First National Bank of Omaha Credit Card Complaint

First National Bank of Omaha Credit card department,

Payoff process Georgia

The Banks holding Credit-Card Debt are UN-FAIRLY manipulating their Payment Allocation '' ( methodology ) to FAVOR Pay-Down '' of LOWER Interest-rate Remaining Balance-Due '' while INCREASING those


Charge Summary '' as those Line-Items '' depicting ( Your ) various Purchases '' or Cash Advance '' or Balance Transfer '' or Special/Loan/Program '' followed by It 's Terms '' itemized as APR '' with Fixed Interest '' ( terms ) depicted as ( f ) and Variable Interest '' ( terms ) depicted ( v ), then followed by Balance Subject to Interest Rate '', then Days Rate Used '', and finally that Interest Charged '' ( You ) over those ( Days ) It was accrued as-such. Whereas I have - ITEMS on My Charge Summary '' for them to Allocate Payment '' - and DESPITE that I PAID OVER $36.00 MORE THAN My Minimum payment Due '' of $240.00 ( for actually paying $280.00 ) - The Banks Payment Allocation '' rather went-down exampled as-follows : ( A ) BT SPECIAL '' ( Balance Transfer Special ) amount of $10000.00 [email protected] % ( v ) RATHER INCREASED $1.00 to $10000.00 for NO PAYMENT ALLOCATION WHATSOEVER ~ AND DESPITE ME PAYING MORE THAN $36.00 ABOVE the minimum-payment due '' AND well-before It 's Due Date ''. ( B ) BT SPECIAL '' outstanding-balance of $600.00 [email protected] % ( v ) DECREASED to $570.00 for the Payment Allocation '' to It of $29.00 ( C ) BT SPECIAL '' outstanding-balance of $1800.00 [email protected] % ( f ) DECREASED to $1600.00 for a Payment Allocation '' of $170.00 ~ Indeed HERE is where THEY apply THE LION-SHARE of that $280.00 Payment '' ... toward paying-down what Balance '' I 've secured at Low/Fixed-Interest :? IT 'S A PROBELM TO CONSUMERS WHEN PAYMENT ALLOCATIONS '' ARE RATHER MIS-ALLOCATED TO RATHER CAUSE AN INCREASE IN OUTSTANDING DEBT! IT 'S A PROBLEM TO CONSUMERS WHEN PAYING THE MINIMUM PAYMENT DOES N'T AT-LEAST ABATE NEGATIVE AMORTIZATION '' ( Growth vs. Reduction ) OF ONES DEBT ''!! IT 'S A PROBLEM TO CONSUMERS WHEN PAYMENT ALLOCATIONS RATHER PERPETUALLY INCREASE THOSE BALANCES REMAINING '' AT HIGHER INTEREST DESPITE ONE MAKING MORE-THAN THE MINIMUM PAYMENT DUE '' BECAUSE IT 'S UN-FAIR AND ETHICALLY WRONG!!! The Example again : Whereas My Minimum Payment Due '' was $240.00 - and I rather-paid $280.00 - My - - BT Special '' @ 6 % FI-ED APR Balance Subject to Interest Rate '' ( Balance Outstanding ) DROPPED for a payment-allocation made toward IT of $170.00 ... BUT My - - BT Special ''@7.99 % VARIABLE INCREASED for an additional $1.00 BEING ADDED TO IT ... THIS DESPITE PAYING MORE THAN THE MINIMUM-PAYMENT DUE '' PAYING THE MINIMUM PAYMENT DUE '' SHOULD ALWAYS AT-LEAST SATISFY MAINTENANCE OF THE ACCOUNT STATUS-QUO vs. INDUCE ANY NEGATIVE AMORTIZATION ~ AS IT IS RATHER DOING E-ACTLY AND DESPITE ( ME ) MAKING MORE-THAN THAT MINIMUM PAYMENT DUE ''. This has gone-on for years now despite MINE AND OTHERS protests to Creditors '' and SHOULD therefore now go to FEDERAL Court as a Class-Action Lawsuit to STOP IT!!! This CURRENTLY ALLOWED PRACTICE OF THE BANKS is an UN-FAIR manipulation of that methodology employed to calculate Payment Allocation '' and IT MUST STOP NOW with Mine, Yours, and Our protest TODAY, Thank You.