CreditCards.com editorial, corrections policies

Since its establishment in 2007, CreditCards.com’s editorial department has covered the fast-changing payments industry, publishing breaking news and information of value to consumers every weekday.

CreditCards.com is solely responsible for the information and opinions published on the news and blog portions of its websites (except for user-generated content as defined on our Terms of Use page). Unless otherwise stated, no payment or other consideration has been received from any company, product or person mentioned for placement on our editorial pages. The company makes its revenue chiefly by presenting consumers with side-by-side listings of cards and their features, and collects a fee from card issuers when consumers use the site to obtain a card. The journalists in the editorial department are separate from the company’s business operations. CreditCards.com’s editors and authors average more than 10 years’ journalism experience, and its staffers have won multiple journalism awards.

CreditCards.com’s editorial department strives to publish objective, thorough and accurate news articles and blogs. If you believe we have published something in error or wish to comment on an article, please contact us by e-mail at Editors@CreditCards.com, by fax to (512) 249-5209, or in writing to:

CreditCards.com
9600 N. Mopac, Stonebridge Plaza II, Suite 500
Austin, TX 78759
Attention: Editors

Phone: 512-996-8663, ext. 131

We will correct minor errors of spelling, punctuation and grammar on the website without notice.

When we correct significant errors of fact or substance, we will note those corrections on this page and in a note within the corrected article.

We seek a broad range of viewpoints. As such, we will not correct opinions expressed by people we quote in news articles, or the opinions of those who we solicit to write op-ed pieces for us. We do welcome opposing points of view.

If you wish to correct an article, please send the following information to Editors@CreditCards.com:
1. The URL (Web address) of the article on which you wish to have us correct.
2. Your name and e-mail address. This information will never be shared with any third party, or used in any way except to verify your information, and to contact you for further details.
3. The error. If appropriate, let us know how we can verify that we erred.

This corrections policy applies to articles written or commissioned by CreditCards.com’s editorial department. For questions about information presented by the company’s other departments, see the “Contact us” section.

CORRECTIONS:

February 14, 2020
The article “Is credit card interest tax deductible” incorrectly identified Greenpath credit counselor Jeff Arevalo.

July 29, 2019
The article “How to manage credit card debt ahead of the next recession” quoted a certified financial planner by the name of Patricia Russell, who was later found to have fabricated her identity and credentials.

April 25, 2019
The article “Experian Boost: How to sign up, how soon it ‘boosts’ score” incorrectly stated that Experian Boost data affects FICO score versions released prior to FICO 8.

February 8, 2018
The article “How to use a cash back card as a savings tool” incorrectly reported that SallieMae bank’s student loan services are sponsored by the government.

January 4, 2018
We incorrectly reported that, before 2011, Social Security numbers were assigned based on where and when people were born in the 2015 blog post “Guard the last 4 digits of your Social Security Number – they may be all ID thieves need.”

September 19, 2017
The article incorrectly explained how Plastiq makes payments to merchants using their service in “Plastiq, Tio: Pros, cons of charging your bills through an online service.”

June 15, 2017
We incorrectly stated the number of eligible investment accounts linked to a Fidelity Rewards Visa Signature card that can’t be directly withdrawn without high penalty fees in the story “Cash back cards survey: Complex is out, simple is in.”

March 16, 2017
The article incorrectly stated that only the primary account holder was eligible for the reward in “Who qualifies for the Costco 2% Executive reward?”

March 15, 2017
USAA Bank was described incorrectly in the story “Cash back cards become more generous with rewards.”

Jan. 19, 2017
We mangled the name of the company Armstrong Financial Strategies in the story “Are rewards points taxable or not? Yes.”

Nov. 7, 2016
An incorrect Capital One credit card was mentioned in the story “7 ways rewards cards can trim holiday costs.”

Sept. 14, 2016
The name of readability expert Audrey Riffenburgh was misspelled in the story “Study: Credit card agreements unreadable to most Americans.”

June 30, 2016
The title of David Carlson’s book is “Hustle Away Debt.” As originally published, the title was incorrect in the story “Q&A with David Carlson: How side hustles can pare debt.”

Oct. 26, 2015
VantageScore, not FICO, is the source of free credit scores for USAA customers. It  was misstated in the chart accompanying the article “Cards with free credit scores.”

July 2, 2015
The fees for Zipmark echeck processing services were misstated in the story, “Lowering merchant fees on large sales.” Fees for the company’s services start at 50 cents per transaction. The story has been corrected to reflect that.

Jan. 29, 2015
In the story headlined What merchant information is required on receipts?, small-business attorney Jason M. Gordon said he was not aware of any consumer protection law that requires a retailer to print the store’s name, address and telephone number on customer receipts. Further research by CreditCards.com and Gordon revealed that the Electronic Fund Transfer Act does require some identifying information on customer receipts, and the story has been changed to reflect that.

Nov. 12, 2014
The review period for a proposed rule affecting prepaid cards was misstated in the story, “New rules aim to tame prepaid cards.” The correct period is 90 days from the date of the proposed rule’s publication in the Federal Register, which occurred Dec. 23.

Oct. 7, 2014
The number of people employed part-time in September 2014 in the story, “Fed: Card balances fall for the first time in months,” was incorrectly stated. It has been corrected to be 7.1 million.

Sept. 30., 2014
A chart within the story headlined “Retailers roll out layaway plans early for 2014 holidays” had data switched: Information regarding Wal-Mart’s layaway program appeared in the column labeled Sears, and vice versa.

Feb. 13, 2014
The story, “Rewards programs move toward flexible, immediate spending” misspelled the name of Melanie Backs.

Jan. 29, 2014
The reader Q&A headlined “Can you build business credit without a Social Security number?” reported that the application for Chase’s Ink Plus card asks for a Taxpayer Identification Number but says that if you don’t have one you can supply a Social Security number. It omitted the fact that Chase requires a Social Security number to complete the application, even if you have a TIN.

July 1, 2013
The story headlined “Bill to curb employer credit check passes N.Y. Assembly” reported nine states had laws limiting pre-employment credit checks. It omitted a 10th state, Nevada, which passed such a law in May.

April 29, 2013
The story “Card add-on products stage a comeback” mischaracterized Capital One’s free credit monitoring services as applying to a secured card for students. The credit monitoring comes with the company’s secured card and its Journey credit card for students.

Jan. 25, 2013
The story “Credit card surcharges now allowed” misspelled the name of Mitch Goldstone’s company, ScanMyPhotos.com.

Oct. 27, 2011
The story “Gift card scams: How to spot them, how to avoid being a victim” misspelled the name of Peter Camenzind.

Oct. 25, 2011
A story headlined “7 ways to protect your credit rating during unemployment” incorrectly referred to employers checking prospective employees’ credit scores. While employers may and do check job applicants’ credit reports, the credit bureaus do not provide them with the credit scores derived from the reports.

June 8, 2011
As originally published, a pair of stories titled “Cure your defaulted student loan in six steps” and “Debunking a myth about wage garnishment and student loans” asserted that under the federal program for rehabilitating defaulted student loans, it is solely at the debtor’s discretion to decide what a “reasonable and affordable” repayment amount would be. While the debtor has considerable input in setting the amount, the decision on the repayment amount is not solely up to the debtor. It is a sum negotiated between the debtor and creditor that requires the debtor to document income and ability to pay.

April 25, 2011
A story published April 20, 2011, that now carries the headline “Shift in student credit cards sends interest rates higher” originally had a misleading headline, one which could be construed to say a Chase move had directly impacted the national average credit card APR. Chase’s decision to no longer market a card triggered a change in the CreditCards.com database of cards, which indirectly caused a change in the national average.

April 21, 2011
As originally published, a story headlined “Study: Prepaid card can be better deal than a checking account,” published March 31, 2011, indicated that funds held on individuals’ reloadable debit cards were not FDIC insured. They are. A 2008 FDIC ruling made clear that even if a debit card issuer is not a bank, and it pools the funds of the debit card holders into a single account, FDIC insurance “passes through” to individual account holders.

Oct. 6, 2010
A reader Q&A titled “Act fast when hit by credit card fraud, even if mom and dad were to blame,” published Oct. 6, 2010, got wrong the name of the Identity Theft Resource Center.

June 26, 2010
The article “4 keys to credit, debit card zero-liability policies,” published June 10, 2010, incorrectly characterized the way PIN-based debit card transactions are processed.

May 20, 2010
A reader Q&A titled “Comparing desperate options: bankruptcy vs. debt negotiation” published May 3, 2010, incorrectly said credit scores are used by employers in hiring decisions. They are not, credit reports are.

Feb. 13, 2010
An article about the FTC considering new regulations on ‘negative options’ misstated the nature of the product that triggered one consumer’s complaint.

Feb. 2, 2010
Two articles — “A guide to the Credit CARD Act of 2009” and “New Fed rules don’t cover business, corporate cards” — incorrectly described which service members are entitled to interest rate protection under the Service Members’ Civil Relief Act. The act’s benefits apply to active duty military personnel.

Nov. 9, 2009
A pair of stories published Nov. 5, 2009, erroneously said Discover cards would boost penalty rates in the wake of the passage of a credit card reform law. The mistake was in the stories headlined “Discover debuts reform-law compliant credit card terms” and “Rates steady this week, but banks keep tweaking other terms.” The first story also stated that Capital One had pledged to forgo rate increases immediately as a result of the coming of that reform law; Capital One says it will be in compliance with the law’s restrictions, which go into effect in 2010.

Sept. 9, 2009
An article titled Personal finance boot camps fight debt with hard-nosed approach, incorrectly stated the location of a financial boot camp run by Travis. It is in St. Louis.

June 17, 2009
An article titled 10 things you should know about identity theft, stated that your hotel room keys contain your personal information. This is an urban legend and is not true.

March 2, 2009
The article titled 7 credit card myths debunked, stated stated that Sam’s Club only accepted Discover and its own branded credit card. The chain also accepts MasterCard for in-store purchases, though they do not take American Express or Visa.

Feb. 25, 2009
In an article titled How different are Visa, AmEx, MasterCard and Discover?, it was incorrectly stated that Discover exclusively issues its own cards. The firm partners with several other card-issuing banks.

Feb. 18, 2009
In an article headlined 4 reasons you should get a department store credit card, the company name DebtGoal.com was misspelled.

Feb. 12, 2009
In a pair of Q&A columns titled Take these steps to opt out of a rate increase and How to opt out of credit card rate increases, the ability of consumers to opt out of interest rate increases was overstated. At the time of publication, opting out was not a right, but a privilege, granted by most, but not all, card issuers. Since publication, opting out has become a right mandated by federal law.

Feb. 9, 2009
In a story headlined Wipe the slate clean by settling old debts, it was incorrectly stated that by paying off delinquent debt that went into collection, your credit score will improve. In fact, it is the original delinquency that is factored into your credit score, and paying that account will not improve your score.

Feb. 5, 2009
A story headlined Experian FICO score may soon be off-limits to consumers included a miscount of the number of credit score-related products that would be impacted by the end of a deal between Fair Isaac and Experian.

Jan. 19, 2009
A story headlined 7 things not to do when you’ve maxed out your credit cards incorrectly characterized Thrive. It is an online personal financial advisory service.

July 2, 2008
A story headlined Credit checks for job applicants become more common, originally published July 1, 2008, misspelled the name of Todd L. Moss, president of Crimcheck.com.

July 1, 2008
The Credit Guy column, What VantageScores are, how they work, originally published June 30, 2008, mischaracterized how consumers may obtain their VantageScore credit reports.