I saw this story this morning, about how Gander Mountain is suing its partner in providing a branded store credit card. The reason for the lawsuit? The bank involved has been denying what most people would consider the 'best' credit card customers: If you have too high a credit rating, and always pay off your balances, this company feels they'll be losing money on you.
Now, ISTM that this will be likely a slam-dunk suit for Gander Mountain: They contracted for a store credit card to make it easier for people to buy their products. The fact that the company they've contracted with is being paid on time is not going to be something Gander Mountain would consider to be a problem. I don't know what, exactly, the arrangements for such an agreement might be, but I suspect that the issuing bank would have some clauses put in to share risk with the retailer for bad debts. I doubt there's any kind of guarantee for generating enough late fees.
I think it's telling that a bank is alleged to have out and out admitted that junk charges are the major focus of their business. I tend to be disturbed by the way that people seem willing to excuse predatory banking or lending practices, esp. if they feel that the victims of such scams are undesirables. OTOH, I will admit that so long as the bank involved explained its fee structure clearly on the application, I'd have no problem with a bank using the criteria mentioned for choosing whom they will issue credit to. Provided they're not also contracted to provide banking services for a third party's customers. I would hope I wouldn't feel the need to do business with such a company, but I admit I have a certain latitude that many people don't when talking about credit.
It just seems to be another bank giving up camoflauge, and raising the skull and crossbones. Arrrr!