Connect with us

News

BEWARE: Deserve credit cards are a SCAM! Avoid the Facebook ads

Published

on

KNNP-TV News is investigating what appears to be a social media campaign that is targeting younger adults and college students alike.

According to various reports online, the company behind the scam is Deserve.

Deserve colelcts sensative information, including your Facebook profile link, your basic contact information, and your social security number.

A fraudlent Facebook ad for Deserve.com

Credit repair experts told KNNP-TV news that Deserve is a fraudlent credit card company, and that you should avoid them at all costs.

“Deserve is a credit card company, with no contact info. When we pinged their website registrant details, it came back blank.” said one expert via telephone interview.

KNNP-TV decided to look into this matter further, by pulling the website details.

Deserve.com is a scam
Deserve.com hides all their contact information

Next, we decided to look at professional reviews. Surely a “legit” credit card company would have excellent unbiased reviews… right? Deserve’s credit card failed the professionals review.

As we looked at WalletHub, one of the nations leading economic website, we noticed an issue. The editor only gave them a 3 out of 5 star review, hmmm? https://wallethub.com/edu/cc/deserve-classic-credit-card-review/47093/

Next, we checked CreditCards.com – the largest website used to validate credit card. CreditCards.com only gave Deserve a 2 out of 5-star rating, how horrible! https://www.creditcards.com/reviews/deserve-edu-mastercard-for-students-review/

Following on the path, we decided to look at the BBB (Better Business Bureau) website for details about Deserve. As labeled, they are a :”new company”. Fair enough, but if they have only been accredited since 2016, that means they likely have zero complaints, right? Wrong again. Deserve managed to gather 15 recent formal complaints. Let’s take a look at how much of a scam Deserve really is.

“I thought there would be no hard inquiry since it said that you don’t need credit to apply. However, a credit inquiry shows up on my report.”

” I applied for the Deserve Classic credit card, this is the only card I did the whole process of applying for, because it is advertised by Deserve that “No Prior Credit History Required” exactly how it is stated on their website and I was denied the Deserve Classic for having “No Prior Credit History”. “

Seems kinda suspicious they are publishing scams….

Finally, we reached out to a viewer who ran into a whole mess. The individual wishes to remain anonymous, but they say that they have been scammed by Deserve.

“I had my Deserve account set on automatic payments. It would come out regularly, and I had no issues with the credit card at first. Then, I looked at my credit report. They decided to cancel automatic payment from my account without my permission, and I was marked late on my report. I tried calling customer service multiple times, but they were always closed when I tried to call. Fianlly one day I had this number that kept calling me from California. I answered it, and it was Deserve. They wanted to collect their minimum payment for the past 2 months. I told them I would pay the balance immediately if they removed the late remark from my credit report as it was their fault. Their foreign representative obliged and said it would be removed as soon as I paid. So, I gave them my routing details, and he helped get me back into my account following being locked out of the account.”

When our viewer thought this nightmare was over, they soon realized it had just began.

“About a week later I noticed the remark was still on my credit report. I email their generic support team, who told me I paid within the grace period and the late remark should have never been added to my report. Finally after another week or two, I noticed it was still on. I was told that under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, I would have to DEAL with it being on my report, even after two reprentatives told me it would be remvoed,a nd it was their fault. Finally someone from their compliance department contact me after I filed a BBB review. the compliance rep was extremely rude, and possibly drunk while working ont he job. He told me that he had listened to all phone calls, and that what I said never happened.”

KNNP-TV would like to remind residents in our viewing area that Pennsylvania is a two-party consent state, and Deserve does not mention the call is being recorded via their support hotline.

Deserve is one of the cards targeted to young individuals who are naive to give their information willingly. It is sad that a fraudlent credit card company would try to harm college students, young adults, and practically anyone just to collect their private information, and likely sell it while ruining credit reports for people with big hopes and dreams.

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

California’s vague new financial regulation law

Published

on

California Capitol. Photo by Anne Wernikoff for CalMatters

In summary

California has a new financial regulation law but its reach is vague and awaits more definition.

Assembly Bill 1864 didn’t get much media or public attention as it zipped through both houses of the Legislature on the last day of the 2020 session.

Superficially, it appeared merely to reconfigure the state’s financial regulatory agencies into a new entity called the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation.

However, those in California’s vast financial industry were paying lots of attention because the bill creates an entirely new regulatory regime with broad powers, including fines of up to $1 million a day, to police financial players that hitherto have had little oversight.

The official rationale for the legislation is that President Donald Trump’s administration neutered the federal Dodd-Frank Wall Street Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010, so the state must step in with an equivalent to guard against predatory financial practices that harm consumers.

The new California Consumer Financial Protection Law gives the reconstituted agency authority to go after “abusive practices” whose definition in the law is fairly vague. Thus, the agency itself will define the term as it also decides which businesses will face its scrutiny.

It appears that the new law will affect firms involved in debt settlement, credit repair, check cashing, rent-to-own contracts, payday lending, student loan servicing and financing for retail sales. However, its primary target seems to be financial services offered by non-banks, particularly what are called “fintech companies” that offer bank-like services via the Internet without maintaining physical offices.

Fintechs, many of them based in the San Francisco Bay Area, have blossomed in recent years as part of the digital economy, competing with traditional brick-and-mortar banks. Their disruptive nature is not unlike the challenge that technology-based ride services such as Uber and Lyft pose to taxicabs and buses.

Late-blooming changes in AB 1864 exempted traditional financial firms that are already regulated, such as banks and credit unions, from the new consumer protection law, leading some analysts to conclude that its unstated aim is to help them stave off competition from new kids on the financial block.

The vagueness of the new law was encapsulated in what Gov. Gavin Newsom said during a signing ceremony. The new law and the new department, he said, will “create conditions for innovation to flourish in a way where we can steward that and we can just work against its excesses. So we support risk-taking, not recklessness.”

Newsom also signed two other financial protection measures, one that requires debt collectors to be licensed beginning in 2022 and the other creating a Student Loan Borrower Bill of Rights.

Although the new state law is said to mirror the Dodd-Frank law, it contains at least one significant difference. When federal regulators levy fines for what they consider to be bad conduct, the money goes into the federal treasury. When state regulators impose their fines of up to $1 million a day, the money will be retained by the new agency to finance more activity.

Will that give the new agency a financial incentive to skip over minor consumer issues and go after big companies? It’s a question that only time will answer.

Significantly too, the new investigative and regulatory mechanism contained in AB 1864 specifically does not usurp the authority of the attorney general to also target companies under the state’s equally vague “unfair competition” law.

From its inception a decade ago, Dodd-Frank has attracted criticism from business executives for regulatory overkill. Will California’s new version be less controversial? We won’t know until the new agency puts some definitional meat on its bones.



Source link

Continue Reading

News

California’s vague new financial regulation law – Whittier Daily News

Published

on

Assembly Bill 1864 didn’t get much media or public attention as it zipped through both houses of the Legislature on the last day of the 2020 session.

Superficially, it appeared merely to reconfigure the state’s financial regulatory agencies into a new entity called the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation.

However, those in California’s vast financial industry were paying lots of attention because the bill creates an entirely new regulatory regime with broad powers, including fines of up to $1 million a day, to police financial players that hitherto have had little oversight.

The official rationale for the legislation is that President Donald Trump’s administration neutered the federal Dodd-Frank Wall Street Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010, so the state must step in with an equivalent to guard against predatory financial practices that harm consumers.

The new California Consumer Financial Protection Law gives the reconstituted agency authority to go after “abusive practices” whose definition in the law is fairly vague. Thus, the agency itself will define the term as it also decides which businesses will face its scrutiny.

It appears that the new law will affect firms involved in debt settlement, credit repair, check cashing, rent-to-own contracts, payday lending, student loan servicing and financing for retail sales. However, its primary target seems to be financial services offered by non-banks, particularly what are called “fintech companies” that offer bank-like services via the Internet without maintaining physical offices.

Fintechs, many of them based in the San Francisco Bay Area, have blossomed in recent years as part of the digital economy, competing with traditional brick-and-mortar banks. Their disruptive nature is not unlike the challenge that technology-based ride services such as Uber and Lyft pose to taxicabs and buses.

Late-blooming changes in AB 1864 exempted traditional financial firms that are already regulated, such as banks and credit unions, from the new consumer protection law, leading some analysts to conclude that its unstated aim is to help them stave off competition from new kids on the financial block.

The vagueness of the new law was encapsulated in what Gov. Gavin Newsom said during a signing ceremony. The new law and the new department, he said, will “create conditions for innovation to flourish in a way where we can steward that and we can just work against its excesses. So we support risk-taking, not recklessness.”

Newsom also signed two other financial protection measures, one that requires debt collectors to be licensed beginning in 2022 and the other creating a Student Loan Borrower Bill of Rights.

Source link

Continue Reading

News

397 people register to vote on deadline day at Duval Supervisor of Elections – 104.5 WOKV

Published

on

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. — Monday, Oct. 5 at midnight, is the deadline to register to vote in Duval County.

But the Supervisor of Elections helped hundreds of people get registered today.

Robert Phillips, the chief elections officer of the Duval Supervisor of Elections, told Action News Jax’s Courtney Cole that 397 people came down to the Supervisor of Elections in downtown Jacksonville to get registered.

Supervisor of Elections staff assembled tents outside to allow people to register to vote without having to go through the COVID-19 prescreening necessary to enter the building.

“Again, 2020 has thrown us some challenges,” Phillips said.

There was even a little rain thrown into the mix today, but it didn’t stop folks from coming out.

“Out here, we have a lot of activity. We’ve been going since first thing this morning,” Phillips told Action News Jax.

There were people of all ages from all walks of life — some even registered for the very first time like Lemark Jamison.

Monday, Oct. 5, is a day he will always remember.

“It feels awesome, you know? It feels awesome,” Jamison told Cole.

Today, Jamison had the opportunity to register to vote for the first time in Florida.

“I’ve worked for voter registration companies. I’ve done advocating for Amendment 4, but I was never able to vote because of my prior background. But now I can,” Jamison said.

Jamison, the owner of a tax and credit repair business, told Cole his prior felony conviction held him back in the past.

In November 2018, more than 60% of Floridians voted to restore voting rights to more than 1 million people who completed their sentences.

But several months later, legislation was passed that required them to pay all financial penalties, which means thousands lost the right as quickly as they gained it.

“I’ve been contributing to society. I’ve been able to have several businesses. And I pay taxes. But I haven’t been able to, when it comes to voting, whether in a local level or any type of legislature — I haven’t been able to vote,” Jamison said.

The 35-year-old told Cole even though his wife helped him fill out his voter registration form — to which he exclaimed, “Thank God for wives, right?” — he told Cole it was pretty easy.

Now, he has this advice to share with other people who may be in his shoes:

“Get out and vote. Take advantage of this opportunity, regardless of who you plan on voting for.”

Here’s a breakdown from the Supervisor of Elections of how the 397 people registered today:

-56% registered as Democrats.

-21% registered as Republicans.

-22% registered as nonparty affiliates.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending