my own credit card terms

[jay]

Minnesota I applied for a credit card and went through the agreement and crossed out everything like late fees and interest rates and wrote in my own. When I signed it I wrote a note in the space saying that if credit was approved it would be under the terms I had specified and could not be changed for 5 years. I have tried this before but was never accepted. This time I received the card and am wondering if this would hold up in court? Thanks.

 

[shell007]

Minnesota I applied for a credit card and went through the agreement and crossed out everything like late fees and interest rates and wrote in my own. When I signed it I wrote a note in the space saying that if credit was approved it would be under the terms I had specified and could not be changed for 5 years. I have tried this before but was never accepted. This time I received the card and am wondering if this would hold up in court? Thanks.

What are you going to court for?????

Do you just do this for fun???

 

[justalayman]

What are you going to court for?????

Do you just do this for fun???

I would think that this a pre-emptive informational post. I believe the OP wants to know if by issuing the card as a result of the altered application has the company agreed to his terms.

Can't blame him though. Gets tiresome to read "we can change any part of this agreement at any time because we feel like it"

 

[Debt Guy]

Credit card agreements are contracts of adhesion -- which means take it or leave it. You cannot negotiate a contract of adhesion.

Your modification of the card agreement is interesting.

I have no idea if it would hold up court. My guess is that the creditor would argue "it was a contract of adhesion and the consumer agreed to the terms of the original agreement offered by the creditor when the consumer first used the card".

What would the judge do? I really don't know. My guess is they would side with the creditor.

 

[Who's Liable?]

I think I just had an epileptic fit!

 

[Debt Guy]

Huh? **************.

 

[justalayman]

Credit card agreements are contracts of adhesion -- which means take it or leave it. You cannot negotiate a contract of adhesion.

Your modification of the card agreement is interesting.

I have no idea if it would hold up court. My guess is that the creditor would argue "it was a contract of adhesion and the consumer agreed to the terms of the original agreement offered by the creditor when the consumer first used the card".

What would the judge do? I really don't know. My guess is they would side with the creditor.

Does this mean you are "stuck" with it?

 

[LIKE ME!]

Credit card agreements are contracts of adhesion -- which means take it or leave it.

You have no idea what you're talking about. That's one of the most stupidest statements yet!

 

[Debt Guy]

Q. Does this mean you are "stuck" with it?

A. I think you are making a pun -- contract of adhesion -- stuck. Right? But, that is the way it works. If you accept a contract of adhesion you agree to be bound by its terms. Another example of a contract of adhesion is an insurance policy. You either take it or you leave it.

Q. You have no idea what you're talking about. That's one of the most stupidest statements yet!

A. OK. I acknowledge your right to disagree. Heck, I even acknowledge your right to say I am stupid. But, defend your position with facts or a logical argument or at least an explanation of why you think the statement is in error.

 

[justalayman]

Q. Does this mean you are "stuck" with it?

A. I think you are making a pun -- contract of adhesion -- stuck. Right? But, that is the way it works. If you accept a contract of adhesion you agree to be bound by its terms. Another example of a contract of adhesion is an insurance policy. You either take it or you leave it.

Q. You have no idea what you're talking about. That's one of the most stupidest statements yet!

A. OK. I acknowledge your right to disagree. Heck, I even acknowledge your right to say I am stupid. But, defend your position with facts or a logical argument or at least an explanation of why you think the statement is in error.

Yes DB...just humor

 

[jay]

jay

The reason I did this is because 2-3 times in the last several years I have misplaced a bill or been a few days late on a credit card payment. Usually I have been able to get the late fee refunded but it is always a hassle. I am NOT a green but I heard Ralph Nader once challenge his audience to try writing their own terms and see how far it got them. I plan on using this card as responsibly as any but if I am ever late or "over the limit" I do plan on challenging it seeing as I have an agreement that says these fees are $0. Oh, by the way, interest rates are 0% and all terms must be adhered to for a minimum of 5 years! Wish me luck, I think I'll need it! An interesting experiment at least. jay

 

[JETX]

Credit card agreements are contracts of adhesion -- which means take it or leave it. You cannot negotiate a contract of adhesion.

And where in hell did you get THAT??? Since of course, it is NOT correct.

adhesion contract
n.(contract of adhesion) a contract (often a signed form) so imbalanced in favor of one party over the other that there is a strong implication it was not freely bargained. Example: a rich landlord dealing with a poor tenant who has no choice and must accept all terms of a lease, no matter how restrictive or burdensome, since the tenant cannot afford to move. An adhesion contract can give the little guy the opportunity to claim in court that the contract with the big shot is invalid. This doctrine should be used and applied more often, but the same big guy-little guy inequity may apply in the ability to afford a trial or find and pay a resourceful lawyer.

So, now that little 'error' is out of the way.... the REAL answer to the OP is.... Yes, your 'amended contract' COULD be argued as a valid one.... however, you would also have to argue, since they don't 'sign' the agreement, that their issuing the card was in fact their acceptance of your terms.