Chase and an “UN-Change In Terms (for the time being)” for one account holder.

Thanks to another ChangeInTerms.com visitor, I received this information, which might be helpful to others (quoted, with permission; but name withheld):

I’m thinking that my favorable outcome is probably due to a somewhat unique approach that I’ve initiated with Chase—the complaint to the FDIC.
 
While the Internet complaint web sites are full of frustrated customers who have complained to the OCC, the FTC, and Federal Reserve (who just shifts its response to the OCC), there is very little to complain to the FDIC.  I found an interesting web page (see http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/How-tell-if-a-credit/story.aspx?guid=%7BCA455087-0317-4F68-8B19-7D24F2E32D7E%7D) on Market Watch which suggested to me how I might get this agency involved.  It provides helpful hints on the kind of action this agency is interested in.
 
Herein is the text I submitted to the FDIC via web page (see https://www2.fdic.gov/starsmail/index.asp).  You have my permission to post this to your web site.
 
*** BEGIN ***
 
Chase Bank USA engaging in unfair and deceptive practices regarding Change of Terms for credit card accounts with fixed-rate-interest for life (of the balance transfer account, until the whole amount is paid off).  These card accounts have no annual fee, and a minimum monthly payment of 2% of the outstanding balance.  These terms were spelled out in the initial promotional offer that Chase, or their predecessors, offered to new credit card account.  I accepted the offer in September 2004 with a fixed interest rate of zero percent, and have been abiding by these terms ever since.  All my payments have always been sufficient and on-time.
 
In November 2008, Chase began notifying credit card customers with balance transfers and fixed-rate-for-life terms of new charges, to be assessed starting with their first January 2009 statement.  Firstly, that $10 will be assessed EVERY MONTH.  Secondly, that the minimum monthly payment will be increased from 2% to 5%, more than double.  And lastly, that there was no effective “opt out” provision where the account could be closed and the payoff terms will remain at their original settings—the notice specifically stated that closing the account does not alter this change in terms.
 
These terms are DECEPTIVE, in that that are abrogating terms of the promotional offer thus misleading the consumer that no unexpected fees would appear for the life of the card; that it’s reasonable to assume that no annual fee also means no monthly fee (or any other time period); and this practice is material in that I would not have accepted the promotional offer if the terms were otherwise.  A similar argument would apply to the minimum monthly payment in that those were the terms in the original offer, and that it is customary of a vast majority of credit cards to use a low (for example 2% of balance) monthly minimum payment—5% is unheard-of.
 
These terms are UNFAIR, in that they were applied unilaterally, of benefit only to the bank, no reasonable “opt out” provision was provided; and the injury is substantial in terms of new assessed fees and a significant blow to the customer’s monthly cash flow.
 
*** END ***