Bank of America aims new credit card at illegal immigrants

[Fandango 1,440]

BoA is free to do what BoA wants, and apparantly does...but I really do have a problem with being able to hold an American credit card if you have no ss#. Simple as that.

Do you have a problem with someone being able to get a mortgage if they have no Social Security number?

foreign investors buy property all the time, we both know that. And we both also know there's a bigger paper trail with any land purchase than with opening one of these CCs.

Having the only prerequisite being you need a bank acct for 3 mos only, which also only requires limited documentation to open up is hardly the same thing.

No it's not the same thing at all. There's a bigger paper trail because of it's property. This is a credit card we are talking about.

But philosophically I think they are very similar.

There's some assumptions being made here that no SS number and a limited credit history makes one 'illegal' or 'potentially dangerous' or 'uncreditworthy'. I think those are some pretty big assumptions to make based on just a couple of factors.

Would you not sell a house to a client if you found out they only had a TIN? Would you give up that potential commission based on that?

My objection is not philisophical in nature. The lack of a paper trail is what annoys me. You admit there's a bigger paper trail with housing purchases, therefore I don't see how your analogy is even relevant.

I have never said 'illegal' 'terrorist' or 'uncreditworthy', so take that up with whomever said it, but it wasn't me.

But my opinion is it IS potentially dangerous. My concerns were based on the potential hazzards for identity theft. Talking about my commission on houses has nowt to do with that

eta: re: uncreditworthy....erm, now that you bring it up....don't think for a sec BoA is doing this out of the kindness of their hearts, and for this service there will be a premium APR. If one was creditworthy, one would get a lower rated card. Of course that is assumption, but I doubt anyone here would disagree...no matter where the stand is on this issue!

Edited February 14, 2007 by LisaD

[rebeccajo 14]

BoA is free to do what BoA wants, and apparantly does...but I really do have a problem with being able to hold an American credit card if you have no ss#. Simple as that.

Do you have a problem with someone being able to get a mortgage if they have no Social Security number?

foreign investors buy property all the time, we both know that. And we both also know there's a bigger paper trail with any land purchase than with opening one of these CCs.

Having the only prerequisite being you need a bank acct for 3 mos only, which also only requires limited documentation to open up is hardly the same thing.

No it's not the same thing at all. There's a bigger paper trail because of it's property. This is a credit card we are talking about.

But philosophically I think they are very similar.

There's some assumptions being made here that no SS number and a limited credit history makes one 'illegal' or 'potentially dangerous' or 'uncreditworthy'. I think those are some pretty big assumptions to make based on just a couple of factors.

Would you not sell a house to a client if you found out they only had a TIN? Would you give up that potential commission based on that?

My objection is not philisophical in nature. The lack of a paper trail is what annoys me. You admit there's a bigger paper trail with housing purchases, therefore I don't see how your analogy is even relevant.

I have never said 'illegal' 'terrorist' or 'uncreditworthy', so take that up with whomever said it, but it wasn't me.

But my opinion is it IS potentially dangerous. My concerns were based on the potential hazzards for identity theft. Talking about my commission on houses has nowt to do with that

eta: re: uncreditworthy....erm, now that you bring it up....don't think for a sec BoA is doing this out of the kindness of their hearts, and for this service there will be a premium APR. If one was creditworthy, one would get a lower rated card. Of course that is assumption, but I doubt anyone here would disagree...no matter where the stand is on this issue!

I brought up the commission only to draw an analogy about making money. Which is what the bank is trying to do. The question was rhetorical - from that perspective I feel it's relevant.

A social security number is not a means of identification. If that's all a person is carrying on them as ID, I don't know a business that will accept that. What I perceive is being done here is loosening some of the boilerplate identity regimen that businesses try to pigeon-hole consumers with.

Credit cards are prime for identity theft - I really don't see how not being able to produce a social security number would make this product a more likely target than any other card that requires one. Indeed, it's the social secuity number that often gets stolen and used - as if it were some sort of magic key.

I'm sure you are right that the APR is high. There may be some other fees associated as well. It's not my contention that this is a great deal. It's just another product designed to serve a market demographic.

The point of the article was 'illegal'. And that was the point of the original post, I believe. Any comments I made regarding that are to clarify my feelings on that issue. Not to point a finger at you personally, Lisa.

[Fandango 1,440]

I brought up the commission only to draw an analogy about making money. Which is what the bank is trying to do. The question was rhetorical - from that perspective I feel it's relevant.

A social security number is not a means of identification. If that's all a person is carrying on them as ID, I don't know a business that will accept that. What I perceive is being done here is loosening some of the boilerplate identity regimen that businesses try to pigeon-hole consumers with.

Credit cards are prime for identity theft - I really don't see how not being able to produce a social security number would make this product a more likely target than any other card that requires one. Indeed, it's the social secuity number that often gets stolen and used - as if it were some sort of magic key.

I'm sure you are right that the APR is high. There may be some other fees associated as well. It's not my contention that this is a great deal. It's just another product designed to serve a market demographic.

The point of the article was 'illegal'. And that was the point of the original post, I believe. Any comments I made regarding that are to clarify my feelings on that issue. Not to point a finger at you personally, Lisa.

No no no, I'm not thinking you're pointing the finger at me, but you brought up things in your response to me that I didn't say re: the illegal, terrorist, uncreditworthy labels. Since they're in response to what I say, I just wanted to point out that I didn't say any of them, therefore I'm not the one to explain why they were being said.

I think not having a ss# to crossreference a cc acct with carries a higher risk of identity fraud. I believe in a paper trail. Of course a social is not a form of id such as a passport or dl, but it is a valuable piece to the puzzle that is you. With no social to steal, then the identity thiefs are one step closer. I believe not requring a ss holds potential dangers.

I don't quite get the analogy of 'making money' even with your explanation, because since the dawn of time (exaggerating here obviously), cc companies make money by issuing charge cards. That's great...whatever...I really don't care how much they charge, what the rates are...I'm very much a believer in the consumer taking the responsibility in that scenario. Yet a major step of the process is being overlooked for the bottom line. Now if you want to revert again to your commission analogy, I don't reinvent the wheel at my job. There's a process and it gets done. After it gets done is when I get paid. It doesn't get followed...I don't get paid. There are many customers that would be able to buy homes if steps were skipped in the paper trail...but them's the breaks. The steps are followed and the job gets done. The bank surely is trying to make money, but they're doing it in a dangerous fashion...with semi-verifiable identities. That's not cool. I don't care how much they make when the process is followed, but allowing shortcuts in an electronic age like today is simply wrong, and reckless.

Edited February 14, 2007 by LisaD

[rebeccajo 14]

....... I don't reinvent the wheel at my job. There's a process and it gets done. After it gets done is when I get paid. It doesn't get followed...I don't get paid. There are many customers that would be able to buy homes if steps were skipped in the paper trail...but them's the breaks. The steps are followed and the job gets done. The bank surely is trying to make money, but they're doing it in a dangerous fashion...with semi-verifiable identities. That's not cool. I don't care how much they make when the process is followed, but allowing shortcuts in an electronic age like today is simply wrong, and reckless.

But banks do change mortgage processes all the time. In fact when banks started doing 'low document' mortgages they seriously altered the process by decreasing the amount of verification required. In the 80's when I processed mortgages, we had to send out forms verifying employment and assets. We had to wait around to get those back before we could submit the loan, the loan could close, and everybody got paid. Now you just bring in your paystub and bank statements - poof - approved. Tell me a really crafty individual can't forge those documents. To verify identity, my boss is required to collect a photo ID from the buyer. I know - a photo ID can be forged as well. But - by and large that WASN'T done back then. So the checks and balances take place elsewhere in the transaction.

I'm not saying you're completely wrong or off-base. I just don't see this new product as being any more likely to be used for identity theft than any other type of credit card.

As to the issue of the implied point of the news article - outrage over this product as being something designed to attract the EWI community is a waste of energy IMO. When you've gone down the 'documented' path of immigration it's pretty easy to get PO'd about the concept of anything that 'caters' to those who did differently than you. But like it or not - this is the way things are changing. Our Congress will pass laws this year that will change the face of immigration. IT WILL HAPPEN. Those of us who came here legally would be better served in asking Congress to assure the changes will benefit our category of immigrant as well as the undocumented kind. And to use any tools that business creates to serve others by embracing it as something we can use also.

Edited February 14, 2007 by rebeccajo

[pedroh 21]

....... I don't reinvent the wheel at my job. There's a process and it gets done. After it gets done is when I get paid. It doesn't get followed...I don't get paid. There are many customers that would be able to buy homes if steps were skipped in the paper trail...but them's the breaks. The steps are followed and the job gets done. The bank surely is trying to make money, but they're doing it in a dangerous fashion...with semi-verifiable identities. That's not cool. I don't care how much they make when the process is followed, but allowing shortcuts in an electronic age like today is simply wrong, and reckless.

But banks do change mortgage processes all the time. In fact when banks started doing 'low document' mortgages they seriously altered the process by decreasing the amount of verification required. In the 80's when I processed mortgages, we had to send out forms verifying employment and assets. We had to wait around to get those back before we could submit the loan, the loan could close, and everybody got paid. Now you just bring in your paystub and bank statements - poof - approved. Tell me a really crafty individual can't forge those documents. To verify identity, my boss is required to collect a photo ID from the buyer. I know - a photo ID can be forged as well. But - by and large that WASN'T done back then. So the checks and balances take place elsewhere in the transaction.

I'm not saying you're completely wrong or off-base. I just don't see this new product as being any more likely to be used for identity theft than any other type of credit card.

As to the issue of the implied point of the news article - outrage over this product as being something designed to attract the EWI community is a waste of energy IMO. When you've gone down the 'documented' path of immigration it's pretty easy to get PO'd about the concept of anything that 'caters' to those who did differently than you. But like it or not - this is the way things are changing. Our Congress will pass laws this year that will change the face of immigration. IT WILL HAPPEN. Those of us who came here legally would be better served in asking Congress to assure the changes will benefit our category of immigrant as well as the undocumented kind. And to use any tools that business creates to serve others by embracing it as something we can use also.

bravo..

[Fandango 1,440]

....... I don't reinvent the wheel at my job. There's a process and it gets done. After it gets done is when I get paid. It doesn't get followed...I don't get paid. There are many customers that would be able to buy homes if steps were skipped in the paper trail...but them's the breaks. The steps are followed and the job gets done. The bank surely is trying to make money, but they're doing it in a dangerous fashion...with semi-verifiable identities. That's not cool. I don't care how much they make when the process is followed, but allowing shortcuts in an electronic age like today is simply wrong, and reckless.

But banks do change mortgage processes all the time. In fact when banks started doing 'low document' mortgages they seriously altered the process by decreasing the amount of verification required. In the 80's when I processed mortgages, we had to send out forms verifying employment and assets. We had to wait around to get those back before we could submit the loan, the loan could close, and everybody got paid. Now you just bring in your paystub and bank statements - poof - approved. Tell me a really crafty individual can't forge those documents. To verify identity, my boss is required to collect a photo ID from the buyer. I know - a photo ID can be forged as well. But - by and large that WASN'T done back then. So the checks and balances take place elsewhere in the transaction.

I'm not saying you're completely wrong or off-base. I just don't see this new product as being any more likely to be used for identity theft than any other type of credit card.

As to the issue of the implied point of the news article - outrage over this product as being something designed to attract the EWI community is a waste of energy IMO. When you've gone down the 'documented' path of immigration it's pretty easy to get PO'd about the concept of anything that 'caters' to those who did differently than you. But like it or not - this is the way things are changing. Our Congress will pass laws this year that will change the face of immigration. IT WILL HAPPEN. Those of us who came here legally would be better served in asking Congress to assure the changes will benefit our category of immigrant as well as the undocumented kind. And to use any tools that business creates to serve others by embracing it as something we can use also.

foreign investors buy property all the time, we both know that. And we both also know there's a bigger paper trail with any land purchase than with opening one of these CCs.

Having the only prerequisite being you need a bank acct for 3 mos only, which also only requires limited documentation to open up is hardly the same thing.

No it's not the same thing at all. There's a bigger paper trail because it is real estate.

[Heracles 417]

Why in the world would I be angry with a bank if somebody improperly used a service the bank offers?

I'd be angry if the bank FUNDED the terrorist act.

I just don't equate having to provide certain types of ID to obtain services as something proactive to preventing terror or stopping the flow of EWI's.

I see those types of things as 'big-brother-ish'.

Can you walk into a bank in Ireland and setup a bank account on the fly, let alone a credit card..

OWNED

although true, you can't get a drivers license in some states without a SS# or proper visas and stuff, it's not just giving a credit card to anybody who walks in and asks for one.. besides, it's a credit card, not a bank account where u can save your money.. and I don't think BOA is gonna give'em 10k dollars as starting limit.. unless it's a charge card.. now collection agencies can charge u balances even if you don't have a SS#

Dude, Of course your going to support this sort of #######.

[Heracles 417]

What is next? No document mortgages to illegal immigrants.

[pedroh 21]

Why in the world would I be angry with a bank if somebody improperly used a service the bank offers?

I'd be angry if the bank FUNDED the terrorist act.

I just don't equate having to provide certain types of ID to obtain services as something proactive to preventing terror or stopping the flow of EWI's.

I see those types of things as 'big-brother-ish'.

Can you walk into a bank in Ireland and setup a bank account on the fly, let alone a credit card..

OWNED

although true, you can't get a drivers license in some states without a SS# or proper visas and stuff, it's not just giving a credit card to anybody who walks in and asks for one.. besides, it's a credit card, not a bank account where u can save your money.. and I don't think BOA is gonna give'em 10k dollars as starting limit.. unless it's a charge card.. now collection agencies can charge u balances even if you don't have a SS#

Dude, Of course your going to support this sort of #######.

when I was studying in Holland I got a bank account with just the college ID I was attending to..

I don't see the big 'dangers' of some dude having a $300 limit credit card.. really don't.. and that actually would help lower crime, usually illegals keep their cash @ home, under the couch or something crazy like that, they get robbed a lot, even cops do it (around here).. so that'd keep their cash safe, and no robberies or deaths

Edited February 16, 2007 by pedroh

[Cali Gal CPA 0]

####### I am cutting up my B of A card!

Me too! This is crazy, no wonder we can't keep illegals from coming into this country, corporations like BofA just makes it easier for them. Well, goodbye BofA I will never conduct business with ya again!

[Ban Hammer 13,773]

when I was studying in Holland I got a bank account with just the college ID I was attending to..

I don't see the big 'dangers' of some dude having a $300 limit credit card.. really don't.. and that actually would help lower crime, usually illegals keep their cash @ home, under the couch or something crazy like that, they get robbed a lot, even cops do it (around here).. so that'd keep their cash safe, and no robberies or deaths

only $300? is that the limit of this card?

[Heracles 417]

when I was studying in Holland I got a bank account with just the college ID I was attending to..

What sort of account would you have received if you jumped the border into Holland? Europe has some of the toughest unlawful immigration laws out there..

It seems that you group, in the same category, legal residents with unlawful residents..

[pedroh 21]

when I was studying in Holland I got a bank account with just the college ID I was attending to..

I don't see the big 'dangers' of some dude having a $300 limit credit card.. really don't.. and that actually would help lower crime, usually illegals keep their cash @ home, under the couch or something crazy like that, they get robbed a lot, even cops do it (around here).. so that'd keep their cash safe, and no robberies or deaths

only $300? is that the limit of this card?

you think BoA is gonna give them a $1000 limit credit card to start with? I don't think so.. for low credit customers the CC's start usually at $200 or $300 when they start, so I don't think the people withouth SS#'s are gonna be considered people with good credit

[pedroh 21]

when I was studying in Holland I got a bank account with just the college ID I was attending to..

What sort of account would you have received if you jumped the border into Holland? Europe has some of the toughest unlawful immigration laws out there..

It seems that you group, in the same category, legal residents with unlawful residents..

no.. but I think it's BS to try to tell private companies to enforce policies that they are not even required to.. is like in a retail store when someone gives u a fake SS card, u're not even authorized to tell the customer 'hey this is sooo fake'.. so if everybody wants to keep a laisez-faire govt free market and economy, I don't see why some companies need to apply some big brother regulations..

besides, while I'm a resident, not a citizen, I will be subject to those stupid paranoia act rules and whatnot, and I know you love being a good resident and 'oh yea i have nothing to hide etc etc'... but for me all that is aggravating and a loss of time, so, yeah, my main purpose is to be bothered the less possible with BS..

[pedroh 21]

when I was studying in Holland I got a bank account with just the college ID I was attending to..

What sort of account would you have received if you jumped the border into Holland? Europe has some of the toughest unlawful immigration laws out there..

It seems that you group, in the same category, legal residents with unlawful residents..

no.. but I think it's BS to try to tell private companies to enforce policies that they are not even required to.. is like in a retail store when someone gives u a fake SS card, u're not even authorized to tell the customer 'hey this is sooo fake'.. so if everybody wants to keep a laisez-faire govt free market and economy, I don't see why some companies need to apply some big brother regulations..

besides, while I'm a resident, not a citizen, I will be subject to those stupid paranoia act rules and whatnot, and I know you love being a good resident and 'oh yea i have nothing to hide etc etc'... but for me all that is aggravating and a loss of time, so, yeah, my main purpose is to be bothered the less possible with BS..