me on this line.
So, I'm thinking a set of events like this could well have taken place:
1) Request of MTG check triggers computer response (that itself being the flag, not conditional on value of it)
2) Further automated investigation shows TYP balance larger than X. In your case it was 19x,xxx
3) Manual review of customer shows history of signing up for various Citi CC's
4) Decision on 'profitability' of customer and whether they want to keep customer...
Again, just pure speculation here... but, it does seem that Citi is actively putting in some sort of 'new' process here... and likely changing often.
At any rate, if Citi is now looking at 'profitability' of customers for their CC's, I'm fairly certain that most in this forum would not fall into the 'profitable' category. At this point it may not matter how unprofitable you are, just merely that you are unprofitable. Or to reuse the analogy: 'one is not going to be found innocent of murder because they did not murder as many as Charles Manson did'.
So, not sure 'how' I'd suggest to cash out at this point, but, if I had a 6 digit TYP balance at this point, however, I 'would' be cashing out.
May 15, 2013, 3:16 pm
#351
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 417
. Good riddance. LOL!
May 15, 2013, 3:24 pm
#352
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2008
Programs: AA PLT 2MM
Posts: 2,026
Not to spoil this method of cash out by spelling out the in details, with 'photos and arrows' (as Citi my kill that soon too if it's suddenly heavily used again), but, this method might even be more profitable (for some) vs the mtg check.
There are numerous threads on this prior prior to 2009 when Citi at one time had 3CPP value for flight redemption (actually, they once had uncapped CPP value on that).
Or put in other words, sometimes it might be worth paying the $150-$200 fee to 'buy a voucher' for your favorite airline so that one can get 33% increased value on 'X' thank you points redeemed.
May 15, 2013, 4:04 pm
#353
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: BOS, MHT
Programs: AA ltg, B6, DL, UA, AS, SPG/Marriott Plt, HH, Hyatt
Posts: 10,052
my citi history is as follows:
So the two TY cards are new and my only citi CC products in 5 years. I'd say I am not on any churn list right now (as all those 5 year old inquiries have dropped off anyway) but did do it in the past with the AA cards, so who knows.
- have equity line - 7 years old, no balance now.
- have another checking acct and just went to open a savings with a promo
- have citi gold
- have a AA MC from 5 years ago and had not been able to get more citi cards due to too many iniquities (and too many cards from back when myself and others here did many ultimate savings programs with citi to move large sums and eventually move to AA LTgold.
- Had been using the EQ line to fund ST and get MOs and then pay it off with MOs but am no longer doing that since getting into TY. Dont want to make THAT the reason someone shuts me down on the banking side!
- Opened second citi gold checking and savings at end of April
- tied this to equity line (did all this in branch)
- Opened the Premier card (and already did spend on it)
- opened the preferred and have continued to use it.
So the two TY cards are new and my only citi CC products in 5 years. I'd say I am not on any churn list right now (as all those 5 year old inquiries have dropped off anyway) but did do it in the past with the AA cards, so who knows.
May 15, 2013, 4:17 pm
#354
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: SFO
Programs: OZ *G; HH Diamond;
Posts: 1,644
I am fairly sure it has occurred to some here, but, doesn't seem to be said yet... I recall in the past people mentioning that Chase had closed down accounts of 'churners' not just 'manufacture spenders'. Is it not inconceivable that Citi is now looking through relationship history of their customers? What triggers this 'review' ? Perhaps a high TY balance? Perhaps something else...
I can say this much, when you're being told 'you should be receiving a letter within 30 days' (emphasis mine), and they can't give you any other information, then this is not good news. The letter implies they are going to send you something from the legal department. Legal department doesn't send 'friendly hello' letters. These are vetted official responses that will intentionally not reveal much thus that you do not have easy ammunition by which to take them to court. Very easy for them to meet you in court if they haven't actually revealed much, versus showing you their entire hand. Thus, the reason that customer service reps, all the way up the management change really don't have any information at all to share. Legal doesn't want some hourly employee revealing the actual reasons for account review. It's pretty clear that it's all about the money, and, it seems given the most recent stories of closure that Citi is now considering a broader scope of customers as to what it considers 'unfavorable'. Ultimately someone who opens 2 new accounts every 60 days to collect the sign up bonus is likely considered 'an unprofitable client' just as someone who only spends in the 5X categories is also 'an unprofitable client', especially if done en mass.
This screams of some sort of sudden shift in risk/revenue management goals at Citi. Their solutions seem petty however. Basically now it seems Citi wants to 'have their cake and eat it too'. i.e., they want to remain competitive in the CC business and still offer large sign on bonuses and such so they don't lose market share, however, they don't actually want people to repeat this.
Yes, of course they could apply limits on the number of times one could collect a bonus (as they tried with AAdvantage bonuses, but, ultimately seems they've failed). Or they could put a cap on how much one could accumulate in bonus categories at the bonus rate. But, that's obviously not the direction Citi is taking this (at this time anyway).
I can say this much, when you're being told 'you should be receiving a letter within 30 days' (emphasis mine), and they can't give you any other information, then this is not good news. The letter implies they are going to send you something from the legal department. Legal department doesn't send 'friendly hello' letters. These are vetted official responses that will intentionally not reveal much thus that you do not have easy ammunition by which to take them to court. Very easy for them to meet you in court if they haven't actually revealed much, versus showing you their entire hand. Thus, the reason that customer service reps, all the way up the management change really don't have any information at all to share. Legal doesn't want some hourly employee revealing the actual reasons for account review. It's pretty clear that it's all about the money, and, it seems given the most recent stories of closure that Citi is now considering a broader scope of customers as to what it considers 'unfavorable'. Ultimately someone who opens 2 new accounts every 60 days to collect the sign up bonus is likely considered 'an unprofitable client' just as someone who only spends in the 5X categories is also 'an unprofitable client', especially if done en mass.
This screams of some sort of sudden shift in risk/revenue management goals at Citi. Their solutions seem petty however. Basically now it seems Citi wants to 'have their cake and eat it too'. i.e., they want to remain competitive in the CC business and still offer large sign on bonuses and such so they don't lose market share, however, they don't actually want people to repeat this.
Yes, of course they could apply limits on the number of times one could collect a bonus (as they tried with AAdvantage bonuses, but, ultimately seems they've failed). Or they could put a cap on how much one could accumulate in bonus categories at the bonus rate. But, that's obviously not the direction Citi is taking this (at this time anyway).
May 15, 2013, 4:22 pm
#356
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Austin, Texas
Programs: Airline nobody. Sad!
Posts: 26,062
.
May 15, 2013, 4:31 pm
#357
Original Poster
Join Date: May 2008
Programs: AA PLT 2MM
Posts: 2,026
Nope.
Wasn't posted here, and was said in private discussion.
If the guy shares here, then by all means, but it's up to him.
If you're merely looking for details. It kind of went like this:
1) Statement closed
2) Checked TY Account online, and all looked good
3) Called to redeem for check, and suddenly account went 'locked' while he was on the call with the agent.
I have no reason to doubt this guy, but, then again I no longer have any TYPs to cash out, so, it doesn't bother me one way or the other.
If you want to cash out via mtg check, then by all means go for it. Maybe you're not on their radar anyway and all will be fine. But, please share your results regardless of outcome, I think the members of this community who are keenly reading this thread trying to parse together information would appreciate it.
Wasn't posted here, and was said in private discussion.
If the guy shares here, then by all means, but it's up to him.
If you're merely looking for details. It kind of went like this:
1) Statement closed
2) Checked TY Account online, and all looked good
3) Called to redeem for check, and suddenly account went 'locked' while he was on the call with the agent.
I have no reason to doubt this guy, but, then again I no longer have any TYPs to cash out, so, it doesn't bother me one way or the other.
If you want to cash out via mtg check, then by all means go for it. Maybe you're not on their radar anyway and all will be fine. But, please share your results regardless of outcome, I think the members of this community who are keenly reading this thread trying to parse together information would appreciate it.
May 15, 2013, 4:57 pm
#358
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: BOS, MHT
Programs: AA ltg, B6, DL, UA, AS, SPG/Marriott Plt, HH, Hyatt
Posts: 10,052
Id be doing something similar at least on my first set of points--to get my money's worth as it were. I wont try for checks as they could bounce. Something more "one way" redemptions such as gc and travel will work for me.
May 15, 2013, 5:23 pm
#359
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Florida
Posts: 29,772
Well... it's just that, a 'theory' at the moment. But, given what you've described previous to your TYA going under review (and being told you would receive a 'letter' within 30 days), I'm looking for plausible explanations. Frankly I don't see anyone here as 'innocent' here. Innocent meaning innocent of 'not being profitable to the bank'.
So, I'm thinking a set of events like this could well have taken place:
1) Request of MTG check triggers computer response (that itself being the flag, not conditional on value of it)
2) Further automated investigation shows TYP balance larger than X. In your case it was 19x,xxx
3) Manual review of customer shows history of signing up for various Citi CC's
4) Decision on 'profitability' of customer and whether they want to keep customer...
Again, just pure speculation here... but, it does seem that Citi is actively putting in some sort of 'new' process here... and likely changing often.
Recent reports seem to indicate that the MTG check is a trigger now. So much so that it seems the mere request for said check starts the review process before points are deducted from account and check is even produced (I guess Citi thought it prudent to stop bouncing checks as they had been for the past month on this).
So, not sure 'how' I'd suggest to cash out at this point, but, if I had a 6 digit TYP balance at this point, however, I 'would' be cashing out.
So, I'm thinking a set of events like this could well have taken place:
1) Request of MTG check triggers computer response (that itself being the flag, not conditional on value of it)
2) Further automated investigation shows TYP balance larger than X. In your case it was 19x,xxx
3) Manual review of customer shows history of signing up for various Citi CC's
4) Decision on 'profitability' of customer and whether they want to keep customer...
Again, just pure speculation here... but, it does seem that Citi is actively putting in some sort of 'new' process here... and likely changing often.
Recent reports seem to indicate that the MTG check is a trigger now. So much so that it seems the mere request for said check starts the review process before points are deducted from account and check is even produced (I guess Citi thought it prudent to stop bouncing checks as they had been for the past month on this).
So, not sure 'how' I'd suggest to cash out at this point, but, if I had a 6 digit TYP balance at this point, however, I 'would' be cashing out.
The 30 days is the boiler plate language the rude TYP supervisor said to me this morning.
The customer service manager got a different answer from the TYP side - she asked about the 30 days, "they" told her no, no, she did not need to wait 30 days. It is normally a couple weeks they would finish a review. Further more, she was told that the managers over TYP side do not see any notes being put on the account other than it is locked. According to the CS manager, "they" actually agreed to speed the review process and would contact me both by phone and by letter. That was all she was able to accomplish. She was feeling bad about her inability to help. She gave me a different toll free number for TYP and told me to call back if nothing changed by Friday or latest Monday morning.
Based on what I was just told privately, there is at least a person whose account is locked sometime in the middle of billing cycle but is told that a resolution would come at his next billing cycle. His card remains open as of now. He is a "normal" user.
My speculation is, a check request would trigger a review, regardless the value of the check. However a review does not always mean death of the account if a human really spends time to go over account activities. It remains to be seen.
Last edited by Happy; May 19, 2013 at 1:03 pm