Tuesday, January 16, 2007

Online credit increases -- instant gratification

All this credit-report research this week got me in the mood to go check my own reports. I'm pulling them through annualcreditreport.com, the official, free, government sanctioned way to get your reports. You get one free report each year from each of the three credit-reporting agencies. You can pull all three at once or space them out, as you like. Forcing the creation of this site, and requiring the credit-reporting agencies to release one free annual report, was an excellent move on Congress's part. It's one of the most consumer-friendly pieces of legislation in years. Go politicians!

Seriously, if you're in the demographic I imagine most Birds & Bills readers are (your twenties, with all the student-debt and entry-level-salary joys that come with the age), if you do nothing else to organize your financials for the entire decade, do these two things:

-Start a 401(k), and put in whatever your employer will match. It doesn't matter if you have piles of other debt. A 401(k) match is free money, and because it comes out of your paycheck pre-tax, the bite is smaller than you'd expect. You will be intensely glad later if you do this.

-Pull your credit reports every so often and get a feel for what's on them. Ideally, pull them once a year, but doing it annually is less important than simply doing it.

I'll do a longer post later on my findings from my credit-report-pulling adventures, but one immediate one was that my FICO score is getting dinged for having overly high balances on my revolving accounts. My first reaction: er, what? I have one credit card, my Amex, that I try to concentrate my credit-card spending on. It has piles of spare credit. So why is my score getting dinged?

Then I went and checked my Amex, and realised that my utilization had crept higher than I thought. Various large items are sitting on the Amex temporarily (it's spring semester payment time, whee), and my balance had crept up to almost half my available credit. Arugh. While I still have what seems to me a pretty large amount available before hitting my credit limit, the pattern was obviously Displeasing To The FICO Gods.

Well, I thought, I can solve this problem in one of two ways ...

The balance isn't going to be fully paid down for a bit longer. Various machinations have to process behind the scenes. So, the other way to decrease my utilization percentage ...

Amex lets you request increases online. I did a back-of-the-envelope calculation of what I think is the highest balance I could ever need to carry on the card, if I'm carrying, say, big travel expenses or some such. Then I calculated the credit limit I'd need for that amount to be 1/3 my available credit limit. (Utilization below 1/3 is apparently the percentage that appeases The FICO Gods.)

That amount was about a $7,000 jump over my existing credit limit. Ow.

What the hell, I thought. Might as well go for broke ...

It went through. Instantly.

Yow.

I now have a credit limit that strikes me as borderline insane, but at least utilization percentage problems should be a thing of the past.

Monday, January 15, 2007

The real costs of minimum wage

Here in personal finance blogland, we tend to be consumed with optimizing investment strategies, big goals -- "save a million dollars"; "retire early"; or even simply "buy a house" -- and batches of financial exotica. Want to know about CD APYs? There's a whole blog devoted to it.

This is a good thing. Fiscal responsibility is good; fiscal education and control are very, very good. Money should be demystified so that people have the tools and information they need to decide how best to spend their paychecks.

But first, they need to have paychecks with enough money in them to actually spend.

Congress is in the midst of a much-publicized push to increase the minimum wage to $7.25 an hour. A number of publications are looking at how this will affect people earning the minimum. One of the best I've seen is the Washington Post's "Life at $7.25 an Hour," which deftly examines the local economy in Atchison, Kansas, through the eyes of the town's residents. At $7.25 an hour, you're not thinking about 401ks, CDs, real estate investment or money-market savings accounts. You're thinking about how to feed three people for two weeks on $70.

In New York, the minimum wage isn't anything close to a living wage. New York magazine's annual money issue (typical story tagline: "Sometimes being a billionaire can just be so complicated.") included a great piece this year on a security guard making $10 an hour. He does all the things you're "supposed" to do -- works hard, is reliable, supports his kids -- but none of that changes the cold fact that to live in New York with a biweekly paycheck of $676, you're going to make a lot of miserable compromises.

A few years ago I read Barbara Ehrenreich's Nickel and Dimed, and wrote up some thoughts in my booklog. The biggest thing that struck me is that what low-wage workers sacrifice aren't "luxuries," but basics, like health and privacy.

I don't have answers for any of this. Income disparity, and setting an income floor, is among the most daunting public policy issues out there.

But I try to always remember how incredibly lucky I am to have a salary that affords me the choices I have. I don't think I could manage with any kind of grace the life an overwhelming number of low-earning Americans have too few opportunities to escape.

Sunday, January 14, 2007

Repairing past sins, part II: Rebuilding your credit score & report

My last post was about your legal responsibility for old debts, particularly those that are beyond the statue of limitations -- meaning you no longer have any legal obligation to pay. (Er, is it still "tomorrow"? Pretend I posted this Thursday ...)

This one is about how to minimize and repair the damage to your credit report and your FICO score. (Remember, your credit report is different than your credit score -- and you actually have three FICO scores, one each from Equifax, TransUnion and Experian. The FICO post explains the basics.)

First, to reiterate a point made at the end of my last post: Be very, very careful about paying anyone anything on an old debt. If you're four months late on your Visa bill, by all means, call the provider and start negotiating a payment plan you can afford that will get you current. (Remember, providers want to help you find a way to pay your debts. If they have to charge them off, they get much less than they will by working with you.) If you're four years late, ignoring the debt and refusing to pay anything might be the soundest strategy for protecting your credit report.

That's because credit reports track charge-offs (when the original creditor consigns your debt to "bad debt" and takes it off its books; this almost always happens within one year of you not paying) and accounts referred to collections (when that bad debt is sent over to an agency to hunt it down). But FICO scores and credit reports care very little about what happens after that. Depending on what's actually showing up on your individual credit report, the effect of reviving an old debt to settle it will probably range from "very mildly positive" to "crushingly bad."

MSN Money has an article that does a good job of explaining all the various pitfalls of trying to settle an old debt. The gist is that it's a murky minefield.

Basically: avoiding having items sent to collections and charge-offs is very, very good. Do that if you possibly can. (If there's interest, I can do a post on negotiating with creditors over current debts you're behind on paying.) But once an item has gone that way, the value to *you* of clearing the debt goes down dramatically, and continues dwindling as it ages.

So if you've got old black marks, what do you do?

The first step to rebuilding a good credit rating is having credit. As anyone without any loans or credit cards learns the first time they apply for credit, you don't get brownie points for not incurring debt. The only way to build a good credit rating is to actually have a credit line, with activity on it. Opening a Visa and never charging a penny on it won't do much for you.

The easiest, safest, fastest way to build a credit record is to be an authorized user on the credit card of someone else who uses the card in credit-score-improving fashion -- someone who charges purchases on it, keeps the usage below about a third of the card's total credit line, and always pays at least the minimum balance due each month, on time. (It's even better if it's a longstanding account. FICO scores weigh the length of time an account has been open as a positive factor.) There are two types of "joint" credit card accounts: actual joint accounts, where each party shares liability for the account, and "authorized user" accounts, where an individual adds someone else as an authorized user on their own account.

Authorized user accounts are pretty interesting from a credit-reporting standpoint. They get reported to credit agencies like a joint account -- ie, the activity on them will affect the credit report, and score, for the authorized user. But, unlike a joint account, the authorized user has no legal responsibility for the account, or any debt incurred on it. All responsibility remains with the individual account owner. So, if you're an authorized user on some else's account, and you run up a bill on it, they're the ones with the legal responsibility for it.

However, there's no requirement that the account holder actually give the authorized user a card to use. If you need to repair a besmirched credit report, and you have someone you're close enough to request the favor from (a parent, spouse, relative, etc.), you can ask to be added as an authorized user on one of their accounts. If they (or you) don't trust you(rself) with the credit line, cut up the card. So long as there's positive activity on the account from the main user, you'll benefit. (Credit reports don't track whose card is used for purchases; if the card you're issued as an "authorized user" is never used, it doesn't matter a bit.)

Another option is a secured credit card. The first resort for people with lousy credit, secured cards require you to pay a deposit, typically 50 to 100 percent of the card's credit line. The credit card company holds this deposit in a savings account. If you default on paying, the company can withdraw what you owe from your deposit. Because the credit provider has that security, secured cards are easy to get, even if your credit rating is in tatters. And, because it's a credit card, activity on the card affects your credit report. If you pay at least the minimum due on time each month, your credit score will start recovering. Bankrate has a list of secured cards; if you have a checking account, your bank probably offers them as well.

Those are two of the aboveboard ways to start fixing bad credit. You'll be surprised how fast your score can change; as I mentioned in an earlier post about FICO scores, I've seen mine jump 60 points in a month when I did things it recorded as positive. (In my cast, that was increasing my Amex credit limit so my utilization percentage tumbled, and paying off a balance on another card.)

The other tactic you can use is slightly sneakier: Challenge negative items on your report, even if they're accurate. The Fair Credit Reporting Act gives you the right to dispute anything in your report you think is incorrect. Once you send in a dispute, the credit reporting agency (TransUnion, Equifax or Experian) has 30 days to investigate the dispute. If at the end of 30 days they can't confirm the information, they're required to remove it from your report. This tactic can be like going to court to fight a speeding ticket; if the cop who wrote the ticket doesn't show up to affirm it, you win by default. If the creditor, collections agency, etc. doesn't provide the credit reporting agency with validation of the debt and nonpayment within the 30-day window, the item is legally supposed to disappear.

In practise, getting the agencies to honor their obligations can be a horror show. The Boston Globe had a great piece recently about one consumer's nightmare of trying to untangle an identity fraud case. Still, challenging negative items costs you nothing, and can work in your favor. You can even dispute items online now -- here are the links for Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax.

Whew, that was long. This set of posts (continued from Wednesday) was prompted by a question from a friend about repairing a bad report. I'm happy to go investigate stuff in response to questions; anyone interested can reach me in comments or by email (stacy at covehurst dot net). Discretion guaranteed, of course.

Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Repairing your past financial sins

Today's question from the floor: You pull up your credit report, and it includes debts that are beyond the statute of limitations. What do you do next? (I wrote about the bad-debt issue a bit last year, but I'm researching it in greater detail for these posts.)

First: keep copies of any paperwork, such as credit reports, that documents the DLA (date of last activity). That paperwork is your key to proving that the statute has run out. Retail vendors tend to have fairly aggressive bad debt write-off timeframes -- they'll ditch it within a year, to allow them to take advantage of tax breaks for it. Once a debt is sold off to a collector, it can be resold ad infinitum. Unscrupulous debt collectors have been known to fraudulently reset DLAs so they can continue pursuing legally uncollectible debts. Documentation of a beyond-the-statute DLA is your best friend in fighting further collection action.

If the collector contacts you about an expired debt: Simply tell them to stop. The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (linked for any masochists that want to pour over legalese) requires debt collectors to cease communication once you send them a written letter telling them to stop. If you're contacted by phone, you can make the request verbally; if they ignore it, ask for an address to which you can send your stop-communication request. If they won't give you a written address, or ignore your requests and continue communicating, tell them you'll file an FTC complaint -- then do it. The form is right over here on the FTC's website. The FTC has a helpful FAQ about debt collection that covers these points.

If you do actually owe a debt, telling the collector to go away doesn't kill the debt. However, it does require them to only communicate again if they're taking a specific action. Basically, it tells them to sue or shut up. And if you're sued over an expired debt (one that you can prove has expired, thanks to the DLA records you kept), you don't legally owe it, and the suit will be dismissed.

OK, so that takes care of the legal end of the expired debt. What about your ravaged credit report?

There, you're stuck for the infamous seven years. Both accounts not paid as agreed and accounts sent to collections remain on file for seven years from the DLA. Once the debt is expired, it's legally dead, but there's nothing you can do to stop it from lurking on your credit report.

What if you want to make the black smirch go away? Be prepared to step into a hornet's nest. Even Suze Orman, who has a nice FAQ on charged-off accounts, throws up her hands here and says 'call a lawyer.' If large amounts are involved, definitely: get legal help.

But if you're struggling with bills, or have in the recent past, you're probably not rushing out to rack up legal fees. What are the other options?

Proceed with extreme caution before paying a penny. Any payment at all -- even a $5 good-faith payment -- is an activity and restarts your DLA. Not only does that allow the black mark to stick around longer, it also means a dead debt becomes a legally viable one again.

There are still steps you can take to repair your credit report, both by establishing good, new credit practises and by vigorously contesting negative information in your report. I'll blog on that tomorrow, but in the meantime, he's a post from last year on how to improve your FICO score.

Tuesday, January 09, 2007

Congress loudly frets about student loans, quietly does little about them

The Democratic Party's pledge to ram significant legislation through in its first 100 legislative hours (which appears to translate to about two months, in civilian hours) has an interesting angle for with student loans. "Easing the financial burden of college tuition" is on the party's First 10 Bills of 2007 list. So what kind of easing do they have in mind -- assuming, of course, that they can get a bill through, and avoid a veto from the White House?

One of my first blog posts here was about the urgency of consolidating outstanding loans before a pile of changes hit in July 2006. July is when the federal government adjusts the rates on Stafford loans (the program that covers federal student loans, both subsidized and unsubsidized). This year, for loans in repayment, the rate hiked almost 2 percent, to 7.143 percent. The bigger change is that the government did away with its variable rate, replacing it instead with a permanent, fixed rate of 6.8 percent for all loans dispersed after July 1, 2006. (I consolidated my outstanding loans before the hike hit and locked in a rate somewhere around 4.9 percent ... but needed to take a new loan for my fall semester, at the new rate. Yuck.)

Get ready to temper your expectations for what kind of relief the Democrats are offering, though. Conscious of the difficulty of passing expensive new legislation while the U.S. is still spending like a college frosh with brand-new plastic, the Democrats are cutting the cost of their plan by narrowing its scope. According to several news reports, the College Student Relief Act of 2007 that will be introduced next Wednesday (Jan. 17) will only affect new, subsidized Stafford loans . On those loans, a rate cut from 6.8 percent to 3.4 percent will be phased in over the next five years.

Reporters are still trying to suss out exactly what will be in this bill, but the general tenor of the reporting is that it'll be narrow. So, if you're already out of school and paying (or ducking) your loans, prepare to keep slogging.

Student loan repayments seem to trip up lots of people, and it's no surprise. Confront your average new grad -- with the typical new-grad paltry paycheck and new-grad naivety about personal finance -- with a bill for a scary large debt, and it's unsurprising that many go the ostrich route and ignore the bill. (I can't claim to be an exception. David dragged me out of denial before my grace period expired, so I never had problems with student-loan defaults, but I spent my first few months out of college throwing out my credit-card bills unopened. David paying my loans for me for the first few years they were due is the only thing that kept my credit and payment track record safe. Yay for better organized, more practical spouses!)

But student loans are about the hardest debt to hide from -- they don't go away in bankruptcy, and even if you never get an actual bill (a common problem plaguing transient new grads), you're responsible for knowing about and servicing the debt. This can be tricky; with banks merging and selling off assets all the time, a standard student-loan debt can change hands a half-dozen times in its lifespan. Fortunately, there are a few resources out there to help you track down your debt, such as the National Student Loan Data System. Mapping Your Future has a resource list.

Thursday, January 04, 2007

Web 2.0ing my way into 2007

After a bit of a December slumber, Birds & Bills is back to tackle 2007.

I'm not one for New Year's resolutions, but more regular activity here is a goal for the year. On that front, coming soon: A major redesign. The graphics are in the works; soon, the default gray look will be banished.

One of my other goals for the year is to Web 2.0ify my life. I winced while typing that. I spend half my professional life writing articles that call "Web 2.0" a piece of nonsense jargon that's propelling the next tech bubble. And yet ... I have to admit there's something to the wave of Web apps that tackle particular problems or productivity hang-ups very elegantly. These days, when I run into an information-management obstacle, my first instinct is to throw software at it.

So, to kickoff the New Year, I'm starting with a rundown of what I'm using, what I'm kicking the tires of, and what I need.

Currently in Use:

-Eight years after I began using it, PocketMoney remains the cornerstone of my financial life. (Yes, I realise that as a desktop -- or, actually PDA -- app, this is very unWeb 2.0. Hush. It works.) The essence of Web 2.0 apps is portability, and nothing is more portable than my Palm -- it travels with me everywhere. All I need for my budgeting is an electronic replacement for a check registry, to track what's actually coming out of my checking account. PocketMoney takes care of that.

- All my bills get paid online, some through the provider's website (I go to Providian.com to pay that bill because I don't trust their processing times if I don't pay directly in a documentable fashion) or by e-pay through my bank, NetBank. The only check I write regularly is my rent check, and I haven't snail-mailed a bill payment in half a decade.

-I run through something like 60,000 air miles in a typical year ... but rarely with one (or even two or five) airlines. I'm still using USA Today's MileTracker. It's free, it's simple, it works. It's a desktop app, so it's not portable, but for me, that's not a problem -- I rarely have a burning need to see my miles. Anyone know of a good, free online tracker?


Tire Kicking:

-My mom tried for nearly a decade to get me to use a paper-and-pen DayRunner. I made a few fitful starts, but didn't stick with it. The interface just didn't work the way my brain does. When I bought my first Palm, in 1998, I wondered if it would languish like my collection of neglected DayRunners. Would I actually use my fancy new electronic gizmo to schedule things?

The answer turned out to be "oh hell yes." The Palm simply works for me; the interface meshes well with what I want from a data organizer.

Which is a long-winded way of saying "user experience matters" -- and of saying that SimoHealth has been kicked out of my information management universe. In August, I wrote about giving it a try for handling tracking of our pile of media expense records for the year. I spent a day plugging in all of our expenses and appointments, one by one. I wrote the review. And then, despite my best intentions, I never opened SimoHealth again. The though of plowing through the painful data-entry for ugly, kludgy results was too dispiriting. The problem, of untrackable medical expenses, is less painful than the solution.

Meanwhile, it seems SimoHealth has gotten rid of its most attractive feature: Its $0 price tag. My version likely still works for free, but anyone downloading it now gets a 30-day free trial and then a $39 bill. Unless there have been *dramatic* revisions to the software, I wouldn't recommend paying that.

Meanwhile, Quicken Medical Expense Manager continues stagnating and won't run on Vista.

This area is screaming for an online management app. Ideally, insurance companies would include this kind of feature in their customer portals, but so far the customer portals I've used (Aetna's and Empire Blue Cross's) are frustratingly rudimentary.

-Being a compulsive bookgeek, I am drawn like a moth to light toward book organizers. Like that moth, I keep finding out the light is a candle. Ouch. Years ago, I started cataloging our library with ReaderWare. Pros: It's extremely flexible and I could configure it to record almost precisely the info I wanted to track. Cons: It's ugly, and it's not a Web app. Flaunting your books on The Internets is half the fun.

So I migrated to LibraryThing, where our library is stalled at about one-third processed. Pros: A very elegant Web app. Con: It's optimized for social networkers, not collectors. Tracking multiple copies of variant editions is a kludge. But in any case, cataloguing the rest of our library is a project on my "to do eventually" list. (It might wait until our next move, one to two years in the future, when we'll hopefully have more room for sorting and organizing the books.)

I also want to revive my booklog, which is about two years out of date. After a fair bit of hunting, I found the perfect software for what I want: oddbook. It has exactly the features I want, and I even managed to get it installed on my server. YAY! Not yay: Two days after I got it installed, it began refusing to let me log in. It will also require some hacking to deal with the multiyear-tracking issue. Ug. Fixing that, or finding a new blog app for my booklog, is a priority for the year.

-So is reviving my installation of Gallery, a photo program that worked brilliantly for us until it broke in a server move over the summer. The thought of wrangling PHP and sever admin to get it working again gives me vapors. Still, I need to suck it up, cope, and fix the damn Gallery.

For those who don't feel the need to have a customized photo gallery hosted on their own servers, Google's Picasa Web Albums and Yahoo's Flickr seem to be doing their jobs well.

-This is a me-specific problem, but since I freelance, I need software to track submissions. After a lot of hunting, I'm currently using Writers Planner. It has some weird aspects (like the creator's rambly explanatory text), and the ads are annoying, but it's free and it's flexible enough that I've kludged it into doing the things I need. It also has a few really elegant touches, like a nice interface for viewing notes on submissions (like the text of rejection letters).


What I Need:

-Data backup: Having suffered one catastrophic hard-drive meltdown this year, I know crashes are a matter of when, not if. So, having been through data-loss hell, what have I done in the wake to safeguard my PC? Er, um. *insert sound of crickets chirping*

I've heard recommendations for Carbonite, and the copy of Lifehacker I have sitting on my desk has a chapter on automated backup. I need to investigate those, soonish.

-When you get started Organizing Things With Web Widgets, it's hard to stop. I could track my wine collection with Cellar Tracker, and/or hunt down something similar for keeping track of any art we buy. (That sounds pretentious, but when your close friend opens an art gallery, you tend to find yourself with some paintings.) I could rip all our music to our PC, invest in a really good backup system, and say goodbye to the CD racks, as my friend mamster did. (Although that's unlikely -- I think David is pretty wedded to his physical CDs and cover art and notes and whatnot.)

Ye gods and fishies, that got long. So, to any readers still with me: What are your indispensable Web widgets or 2007 information-management needs?

Monday, December 18, 2006

And on the 13th day of Christmas, returning those golden rings and partridges ....

Tis the season for rampant consumerism -- and with it, the joys of battling the Retail Industrial Complex. You may have noticed a spate of stories in the newspapers lately about "return fraud," the "growing" problem of retailers suffering losses through returns of stolen or used merchandise. While I don't have the expertise to opine about the magnitude of the problem, it's clear that increasingly sophisticated software options for tracking retail logistics means merchants with modernized systems are keeping better track of who is bringing items back, and how often.

The retail industry trade/lobbying group, the National Retail Federation, kicked off the season with a press release saying retailers will take a $3.5 billion hit during the holidays from return fraud (or, as the release calls it "this immoral, and often illegal, practice." But tell us how you really feel, NRF! Don't hold back!) . Like all loss estimates bandied about by organizations with a vested interest, that one should be taken with a grain of salt. The release also pulls out the eye-popping figure that 8.8 percent of holiday gifts are expected to be returned -- but then, it notes that typical return rates are 7.3 percent. A 1.5 percent jump post-holidays is lower than I'd anticipated, actually.

The NRF is also offering up a list of tips for "stress-free returns," with suggestions like "ask for a gift receipt" and "investigate return policies before you buy." Or you can save the retail hassle and go the regifting (or ebay -- I'll bet *their* sales have a big post-holiday spike) route.

The return-fraud flap may simply be the industry's way of grabbing cover for tightened return restrictions, but I do have sympathy for those dealing with impressively organized shoplifting rings. Speaking of eBay, CSO magazine (published by my former employer) had a fascinating article last year about how eBay is becoming the best stolen-goods fence ever created. For a more penetrating look at the return-fraud issue, go there.

Wednesday, November 29, 2006

Judge orders Treasury to take its money back to the drawing board

If a ruling made yesterday by a federal judge stands, we'll eventually have currency changes even more drastic than those ushered in earlier this year with the colorful bills. U.S. District Judge James Robertson ruled for the plaintiff in American Council of the Blind v. Paulson, Secretary of the Treasury, deciding that American paper currency violates the Rehabilitation Act because bills of different denominations can't be distinguished from each other by the visually impaired.

"Of the more than 180 countries that issue paper currency, only the United States prints bills that are identical in size and color in all their denominations," Robertson wrote. "More than 100 of the other issuers vary their bills in size according to denomination, and every other issuer includes at least some features that help the visually impaired."


The judge ordered officials to begin working on a remedy, but he also structured his decision to speed the inevitable appeal.

It sounds like a radical decision (and, indeed, I see some bloggers are already screaming about activist judging), but it strikes me as a sensible one. Why shouldn't we make bills easier to tell apart? There's no downside to doing so (except, I suppose, the cost of a redesign), and the benefits will be felt even beyond the visually impaired target audience. I've handed over the wrong bills to pay for things (and recieved the wrong bills back in change) when I wasn't paying close attention, and when David moved here from Australia (motto: "Our money is more colorful than a Pink Floyd laser show") the indistinguishability of American bills drove him nuts.

(By the way, thanks for all the kudos and good feedback on my op-ed yesterday. David is back in good health, so all is calm on that front.)

Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Birds and Bills hits the op-ed rounds

I have an op-ed in today's Baltimore Sun about my experiences with and criticisms of "consumer"-driven healthcare. Newspaper opinion pieces are like really long blog entries, done old-skool style. On paper. Crazy talk!

Monday, November 27, 2006

On overdrafts and automatic 401k deposits

My bank refunded my stolen money over the weekend, so I'm back in business. I will give my bank giant brownie points for one big customer-service selling point: No bounced-check fees. My account has a $1,000 overdraft. So long as I don't go past that $1k, my bank will process checks and debits without charging me any fees. (OK, I pay interest on the overdraft money I'm borrowing, but since I've always repaid overdrafts within days, this interest has never totaled more than a dollar.) I don't make a habit of overdrafting, but when stuff like this account hacking happens, my balance goes zooming into the red. Bounced-check fees are up a record high average of $27.40 per transaction, according to Bankrate's latest research. Not having to worry about incurring giant fees for every bounced transaction is a big relief.

In other tidbits, my company sent out a notice recently that in 2007, it will begin automatically enrolling non-participants in the 401k plan, deducting 3 percent from their paychecks for 401k contributions. (My company matches 50 percent of employees' contributions, up to 6 percent -- so, it'll effectively contribute 3 percent of your pay.) Those automatically enrolled can still opt out of contributing, but they'll need to file paperwork with JP Morgan confirming that they don't want to make 401k contributions.

I think this is a great move. I'm already contributing, so it won't affect me, but studies and anecdotal evidence consistently show that a number of people don't participate in 401ks not because they've thought through the decision and intentionally chosen to abstain, but simply because it's One More Thing to deal with. A recent Hewitt Associates study found that automatic enrollment boosts 401k participation rates from 68 percent to 90 percent. If companies didn't offer an opt-out option, I'd object, but since they do, I think it's a smart step to give people that extra nudge toward participation. I imagine automatic enrollment will be a growing trend.

Wednesday, November 22, 2006

Notaries and police reports -- the continuing joys of identity theft

My cheer that the thieves didn't entirely clean out my checking account proved premature. Another $700 went on Saturday -- after the card was supposedly cancelled. Arugh. The transactions seem to have come from an ATM in Quezon City. Fabulous.

I filed a police report, though I felt almost guilty adding to the NYPD workload with a crime they're not going to be able to do anything to solve. Financial identity-theft crimes are skyrocketing. While I waited to fill out the report, I chatted with a lady who was there to report a similar situation: someone had opened a DirecTV account in her name, and clearly had access to her Social Security number and other personal details. The detective who took my report said I was the seventh or eighth person that day reporting this type of crime.

It feels like the most effective way to stem crimes like the ATM scheme that keeps nailing me would be a national database overseen by a national agency, like the FBI. I'm 99% sure I got hit by a trapped ATM. If I did, then so did lots of others, but the only way to find the rogue ATM would be to cross-check the records of those hit recently. I would cheerfully turn over my bank records to an investigatory agency. (Sure, there's a risk in handing over my personal banking info -- but my account already leaks like a sieve. The chances of a bad cop stealing my info feel smaller than those of electronic thieves continuing to crack it.)

Since I doubt the police vigorously pursue these crimes, that leaves enforcement to the banks, which are the ones eating the losses. Big banks like Citibank already have the massive data access you'd need to cross-check the trails of victim -- I wonder to what extent that's already happening? The New York Times article I keep referring to about ATM fraud mentioned one crime ring that got caught after it began siphoning funds from 4,000 compromised accounts. It doesn't go into detail about how investigators cracked the case. That would be a fascinating piece ... if one has written one, I should check it out.

Once again, the most exasperating part of this process was making time to deal with all the paperwork like the police report. My bank also requires a notary to sign my dispute paperwork, so I spent an hour yesterday trudging around the Flatiron area looking for one. After stopping at two office-services shops and three banks, I finally found one available and willing. Arugh. That is my motto this week: Arugh.

Friday, November 17, 2006

Bank account hacked a-bloody-GAIN

I am some sort of lightning rod for financial identity theft.

Dedicated readers will recall my grousing last April when my American Express card got hacked and fraudulently used. I never lost the card; someone got hold of the numbers and used them. As I mentioned in April, that wasn't the first time I'd been through the theft rigmarole. It was the third -- first time with Amex, after two previous attacks on my NetBank check Visa/ATM card. Remember my oh-so-chipper post title? "At least it's less painful than having my debit card hacked."

My debit card got hacked this morning.

Logged on around 1pm to see if an expense check from my company had cleared, only to find a string of seven ATM withdrawals for $99.84 each, plus another for $19.97. None mine.

ARUGH.

I promptly called the bank to cancel, and that may have saved me a bit of money. The thieves got $718.85, but unlike the last two times this happened to my NetBank account, the account wasn't totally wiped out. The customer service person said the ATM withdrawals happened about an hour earlier, in quick succession. Seven successes, then the machine bounced the eight attempt. Maybe I got the account cancelled before the thief hit another ATM for round two.

So, tonight I'll be tromping over to my local police precinct office to file a report, and on Monday I have to tromp around near my office looking for a notary to sign my dispute forms to send my bank so they'll refund my money. Meanwhile, I have virtually no cash until NetBank gets my replacement card to me. Such fun this is.

This new attack is like the first on my NetBank account, three years or so ago -- someone got hold of my card number and my PIN, and made a duplicate card. (I still have my card. It wasn't lost. And, as before, no one -- not even my spouse -- knows my PIN.) Once again, the likeliest explanation is that I used a dodgy deli ATM with trapdoor software in it, capturing the information off cards as they're used. I know I should stick with bank ATMs, especially since this has now hit me twice. The spirit is willing, the flesh is weak. Since my bank has no ATM and I pay a fee every time I use one (no back-end fees to my bank, though), I usually just go with whatever shonky ATM is closest.

Can we please crack down on this crime, stat? I suppose I'm high risk -- I probably use an unregulated deli ATM six or seven times in an average month. But still, for this ATM-trapdoor problem to hit me twice in a matter of years seems to suggest it's a problem that's getting pretty rampant, at least in big cities like NYC.

Monday, November 13, 2006

HSA update

Well, I opted for the HSA, though I almost didn't at the last minute thanks to a loophole that makes it problematic if you have my precise, fairly unusual situation.

In my earlier post I mentioned that an HSA (health savings account) is logistically similar to an FSA (flexible spending account), with the big difference that money in your HSA doesn't disappear at the end of the year. If it's unspent, you keep it. Because of that distinction, the government doesn't want people double-dipping with an HSA/FSA combo: you can't set up an HSA, also fund an FSA, and then use the FSA money to cover your expenses, leaving your HSA savings untouched. That's a sensible restriction. If you have an HSA, you can only use an FSA for things the HSA isn't allowed to cover (which seems to be dental and vision expenses, primarily).

However, here is my particular weirdness, which only becomes an issue if you are a) married, b) don't share a health insurance plan with your spouse, and c) also have relatively separate finances. (See why I said this is a loophole that may only be a problem for me?) David and I each have separate, individual insurance through our separate employers. That's always been more cost-effective for us than sharing a plan. However, when you set up an FSA, you can use your FSA to pay for medical expenses for family members, even if those family members aren't sharing your health-insurance plan. So, this past year, I put a chunk of money in my FSA and used it to pay some of his medical expenses.

Opting for the HSA means the restrictions on what I can use my FSA for (vision and dental only) apply to everyone I would spend my FSA money on (at least, so saith my HR department). But my HSA, of course, can only be spent on me. Hence: no way for me to set up tax-free savings to pay for David's medical expenses in 2007.

The sensible thing, of course, is for him to set up an FSA and put into it however much I would have put into mine. It works out exactly the same to our overall income and spending as a couple. It's just a pain in the ass. Me having the FSA was an easy way for me to contribute an agreed-on amount to the medical costs, and meant I could do all the paperwork for reimbursements and such (which I have more tolerance for than David does). Having the FSA in David's name means we need to rebalance our finances in other areas to offset the whack that will take out of his paychecks, and means he's probably going to have to deal with more of the paperwork.

For that reason, I almost ditched the HSA and stuck with my old HMO + FSA system. However, it was making me unduly cranky to face down the prospect of once again spending a fair chunk each month for insurance that didn't actually pay for almost any of the services I actually consume. (With the HSA, the insurance still won't be paying. I will, unless something unlikely happens and I go past my deductible. But I pay less for the insurance, and I go in knowing what I'll be paying for.)

This is all more about psychology than actual dollars-and-cents calculations of what will save us money. I suspect that the HMO + FSA option would in the end have only cost me a few hundred more than my current HSA scheme, which isn't really enough money to justify the hours and angst I've devoted to thinking through all this. But part of the allure of the HSA is simply that I want to experiment with it. I still have a bad feeling it's the thin end of a nasty wedge, and I don't like the way it's portrayed as an option for insuring the uninsured but is actually a big savings/tax-sheltering opportunity for the well-off. But I figure a year of seeing what the HSA plan is like will give me a firmer foundation for spouting off about them.

Thursday, November 09, 2006

And now, a consumerist interlude

This week the Washington Post profiled Goozex, a used video-game swapping service that aims to fetch gamers better value for their old games than they'd get selling them to retail used-games shops. It sounds like a good idea (gamers, check it out), but it's also a nice illustration of what I'm coming to think of as the yuppie subscription economy. (OK, I know "yuppies" is hopelessly '80s. What are we now? And if anyone suggests bobos, I break out the knives.)

I love the concept of libraries but am a poor user of them. Books are kind of a special case for me, since I choose to buy and hoard them, but for other media, the library concept is a great one -- borrow the things you don't feel compelled to own permanently. Like others in my peer group, though, I hate media-consumption deadlines. When I massively cleaned out my bedroom the summer before I first headed off for college, I found a few books that were overdue by years.

This is why I'm among the six million people subscribing to Netflix. I suspect I come out on the wrong end of this equation financially. I have the three-DVD plan and will go months at a time without sending anything back. I'm not paying for Netflix because it's cost effective. I'm paying for Netflix so I don't have to a) accumulate DVDs I'll only watch one or twice and don't want clogging up my living room, and b) don't have to remember what I owe the video store when.

Goozex seems tailored for people who are going to go through games rapidly. You get the freedom from return dates that comes with ownership, but you also get access to an exchange network so you can keep your media supply fresh. You're paying for the perk of your extended borrowing and access to new titles (you could make do for cheaper; some libraries will loan you older, less enticing video games for free these days), but you're not paying nearly as much as you would buying everything at new, retail price.

This kind of service seems very well suited to a certain demographic (ie: mine) that immerses in media and is willing to pay for convenience -- as iTunes demonstrates. I see them popping up all over. There's BooksFree.com and GameFly, and loads of others, I imagine.

***

On a separate moneyspending note, my friend Ryan has brought his blog Just What I Wanted out of hiatus for the holiday season. It's a neat source of unusual gift ideas, many very affordably priced. And, unlike so many of the gift guides you'll start seeing in glossy mags as the Giftmas season gets going, the blog is noncommercial. Ryan spotlights the products he finds intriguing. Go benefit from his good taste :)

Sunday, October 29, 2006

Considered an HSA? You will.

Picture a home insurance sales brochure offering a rundown on various coverage options. One option is described this way:

You may benefit from this plan if:
- It's hard to remember the last time your home burned down.


... and yet, this is the pitch my health insurance company, Empire Blue Cross, is using to sell its Medical Savings Plan option (better known as a "health savings account," or HSA), which the brochure cheerfully touts as a good plan if "it's hard to remember the last time you went to the doctor."

I grew up in a family that always had good health insurance. My mom had cancer. I've always considered health insurance an absolute essential, just below "housing" on my list of "things you don't go without if there is any possible option." I am willing to pay pretty much any sane amount to stay insured. I consider myself the most conservative shopper possible for health insurance.

And yet, it looks like I'm about to wade into the big experiment known as HSAs -- ie, the preferred health-care option endorsed by Bush and rammed through Congress by fiscal conservatives as part of the recent Medicare bill. I am fairly boggled by this turn of events; I'd previously seen a few articles on HSAs (most notably in the Washington Post, which had a good feature on their risks and mixed benefits) and taken little notice, writing them off as something not applicable to me. Ha ha ha. If the health-care plan options for this year handed to me by my (large-ish) company are any indication, HSAs are going be applicable to everyone, pretty soon.

When you see HSAs mentioned in the media, the quick summary tends to be "minimal insurance in exchange for lower monthly carrying costs, with consumers responsible for higher deductibles and a bigger share of the costs of medical services they consume." The administration hails this as a way to address the crisis of skyrocketing health-care costs: if consumers bear more responsibility for saving for and paying the direct costs of their medical care, they'll become savvier consumers, the argument goes.

The big, oft-mentioned fallacy in this argument is that the health-care system isn't designed for a la carte shopping. Even if you're fortunate enough to be able to plan an expenditure in advance (hardly an option when you're in crisis and racing to the nearest hospital), providers are rarely set up to offer quotes. Good luck trying to find out in advance what a surgery will cost, what with all the many procedures and charges that get wrapped into the final bill. And then there's the biggest stumbling block: Insurers negotiate discount rates. The uninsured don't have access to those lower rates. One standing appointment David has costs us $80, after our insurer's negotiated discount. It would be $150 without the insurer rate. Same thing with a medication we have a standing prescription for. The "rack" rate is around $80; our insurer pays $10. This is a very consumer-unfriendly playing field.

But when I looked at the particular HSA plan being offered by my company, the reality turned out to be very different than what I'd expected. This isn't a "bare-bones coverage in return for higher consumer risk" plan. It's a tax dodge for the well-off, and (I suspect) a step toward softening resistance toward a fully "pay your own way" approach to medical services, akin to what happened when 401k supplanted pensions. The stomach-curdling, politically frustrating aspect of this, for me: Under this calculus, I'm well-off. This is a tax dodge that probably helps me -- and if the tax dodge weren't enough to get me to switch, my insurer (hi, Blue Cross) is breaking out the carrots and sticks to make the HSA plan more attractive than their other options.

The way HSAs work is that you pay a much lower monthly rate in exchange for carrying a high deductible (my HSA plan would cost $37 a month, less than half my HMO option and a third of my company's PPO plan cost). But the plan also features a savings component, where you contribute monthly payments to a tax-free account which you can use to cover medical expenses. The savings account seems to be akin to an FSA (Flexible Spending Account), with one huge difference. At the end of the year, you lose anything left in your FSA. Anything left in your HSA rolls over. Tax free. Indefinitely. If you change jobs, it goes with you, like a 401k. Once you save a certain amount in your HSA, you can even invest the money in mutual funds. Gains on those? Also tax free. The nominal theory is that people can use their HSAs to bank for the eventual medical costs they'll incur later in life. As with a 401k, if you start early, you can build a hefty balance over the years.

As Congressman Pete Stark wrote in a recent editorial, this isn't health policy, it's tax policy. HSAs allow those who can afford to fund them to the max to reduce their taxable income and take advantage of tax-free investment gains. Like 401ks, you can even withdraw from them for expenses other than the intended ones (ie, non-health-related expenses) if you pay a penalty fee.

Here's where things get really strange and scary. Tax benefits be damned; I still wouldn't glance twice at an HSA if it meant I bore a bigger risk if I became catastrophically ill. Perhaps my Blue Cross plan is unusual, but under the terms of my company's plan (I'm setting up a meeting with an HR rep to try to confirm I'm not going to trip on hidden fine print), I don't.

The articles I've found about HSAs tend to focus on the up-front deductible when emphasizing how HSAs can end up costing you more. To me, the far more important number is on the back end: the annual out-of-pocket max. What's the most I might be out, if very bad things happened?

My HSA has a PPO on the back end: Once I hit my deductible ($1,200 -- until I've spent that, my plan plays virtually nothing for medical care), it switches to essentially become a Blue Cross PPO plan. After I've hit the deductible, my plan picks up about 80% of in-network costs and 60% of out-of-network fees -- up to a $2,200 annual out-of-pocket max (which includes the deductible). If I hit the max, 100% of everything above it is covered. (Out-of-network charges have a separate, higher max, but there's still a cap.) As with Blue Cross's HMO and PPO plans, the HSA option has no lifetime max on what the plan will pay.

So, theoretically, I might pay more out-of-pocket under an HSA. If I incur $1,000 in covered medical expenses in a year, I pay. My insurer saves $1,000. But if I incur $100,000 of expenses, they still pay about $97,000 of them.

Why is this scary? Because HSAs are being touted as a Great Thing for Insurers, saving them from paying for all those services consumers frivolously run up and won't if they have higher deductibles and have to pay for them. Now, I have pretty much no expertise on the medical system and its Byzantine economics. But I'm very dubious that those are the costs crippling the system. It's the $20,000 hospital bill David & I ran up earlier this year, padded to the rafters with god knows what indecipherable charges, that makes health care terrifyingly expensive and inefficient -- not the $150 I drop every few years going to my allergist for a check-in.

But if I sign up for this HSA, I'm virtually opting out of funding my company's traditional health-care plans -- the whole idea of which is that risk gets spread around the group. I pay $1,000 in premiums, I don't get sick, my $1,000 defrays the cost of my colleague's cancer treatment. Under this HSA, the revenue my insurer gets from me drops drastically. I'll pay them less than half what I was paying under the HMO plan. My money goes into my HSA account, for me. I keep it. This strikes me as a terrible long-term health care strategy. "Personal responsibility" is dangerous enough when it comes to retirement planning. Are we going to say people should be wholly responsible for saving enough to cover their own, potentially catastrophic, health care costs as well?

Right now, under the terms of my Blue Cross 2007 HSA plan, I'm not responsible for catastrophic expenses. The PPO plan safeguard after I hit my deductible, and the out-of-pocket cap it includes, ensures that. But my insurer is suspiciously eager to get people into HSAs. One nasty shock when I changed jobs was discovering how unfriendly my new plan choices are, compared to the Cigna PPO my old job offered. (I've ranted before about the ways Blue Cross makes the PPO option very unattractive, to push people toward the HMO plan.) Blue Cross is doing even more this year to make its PPO option an unfriendly one. There are an assortment of little kickers, but here's the one that really gets me: If I go out of network for my annual physical, Blue Cross's PPO pays nothing until I hit my annual deductible ($750, for the PPO plan), after which it pays 60%. If I have the HSA plan and go out of network for my annual physical, it doesn't charge against the deductible ("to help ensure that you and your family get this important care") -- they'll pay 60% right off the bat. My out-of-network physical is one of the only expenses I can predict I'll incur next year. This is a decent incentive for me.

The plan also seems to work out in my favor even with the deductible. Premiums for my company's PPO plan would cost me $1,512 for 2007. Premiums for the HSA plan would cost me $444. My company contributes $250 if I elect an HSA; if I fully fund it up to my deductible, the total cost to me is $1,394. Less than I'd pay for the PPO -- and the coverage becomes the same, once I've gone through my deductible.

This feels to me like the thin end of the wedge. Like the early, massive payments offered to get homeowners to sell out to developers, so the developers can later force the last holdouts out with eminent domain and whatnot -- or the Wal-Mart effect in retail, where low prices offered to individuals camouflage the destruction wreaked on our collective economy. Right now, the Blue Cross HSA plan offers big incentives and little downsides. But in a few years? If HSAs catch on and they can get a critical mass switched over? Will the deductibles creep up? Will the out-of-pocket maxes rise and eventually vanish? Because, of course, everyone should be using those HSAs and saving for their healthcare costs, just like everyone knows you should save for retirement and it's your own fault if you were too short-sighted to fund your 401k ...

Ug. I hate feeling trapped. For the services I need, the HSA is the by far the smartest choice for me. But I feel like opting for it will make me one of those setting in motion a huge step backward in fixing our health-care mess.

Friday, October 27, 2006

Dialing for answers on credit card processing fees

A while back I grumped about the "$X minimum purchase" claims some merchants make (which are in violation of Visa & Mastercard contracts). My friend Matthew, proprietor of Roots & Grubs, went further and actually did some investigating to find out more about what processing small transactions actually costs merchants. It's a great, very informative post. Though I am dubious about this whole "making calls for information" thing. It sounds very un-bloglike, involving effort and journalism. Aiee!

(And hi! I'm alive again.)

Friday, September 08, 2006

Cookies can be very expensive

The Checkout blog today spotlights a bizarre practise I wouldn't have imagined existed: Marketers are using your cookies to play with price points for flexibly priced goods (magazine subscriptions, airline tickets, etc.)

Basically, the post explains how clearing your cookie cache can change the prices you're shown at online storefronts. Offering different shoppers different prices is a longstanding marketing tactic, but this is an impressively personalized level of targeting. Yick.

Tuesday, September 05, 2006

Why I'm never ever ever renting from Dollar again

Rental cars and medical bills: these are the two planets around which my financial life seems to orbit.


This weekend I stumbled across an unusual bit of consumer-unfriendliness I hadn't hit before. I had a rental reservation with Dollar, made through Travelocity. I scanned the fine print when I made the booking for the usual catches, but I can't swear I scoured every bit of it on every conceivable link -- though I did print the reservation and bring that along.


When I arrived to pick up my car, I was told the rate would be $55 a day higher than the one I had confirmed. What!? Why? Because I have a Brookyn zip code.


Yep. Dollar discriminates based on where you live.


Never mind that this car was being picked up in Manhattan and had no restrictions on where we could take it. Dollar wanted to charge me $110 more for my rental than they would if I lived on the other side of the bridge.


I argued with the counter person (nothing on my Travelocity printout mentioned this charge, though Dollar insists it's listed somewhere on the site), then called Dollar's customer service number and argued my way up the command chain there. No luck. I finally cancelled the reservation and made something of a scene, standing outside Dollar's office screaming into my cell phone that this was the worst customer service I had ever encountered from a car-rental company.


Now for the particularly spectacular bit of corporate stupidity. It was the Friday afternoon of Labor Day weekend, I was already behind schedule, and I now needed a last-minute car. Where did I end up getting one?


Thrifty.


Which is owned by the same parent company as Dollar. Thrifty, however, has no surcharge for Brooklyn residents. "I've never heard of anything like that," the Thrifty agent said when I made the new booking.


And it was $30 cheaper than my original Dollar rate. So, Dollar's parent company managed to both infuriate a customer and make less money on the transaction than they otherwise would have. Go corporate America!


But seriously, I am never ever ever booking with Dollar again, anywhere.

Thursday, August 31, 2006

Squeaky wheels, ATTACK

"I'm an old Marine. I'm going to follow the chain of command. I can go until we hit God."


That quote is from Katrina survivor Leon Dupreire, explaining in a Washington Post article how he got Allstate to pay out a storm damage claim they initially denied. I'm tempted to plaster it across the box in which I amass bills and such. Unfortunately, it feels like squeaking loudly and persistently is what's too often required to get financial wheels greased.

I finally went back to New School this week to attempt to sort my financial aid yet again, and to resolve the issue of why my one remaining scholarship had dropped to half its initial amount. The result? A completely different story than I got in July -- it seems my scholarship that vanished shouldn't have after all, and only went away because the number of credits I'm taking was incorrectly calculated. Multiple times. Still no one can explain to me how these two scholarship amounts are determined. However, since this trip resulted in the full amount I officially sought being restored, I officially no longer have to care. This is my last year, the money is showing up on my financial aid balance sheet, and I'm declaring victory.

Learning to be organized and persistent in wrangling my college bills is proving far more educational than any of my actual classes. I want credits for it!

Friday, August 18, 2006

Quicken Medical vs SimoHealth: Billing software smackdown

I have an entitlement complex about software. The universe of applications is so vast these days, and the barriers to creating new ones so low, that I expect some clever programmer to have solved pretty much any problem I can dream up. So when I have a problem that seems ideally suited for a software solution, but can't find a good application, I get vexed. Vexed and cranky.

Right now, the gaping void vexing me is software for tracking medical expenses. I take a fairly laid-back approach to budget administration in general. I use PocketMoney on my Palm for day-to-day tracking of money flowing through my checking account. That's all. I have about six regular bills I pay each month in a batch when I get my mid-month paycheck, and it's easy enough for me to remember to do it. My bank information and my regular bills (cable, student loan, credit cards, etc) are all available online. My own personal budgeting approach doesn't demand a Quicken or Microsoft Money; I have little enough to track that I can keep it in my head, and I don't care about the detailed data like "how much did I spend on entertainment last month?" that such programs would offer.

However. I do care about that data mining when it comes to medical bills, now that we have so many. In past years, we've incurred one or two doctor co-pays annually; now we've got a dozen every two months, along with regular prescription costs. We've also got a stack of hospital bills -- one hospital stay, I've learned, can incur at least a half-dozen separate invoices, which show up sporadically.

Our medical paperwork is still not so out of control that a really good tracking system is mandatory -- I've been processing things manually, and everything that needs to get paid is getting paid. I have a good memory for what I've already taken care of, so we're not overpaying. But this is bringing out the information-freak in me. This time, I do want to data-mine the details and have lots of fancy spreadsheets I can run reports against to find out exactly what we're spending, what our insurance company is spending, etc.

Medical bills have lots of specialized wonky wrinkles, like the pile of EOB "this is not a bill" statements they bring in their wake that require tracking and reconciling against the actual, separately mailed billing invoices. The wonkiness means regular budgeting software isn't ideal. So surely some clever programmer has coded up a nifty program tailored for medical bills, right?

Read my first paragraph again. *Sob.*

I can find precisely one major commercial application: Quicken Medical Expense Manager. It's expensive -- $50 -- but if it were fabulous, I'd suck it up, pay, and be happy to find what I was after.

It's not fabulous. Quicken doesn't offer a free trial, so I can't offer a firsthand report, but I probably wouldn't download the trial even if there were one, because user reviews suggest it would break my computer. It seems Quicken Medical doesn't play well with the .Net framework changes in Windows XP SP2.

There's probably a workaround to the .Net issue, and I'd chase it if Quicken Medical had good feedback on its functionality, but it doesn't. The screenshots don't thrill me, and the reviews I've read paint it as an obviously version-1.0 product with a number of gaps and annoying details. I'm not inclined to pay $50 for software I won't love.

However, I'll settle for software I don't love if it's free. Much bashing on Google and Nexis turned up only one serious alternative to Quicken Medical: SimoHealth, a free desktop application from a start-up company funded by Steve Case's Revolution Health. It looks like Simo Software's vague plan is to sell its application to employers and insurers. The company seems pretty dormant at the moment, and I don't know if the application is being supported or maintained, but it's available for free at SimoHealth.com.

I spent about six hours last weekend entering our medical paperwork for the year into SimoHealth. This is not for the fainthearted. The software lacks modern niceties like import and entry-cloning tools; it feels like a version-1.0 GUI slapped over a spreadsheet backend. If you have the same appointment every week, you'll be entering all the details for it 52 times. I didn't run into any glaring bugs, but there were a number of rough edges. Most problematically for me, I couldn't find an obvious way to handle bills incurred over multiple visits but settled all at once. I kluged my way around it, but my solution is an ugly hack that wrecks the elegance I'm seeking from a software solution in the first place.

Still, at the end of my labors, I had data-mining opportunities my paper solution doesn't offer. I can use SimoHealth to quickly total what we've spent to date, and to parse that spending in a few different ways. Keeping it updated will be annoying, given the program's clunkiness, but for me, it's probably worth the pain.

I could do much of this myself in Excel, but I'm a UI snob, and even SimoHealth's basic interface is better than what I could throw together for myself in Excel. But it's a shame there isn't something better out there. (And if you've read this far and know of something better I've missed, please, speak up!) Sod privacy; I think most of us who deal with stacks of medical bills would welcome a Web 2.0ish (aiee, I can't believe I voluntarily typed that) online application for tracking and reconciling medical bills.

I and my entitlement complex look forward to the day when I can settle down at my PC with a bowl of soup, which I will enter in Meal Bandit, and catch up on my medical paperwork with Billing Bandit.