U.S. patent application number 10/321287 was filed with the patent office on 2003-09-18 for method and system for handling method level processing in connection with cardholder account processing.
This patent application is currently assigned to First Data Corporation. Invention is credited to Abelman, Henry, Algiene, Kenneth, Brockley, Tod O., Cash, Rebecca J., Harden, Jeffrey S., Krajewski, Steve R., Plozay, Molly, Rose, Keith A., Savage, Richard L..
Application Number | 20030177079 10/321287 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 28039400 |
Filed Date | 2003-09-18 |
United States Patent
Application |
20030177079 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
Krajewski, Steve R. ; et
al. |
September 18, 2003 |
Method and system for handling method level processing in
connection with cardholder account processing
Abstract
Methods and systems are provided for managing a financial
account in which account information is maintained, including a set
of account parameter values and a specification of a default
account processing strategy. Account usage information is received
for the financial account and is used in combination with the
account parameter values to make a determination whether to
override at least a portion of the account processing strategy. In
addition to implementing the override, the set of account parameter
values may be changed.
Inventors: |
Krajewski, Steve R.; (Omaha,
NE) ; Rose, Keith A.; (Omaha, NE) ; Cash,
Rebecca J.; (Omaha, NE) ; Plozay, Molly;
(Omaha, NE) ; Savage, Richard L.; (Salt Lake City,
UT) ; Brockley, Tod O.; (Omaha, NE) ; Harden,
Jeffrey S.; (Omaha, NE) ; Algiene, Kenneth;
(Littleton, CO) ; Abelman, Henry; (Roswell,
GA) |
Correspondence
Address: |
TOWNSEND AND TOWNSEND AND CREW, LLP
TWO EMBARCADERO CENTER
EIGHTH FLOOR
SAN FRANCISCO
CA
94111-3834
US
|
Assignee: |
First Data Corporation
Englewood
CO
|
Family ID: |
28039400 |
Appl. No.: |
10/321287 |
Filed: |
December 17, 2002 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
|
|
10321287 |
Dec 17, 2002 |
|
|
|
10098586 |
Mar 14, 2002 |
|
|
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
705/35 |
Current CPC
Class: |
G06Q 40/02 20130101;
G06Q 20/10 20130101 |
Class at
Publication: |
705/35 |
International
Class: |
G06F 017/60 |
Claims
What is claimed is:
1. A method for managing a financial account, the method
comprising: maintaining account information for the financial
account, wherein the account information includes a set of account
parameter values and a specification of an account processing
strategy; receiving account usage information for the financial
account; and making a determination whether to override at least a
portion of the account processing strategy by applying a decision
method that considers the account parameter values and the account
usage information.
2. The method recited in claim 1 further comprising changing the
set of account parameter values in accordance with the
determination.
3. The method recited in claim 1 wherein the account usage
information comprises a history of transaction information.
4. The method recited in claim 1 wherein the account usage
information comprises a history of payment information.
5. The method recited in claim 1 further comprising issuing an
instruction to include a statement insert with a statement for the
financial account in accordance with the determination.
6. The method recited in claim 1 further comprising issuing an
instruction to offer an upgrade of the financial account in
accordance with the determination.
7. The method recited in claim 1 further comprising issuing an
instruction to provide a reward in accordance with the
determination.
8. The method recited in claim 7 wherein the reward is to be
provided in response to a specific transaction.
9. The method recited in claim 8 wherein the specific transaction
comprises a charitable contribution.
10. The method recited in claim 1 wherein: the decision method is
defined by a lookup table; and making the determination comprises:
accessing an entry in the lookup table, the entry being defined
according to the account usage information and the account
parameter values; and implementing an operation specified by the
entry.
11. The method recited in claim 1 wherein: the decision method is
defined by a plurality of lookup tables; and making the
determination comprises: accessing an entry in a first of the
plurality of lookup tables, the entry in the first of the plurality
of lookup tables being defined according to one of the account
usage information and the account parameter values; accessing an
entry in a second of the plurality of lookup tables, the entry in
the second of the plurality of lookup tables being defined
according to the other of the account usage information and the
account parameter values, wherein the second of the plurality of
lookup tables is identified by the entry in the first of the
plurality of lookup tables; and implementing an operation specified
by the entry in the second of the plurality of lookup tables.
12. The method recited in claim 1 wherein making the determination
comprises determining to remove a previous override instruction for
the portion of the account processing strategy.
13. A computer-readable storage medium having a computer-readable
program embodied therein for directing operation of a computer
system including an input device, a processor, and a storage
device, wherein the computer-readable program includes instructions
for operating the computer system to manage a financial account in
accordance with the following: maintaining account information for
the financial account on the storage device, wherein the account
information includes a set of account parameter values and a
specification of an account processing strategy; receiving account
usage information for the financial account with the input device;
and making a determination with the processor whether to override
at least a portion of the account processing strategy by applying a
decision method that considers the account parameter values and the
account usage information.
14. The computer-readable storage medium recited in claim 13
wherein the computer-readable program further includes instructions
for issuing an instruction to include a statement insert with a
statement for the financial account in accordance with the
determination.
15. The computer-readable storage medium recited in claim 13
wherein the computer-readable program further includes instructions
for issuing an instruction to offer an upgrade of the financial
account in accordance with the determination.
16. The computer-readable storage medium recited in claim 13
wherein the computer-readable program further includes instructions
for issuing an instruction to provide a reward in accordance with
the determination.
17. The computer-readable storage medium recited in claim 16
wherein the reward is to provided in response to a specific
transaction.
18. The computer-readable storage medium recited in claim 17
wherein the specific transaction comprises a charitable
contribution.
19. The computer-readable storage medium recited in claim 13
wherein: the decision method is defined by a lookup table stored on
the storage device; and making the determination comprises:
accessing an entry in the lookup table, the entry being defined
according to the account usage information and the account
parameter values; and implementing an operation specified by the
entry.
20. The computer-readable storage medium recited in claim 13
wherein: the decision method is defined by a plurality of lookup
tables stored on the storage device; and making the determination
comprises: accessing an entry in a first of the plurality of lookup
tables, the entry in the first of the plurality of lookup tables
being defined according to one of the account usage information and
the account parameter values; accessing an entry in a second of the
plurality of lookup tables, the entry in the second of the
plurality of lookup tables being defined according to the other of
the account usage information and the account parameter values,
wherein the second of the plurality of lookup tables is identified
by the entry in the first of the plurality of lookup tables; and
implementing an operation specified by the entry in the second of
the plurality of lookup tables.
Description
CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION
[0001] This application is a continuation-in-part application of
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/098,586, entitled "METHOD AND
SYSTEM FOR HANDLING METHOD LEVEL PROCESSING CONNECTION WITH
CARDHOLDER ACCOUNT PROCESSING," filed Mar. 14, 2002, the entire
disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference for all
purposes.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
[0002] The present application relates in general to pricing and
processing of a financial account. More specifically, this
application relates to systems and methods for controlling
processing for an individual financial account based on
characteristics of the financial account and behavior associated
with the financial account.
[0003] Credit card issuers, such as banks, retailers, or other
financial service providers, provide cardholders with credit card
accounts. In a typical credit card agreement, the card issuer
agrees to transfer funds to merchants in payment for goods and
services received by the cardholder, and the cardholder agrees to
repay the card issuer. The terms of the agreement also provide that
the card issuer may impose various charges against the credit card
account. For instance, cardholders are generally charged interest
on their account balances. Cardholders may also be charged annual
fees, as well as charges for late payments, returned checks,
exceeding the stated limit on the credit card account, and the
like. Credit card accounts are generally priced by establishing the
amounts of the various fees, interest and other charges at levels
that enable the card issuer to profit from providing the credit
card account.
[0004] Account pricing has been implemented by defining a "pricing
method" for each of the applicable fees, interest, and other
charges. A pricing method establishes values for parameters that
control the computation of a particular charge. For instance, an
interest rate method might include parameters defining how to
compute a balance (e.g., whether to compute it daily or monthly,
what types of transactions to include) and a parameter establishing
the value of the interest rate (e.g., a 15% annual percentage rate
(APR)). A minimum payment method might include parameters
establishing that the payment amount is equal to the larger of a
dollar amount (e.g., $20) and a percentage of the outstanding
balance (e.g., 2%). When the cardholder is billed, the pricing
methods are used to control computation of the charges imposed by
the card issuer. For instance, when the finance charge is
determined, the computation of the account balance and the amount
of interest to charge are controlled by parameters set by the
interest rate method. When the minimum payment is computed,
parameters of the minimum payment method are used to control the
computation.
[0005] In addition to pricing, other methods may be defined to
establish parameter values governing other aspects of cardholder
account processing. For example, a statement-production method may
be provided that sets parameters governing the type of paper to be
used and the information to be included on statements sent to
cardholders. In addition, the statement-production method may set
parameters governing which inserts are to be included with the
statement when it is mailed. In another example, methods may also
be defined to establish parameter values related to incentive or
rewards programs, such as frequent flier miles or rebates awarded
based on purchasing activity. A rewards method typically sets
parameter values for computing rewards points earned for various
transactions (e.g., one rewards point for each dollar spent in a
purchase transaction), and so on. In short, an "account processing
method" (or "processing method") may be provided for any aspect of
cardholder account processing that is amenable to control via
parameter values.
[0006] A pricing "strategy" is established by defining a pricing
method for each charge that could be imposed. For instance, one
pricing strategy may include a first method establishing an
interest rate of 15% (APR) computed on a daily balance, a second
method establishing a minimum payment amount of $20 or 2% of the
account balance, a third method establishing a late payment charge
of $30, and so on. The pricing strategy may be expanded into a
processing strategy by including additional methods not related to
charges, such as statement production or rewards methods. Thus, a
typical processing strategy includes many methods.
[0007] Many card issuers provide different types of card accounts
with different terms and conditions, different rewards programs,
and so on. These account types are generally implemented by
defining multiple co-existing processing strategies, and assigning
each account to one of the strategies. For instance, a card issuer
may define a "classic" strategy, a "gold" strategy, and a
"platinum" strategy, with the classic strategy including an
interest rate of 18% and an annual fee of $20, the gold strategy
including an interest rate of 16% and an annual fee of $25, and the
platinum strategy including an interest rate of 15% and an annual
fee of $50. The ability to assign individual cardholders to one of
several co-existing strategies allows the card issuer to coordinate
account pricing and other aspects of account processing with
cardholder behavior to some extent.
[0008] Further coordination of account pricing and processing with
cardholder behavior is desirable. For instance, a card issuer may
desire to impose penalty pricing on individual cardholders who
violate the terms and conditions of the cardholder agreement, e.g.,
by increasing the interest rate for cardholders who are delinquent
in paying. As another example, a card issuer may desire to offer
incentive pricing, such as a temporary reduction in the interest
rate, in order to attract new cardholders or to encourage existing
cardholders to increase their use of the issuer's cards. Such
penalty or incentive pricing typically involves adjusting a small
number of parameters within one or two account processing methods
for the accounts of cardholders who qualify for the penalty or
incentive.
[0009] Existing systems provide only limited ability to make such
adjustments within an account processing method. In some systems,
each account is assigned a processing strategy (e.g., "classic,"
"gold," or "platinum"), and the processing for all accounts
assigned to that strategy is determined by the account processing
methods that make up the assigned strategy. In such a system,
adjusting a single processing parameter requires the card issuer to
define a new strategy that differs from the old strategy in one
account processing method. The card issuer must then identify the
accounts to which the change should be applied and reassign those
accounts to the new strategy. Subsequent changes intended to affect
all cardholders must be made separately for each strategy, making
this approach burdensome and inefficient.
[0010] Other existing systems allow the card issuer to override one
or more of the processing parameters for an individual account by
applying a method override that changes the value of one or more of
the parameters of an account processing method. For instance, a
penalty interest rate may be imposed by applying a method override
to an account that changes the rate to a higher value but otherwise
leaves the interest rate method unchanged. However, these systems
provide limited functionality for identifying accounts to which a
method override is to be applied. Generally, the card issuer must
search account records to generate a list of qualifying accounts.
Once the accounts are identified, applying a method override
generally involves manually updating each account record.
Subsequently removing the method override (to restore the default
account processing method) involves a second manual update.
[0011] Hence, systems and methods for automatically adjusting
individual price terms for a cardholder account would be
desirable.
BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
[0012] Embodiments of the invention are thus directed to methods
and systems for managing a financial account. Ordinarily, the
financial account is managed according to a default processing
strategy. In some instances, however, embodiments of the invention
permit overrides of the default processing strategy. Such overrides
may comprise one-time overrides or may comprise overrides that
persist under some change in conditions. One consequence of such
overrides is that it is possible to tailor processing strategies on
an individualized basis for account holders rather than relying on
the broader principles used in the default strategy.
[0013] Thus, in one embodiment, a method is provided for managing a
financial account in which account information is maintained,
including a set of account parameter values and a specification of
the default account processing strategy. Account usage information
is received for the financial account and is used in combination
with the account parameter values to make a determination whether
to override at least a portion of the account processing strategy.
In addition to implementing the override, the set of account
parameter values may be changed in some embodiments.
[0014] The manner in which the override is implemented may depend
on the portion of the processing strategy that overridden. For
example, in one embodiment, an instruction is issued to include an
insert with a statement for the financial account in accordance
with the determination. In another embodiment, an instruction is
issued to offer an upgrade of the financial account in accordance
with the determination. In a further embodiment, an instruction is
issued to provide a reward in accordance with the determination;
the reward may be in response to a specific transaction, such as a
charitable contribution.
[0015] The decision method by which the determination is made may
proceed differently in different embodiments. For example, in one
embodiment, the decision method is defined by a lookup table and
the determination is made by accessing an entry in the lookup table
and implementing an operation specified by the entry. In other
embodiments, a hierarchy of tables may be used to define the
decision method. In one such embodiment, the determination is made
by accessing an entry in a first lookup table that identifies a
second lookup table. An entry in the second lookup table defines an
operation to be implemented.
[0016] The methods of the present invention may be embodied in a
computer-readable storage medium having a computer-readable program
embodied therein for directing operation of a computer system. Such
a computer system may include a processor and a storage device. The
computer-readable program includes instructions for operating the
computer system to authorize a commercial transaction in accordance
with the embodiments described above.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0017] A further understanding of the nature and advantages of the
present invention may be realized by reference to the remaining
portions of the specification and the drawings wherein like
reference numerals are used throughout the several drawings to
refer to similar components. In some instances, a sublabel is
associated with a reference numeral and follows a hyphen to denote
one of multiple similar components. When reference is made to a
reference numeral without specification to an existing sublabel, it
is intended to refer to all such multiple similar components.
[0018] FIG. 1A is a simplified block diagram of a system for
applying method overrides to credit card accounts according to an
exemplary embodiment of the present invention;
[0019] FIG. 1B provides a more detailed schematic view of a
computer system on which methods of the invention may be
embodied;
[0020] FIG. 1C is a flow diagram providing an overview of
embodiments of the invention;
[0021] FIG. 2 is a simplified block diagram of a cardholder record
according to an exemplary embodiment of the present invention;
[0022] FIGS. 3A and 3B are simplified block diagrams of a
hierarchical arrangement of lookup tables implementing decision
rules according to exemplary embodiments of the present
invention;
[0023] FIGS. 4A and 4B are tables illustrating the contents of
cardholder allocation tables according to exemplary embodiments of
the present invention;
[0024] FIGS. 5A-F are tables, each illustrating the contents of an
account qualification table according to exemplary embodiments of
the present invention;
[0025] FIG. 6 is a flow chart of an exemplary process for applying
a method override to a cardholder account according to the present
invention; and
[0026] FIGS. 7A-B are screen shots showing a presentation of method
override information for a cardholder account according to an
exemplary embodiment of the present invention.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION
[0027] 1. System Overview
[0028] Embodiments of the present invention will now be described.
The present invention provides systems and methods for flexibly
adjusting individual components of account processing based on
characteristics and behavior of individual cardholders. In some
embodiments, the components of account processing comprise
fee-related parameters and, in other embodiments, the components of
account processing comprise non-fee-related parameters. In an
exemplary embodiment, each account is assigned a processing
strategy that includes a set of account processing methods
establishing parameters of account processing. Such parameters may
include fee-related and/or non-fee-related parameters. One or more
of the methods is made overrideable; in other words, a method
override is provided that, when applied to an account, changes one
or more of the parameters of an account processing method from the
default values established by the processing strategy. Whether to
apply each available method override to a particular financial
account is determined automatically using decision rules related to
one or more aspects of the account's characteristics and behavior
associated with the account.
[0029] In the following, specific embodiments are discussed where
the financial account comprises a credit account, such as a
credit-card account, but the invention is not limited to such
accounts and may be implemented for other financial accounts. For
example, in one exemplary embodiment, a processing strategy
includes an interest rate method for a credit account establishing
an annual rate of 15%; this method may also establish other
parameters (e.g., for computing the balance to which the annual
rate is applied). A method override is provided that, when applied
to an account, changes the interest rate for that account to 18%
without affecting other parameters of the interest rate method. A
decision rule is also provided that establishes that the method
override is to be applied only to accounts with one or more
delinquent payments and a balance between $1,000 and $5,000. An
account record is reviewed to determine whether the account meets
the criteria of the decision rule. If it does, then the method
override is applied, and subsequent bills are computed using the
18% interest rate established by the method override and other
parameters established by the interest rate method.
[0030] In some alternative embodiments, multiple method overrides
may be associated with the same account processing method. For
instance, for an interest rate method, there may be a first method
override that changes the interest rate to 18% and a second method
override that changes the interest rate to 21%. It will be
appreciated that in this example, both method overrides would not
be simultaneously applied to the same cardholder account, but the
first method override could be applied to a first account while the
second method override is applied to a second account and no method
override is applied to a third account.
[0031] FIG. 1A illustrates an exemplary embodiment of a system 100
for controlling the application of method overrides to cardholder
accounts according to the present invention. A server 105
communicates with an account data store 110-1 that contains
cardholder account information and with a rules data store 110-2
that contains decision rules governing the application of method
overrides. Both the account data store 110-1 and the rules data
store 110-2 are examples of storage devices 110 suitable for
storing data. While they are shown as separate storage devices 110
in FIG. 1A, it will be appreciated that the data may alternatively
be stored collectively on a single storage device 110 or may be
stored on a number of storage devices 110 that exceeds two. Each of
such storage devices 110 may be implemented, for example, using
magnetic disk, tape, or any other computer-readable media, and each
of such storage devices 110 may be local to server 105 or remote
and accessible via a network. In one exemplary embodiment, server
105 is implemented as a computer system, as described in greater
detail in connection with FIG. 1B. In some instances, the
information on the storage devices 110 may be derived from multiple
sources and is organized as described in copending, commonly
assigned U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/193,722, entitled
"METHODS AND SYSTEMS FOR ORGANIZING INFORMATION FROM MULTIPLE
SOURCES," filed Jul. 10, 2002 by Brian Friedman, the entire
disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference for all
purposes.
[0032] A user interface 120 is provided to enable a user (such as
an employee of the card issuer where the financial account
comprises a credit-card account) to control various functionality
of server 105, and to view and/or modify data in account data store
110-1 and/or rules data store 110-2. User interface 120 generally
includes a display device (e.g., a monitor) for providing
information to a user and an input device (e.g., a keyboard or
touchscreen) for accepting input from a user. User interface 120
may also include other components, such as hardware and/or software
security components to prevent unauthorized use. User interface 120
may be local to server 105 or remote and connected to server 105
via a network.
[0033] In an embodiment where the financial account comprises a
credit-card account, the decision rules in rules data store 110-2
are defined by the card issuer for each overrideable method. The
decision rules determine whether an available method override is to
be applied to a cardholder account on the basis of one or more
decision elements. Each decision element reflects one or more
features of cardholder characteristics and behavior stored in an
account record, such as the number of late payments, the age of the
account, account balance, frequency of use of the card, total
amount charged to the account over a fixed time period, payment
history, cardholder income, cardholder credit rating, and the like.
An example of an account record is discussed in greater detail in
connection with FIG. 2 below. It will be appreciated that the
number of decision elements may be quite large, and that any
information related to cardholder characteristics and behavior may
be used as a decision element. The decision rules may
advantageously be implemented using a set of lookup tables, as will
be described further below.
[0034] Server 105 operates a decision engine 125 for applying
decision rules to account records. Decision engine 125 retrieves
decision rules from rules data store 115 and an account record from
account data store 110-1. Decision engine 125 then applies the
decision rules to data in the account record in order to determine
whether to apply a particular method override to the cardholder
account. In one exemplary embodiment, decision engine 125 is also
configured to update the account record in account data store 110
when a method override is to be applied or removed.
[0035] In an exemplary embodiment, decision engine 125 has several
modes of operation. In a first operating mode, decision engine 125
reviews and updates each account record (or a selected subset of
the account records) in account data store 110-1. In a second
operating mode, decision engine 125 reviews some or all of the
account records in account data store 110-1 without updating the
account records; instead, decision engine 125 makes information
from the review available to the card issuer, including whether any
method overrides were selected for application to each cardholder
account. In a third operating mode, decision engine 125 is used to
process a new account application by determining the terms and
conditions that would apply to a prospective new account. These
operating modes will be described further below. It is to be
understood that decision engine 125 may have more or fewer
operating modes. The various operating modes of decision engine 125
may be controlled by an operator via user interface 120.
[0036] A structure for the server in one embodiment is shown
schematically in FIG. 1B. This figure broadly illustrates how
individual system elements may be implemented in a separated or
more integrated manner. The server 105 is shown comprised of
hardware elements that are electrically coupled via bus 145. In
this embodiment, these hardware elements include the decision
engine 125 as one or more processors, one or more input devices
130, one or more output devices 135, a computer-readable storage
media reader 140a, a communications system 150, a processing
acceleration unit 155 such as a DSP or special-purpose processor,
and a memory 160. The computer-readable storage media reader 140a
is further connected to a computer-readable storage medium 140b,
the combination comprehensively representing remote, local, fixed,
and/or removable storage devices plus storage media for temporarily
and/or more permanently containing computer-readable information.
The communications system 150 may comprise a wired, wireless,
modem, and/or other type of interfacing connection and permits data
to be exchanged with the server 105, such as with the user
interface 120. Thus, in this embodiment, the user interface 120 is
remote from the server 105 and the storage devices 110 are local to
the server 105, being configured for direct interaction with the
decision engine 125 via bus 145.
[0037] The server 105 also comprises software elements, shown as
being currently located within working memory 165, including an
operating system 170 and other code 175, such as a program designed
to implement methods of the invention. It will be apparent to those
skilled in the art that substantial variations may be used in
accordance with specific requirements. For example, customized
hardware might also be used and/or particular elements might be
implemented in hardware, software (including portable software,
such as applets), or both. Further, connection to other computing
devices such as network input/output devices may be employed.
[0038] It will be appreciated that the description of system 100
herein is illustrative. The components described herein may be
modified or varied, and more or fewer components may be used. Based
on the disclosure and teachings herein, those of ordinary skill in
the art will recognize other ways and/or methods of implementing
the present invention.
[0039] An overview of methods of certain embodiments of the
invention is summarized in outline form in FIG. 1C. At block 180,
account information for the financial account is maintained. This
account information generally includes a set of account parameter
values and a specification of an account processing strategy. At
block 182, account usage information is received for the financial
account. Such account usage information may comprise, for example,
a history of transaction information and/or a history of payment
information. In the case of a credit-card account, for example,
transaction information includes all information related to
transactions entered into by the cardholder, such as purchases
and/or cash advances. Payment information includes all information
related to payments by the cardholder to pay down the credit
balance of the account. Thus, the account usage information may
collectively encompass all information related to any changes in
the account credit balance. At block 184, a determination is made
whether to override at least a portion of the account processing
strategy. Such a determination may be made by applying a decision
method that considers the account parameter values and the account
usage information. If a determination is made to override at least
a portion of the account processing strategy, instructions to
implement such an override are issued at block 186.
[0040] 2. Account Information
[0041] The nature of the account information may be understood more
clearly by considering a specific example in which the financial
account comprises a credit-card account. In such instances, the
cardholder account information in account data store 110-1 includes
an account record (or cardholder record) corresponding to each
cardholder account. An example of such an account record 200 is
shown in FIG. 2. Each account record 200 may include identifying
information 205 for the account (e.g., account number, cardholder
name, etc.). Each account record 200 may also include processing
information 210, such as an identifier indicating the processing
strategy applied to the account and identifiers of any method
overrides that are currently applied.
[0042] The method override information may be stored in one or more
fields in cardholder record 200; for instance, a list of names of
currently applied method overrides may be stored. In some
embodiments, processing information 210 also includes processing
history information related to formerly applied method overrides,
i.e., method overrides that once were, but no longer are, applied
to the account. The processing history information may be stored in
a history file, and account record 200 may contain a reference to
that file. Account record 200 also includes cardholder
characteristics data 215, including account usage and payment
patterns, cardholder income, cardholder credit score, etc.
[0043] It will be appreciated that FIG. 2 is illustrative and that
other information may be stored in account record 200; for
instance, data related to individual credit card transactions
(e.g., where the card was used, the total amount of the
transaction, the date of the transaction) may also be stored.
Storage and management of account records 200 may be implemented
using conventional database products, flat files, or any other data
management technology.
[0044] 3. Decision Rules
[0045] In one exemplary embodiment, the decision rules stored in
rules data store 115 are implemented as a hierarchical arrangement
of look-up tables, examples of which are shown in FIGS. 3A and 3B.
For illustrative purposes, separate diagrams are provided for
fee-related methods in FIG. 3A and non-fee-related methods in FIG.
3B, but it will be understood that such a distinction between
method types need not be implemented. Specifically, the methods may
alternatively be organized in a single larger hierarchical
arrangement.
[0046] a. Decision Rules for Fee-Based Methods
[0047] For the fee-related methods shown in FIG. 3A, the top of the
hierarchical arrangement is a method selection table 305, in which
each overrideable method is listed. The example shown has three
overrideable methods (interest rate, late payment fee, and annual
fee), but it will be appreciated that any or all of the methods
making up a processing strategy may be made overrideable in the
same manner as the examples described herein. It will also be
appreciated that not all methods are required to be overrideable.
For instance, an embodiment of a processing strategy may include 44
methods, of which 27 are overrideable; in that case, the method
selection table 305 would have 27 entries.
[0048] For each entry in the method selection table 305, there is a
corresponding client allocation (CA) table, such as CA tables 310a,
310b, and 310c of FIG. 3A. A table lookup operation on method
selection table 305 using a particular overrideable method returns
a reference to a corresponding CA table 310a, 310b, 310c. Each CA
table performs a first sorting of cardholder accounts based on
selected decision elements. FIG. 4A shows an exemplary
implementation of a CA table 310a for an overrideable interest rate
method. In this example, the decision elements are cardholder
credit score 405, cardholder income 410, and account age 415.
Various thresholds are set in connection with each decision
element. For example, cardholder credit score 405 has thresholds at
values of "400" and "600"; thus, accounts are grouped by whether
the cardholder's credit score is less than "400," between "400" and
"600," or greater than "600." With regard to cardholder income 410,
accounts are grouped by whether the cardholder's income is under
$25,000, between $25,000 and $50,000, or over $50,000. With regard
to account age 415, accounts are grouped by whether the account is
less than a year old, between one year and three years old, or
three or more years old.
[0049] Returning to FIG. 3A, one or more account qualification (AQ)
tables are associated with each CA table. Thus, AQ tables 315a,
315b, 315c are associated with CA table 310a; AQ tables 315d, 315e,
315f, and 315g are associated with CA table 310b; and AQ tables
315h, 315i, 315j, and 315k are associated with CA table 310c. A
table lookup operation on CA table 310a using cardholder data for a
particular account returns a reference to one of the associated AQ
tables 315a, 315b, and 315c. In FIG. 4, "AQ-C," "AQ-G," and "AQ-P"
refer, respectively to AQ tables 315a, 315b, and 315c of FIG. 3.
For example, if a cardholder has a credit score of "420," an income
of $22,000 and an account age of three years, a table lookup
operation on CA table 310a (FIG. 4A) would return a reference to
table 315a of FIG. 3A. The AQ tables provide further sorting of
accounts, as will be described below.
[0050] It will be appreciated that any number and any combination
of decision elements may be included in a CA table such as table
310a. In some embodiments, the maximum number of decision elements
that a card issuer may select for inclusion in a CA table may be
limited (e.g., to 20 decision elements) in order to reduce the
potential table size and complexity. Moreover, each CA table 310a,
310b, 310c within a set of decision rules may include different
decision elements and different thresholds associated with
particular decision elements. A single CA table may include
references to any number of AQ tables.
[0051] AQ tables 315a-315k of FIG. 3A provide further sorting of
cardholder accounts using additional decision elements. Exemplary
implementations of AQ tables 315a, 315b, 315c corresponding to CA
table 310a are illustrated in FIGS. 5A-C, respectively. AQ table
315a is used when a reference to table AQ-C is returned by CA table
310a of FIG. 4A; AQ table 315b is used when a reference to table
AQ-G is returned by CA table 310a; and AQ table 315c is used when a
reference to table AQ-P is returned by CA table 310a. In each AQ
table 315a, 315b, 315c, three decision elements are used: number of
delinquent payments 505, account balance 510, and number of billing
cycles a payment is delinquent 515. Again, various thresholds are
set in connection with each decision element. For instance, in
table 315a, the number of delinquent payments 505 is grouped as
zero, one, or two or more.
[0052] A table lookup operation on an AQ table using cardholder
data for a particular account returns a result value that indicates
whether a method override is to be applied. In one exemplary
embodiment, illustrated in FIGS. 5A-C, each result has one of four
possible values--"Assign," "Last Different," "Same," or "Remove." A
result of "Assign" indicates that a method override is to be
applied to the cardholder account. Where multiple method overrides
are available for a particular method, the "Assign" result includes
an identifier of the method override to be applied. For instance,
in FIGS. 5A-C, each "Assign" result includes either identifier
"MO1" or identifier "MO2." In this example, identifier "MO1"
identifies a first method override that changes the interest rate
to 18%, and identifier "MO2" identifies a second method override
that changes the interest rate to 21%. In some alternative
embodiments, a result value of "Assign" is indicated by returning
only the method override identifier. A result of "Last Different"
indicates that a formerly applied method override is to be
reapplied to the cardholder account, as described further below. A
result of "Same" indicates that the status of the account is
unchanged--i.e., a current method override (if present) is to
remain in effect but no new method override is to be applied. A
result of "Remove" indicates that the current method override is to
be taken off the account, restoring the default method.
[0053] b. Decision Rules for Non-Fee-Based Methods
[0054] The non-fee-based methods may be overridden by similar
decision rules, illustrated for a specific embodiment in FIG. 3B.
In this figure, the top of the hierarchical arrangement of look-up
tables comprises a method selection table 305', in which each
overrideable method is listed. The example illustrates
non-fee-based overrideable methods related to inserts, upgrades,
and rewards. In particular, the "inserts" method is directed to
determining which inserts may be included with an issued statement
regarding the financial account. The ability to override the insert
method according to different override assignments permits inserts
to be included with statements on a completely individualized
basis. When the server has determined how inserts are to be
included according to the overrides, a file may be provided through
output device that may be used by an intelligent insertion system,
such as the one described in detail in copending, commonly assigned
U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/028,449, entitled "REAL-TIME
INTELLIGENT PACKET-COLLATION SYSTEMS AND METHODS," filed Dec. 19,
2001 by Scott J. Smith et al., the entire disclosure of which is
herein incorporated by reference.
[0055] The "upgrades" method is directed to determining whether to
offer an upgrade in processing strategy to the account holder. For
example, in cases where the account comprises a credit-card
account, the upgrades method may define criteria by which the
cardholder may be offered a higher-status card on a preapproved
basis. The holder of a classic card might be offered an upgrade to
a gold card, or the holder of a gold card might be offered an
upgrade to a platinum card, depending on such factors as the length
of time the individual has been a customer and his payment record.
Embodiments of the invention permit the usual method of determining
whether to offer an upgrade to be overridden in response to
specific account parameter values and account usage information.
For example, if a cardholder achieves a particular increase in
credit score and maintains a balance within a predefined window,
the upgrade method may be overridden to accelerate an upgrade
offer. In another embodiment, the default strategy may be never to
offer an upgrade. This default strategy may be overridden to offer
upgrades upon satisfaction of certain criteria, enabling upgrades
to be offered on an individualized basis.
[0056] The "rewards" method is directed to determining whether to
offer a reward to the account holder. In some embodiments, this may
be implemented similarly to the upgrades method by adopting a
default strategy never to provide a reward. Upon the satisfaction
of certain criteria, this default strategy may be overridden to
provide rewards on an individualized basis. In other embodiments,
the rewards method may use a default strategy that provides rewards
when certain criteria are satisfied. This default strategy may be
overridden in accordance with account parameter values and account
usage information, such as by enhancing the quality of the reward
or by providing lesser awards. In some instances where the account
information is generally negative, the override may act to suppress
rewards that would otherwise be offered in accordance with the
rewards method. Rewards may take a variety of different forms, such
as by providing points or coupons, and the rate at which these are
provided may be overridden with embodiments of the invention.
[0057] Embodiments of the invention also permit rewards to be tied
directly to certain types of transactions. For example, in one
embodiment, an extended grace period may be provided for certain
types of charitable contributions. If such a charitable
contribution is made by charging the financial account, the
invention permits the processing strategy to be overridden with
respect to that transaction so that the time for repayment without
a finance charge is extended.
[0058] For each entry in the method selection table 305', there is
a corresponding client allocation table, such as tables 310a',
310b', and 310c' of FIG. 3B. Similarly to the fee-based
overrideable methods, the respective client allocation tables are
used to perform a first sorting of accounts based on selected
decision elements. This first sorting identifies one of a plurality
of account qualification tables (identified as "BQ" tables for the
non-fee-based methods). For example, in FIG. 3B, account
qualification tables 315a', 315b', and 315c' are associated with
the client allocation table 310a' for the inserts methods; account
qualification tables 315d', 315e', 315f', and 315g' are associated
with the client allocation table 310b' for the upgrades methods;
and account qualification tables 315i', 315j', and 315k' are
associated with the client allocation table 310c' for the rewards
methods.
[0059] FIG. 4B provides an exemplary implementation of client
allocation table 310c' for the rewards methods. This example
illustrates an implementation of the override scheme that may
permit an extended grace period for repayment of charges made for
charitable donations. The decision elements comprise cardholder
credit score 420 and the type of transaction 425, i.e. whether the
transaction is classified as a charitable or noncharitable
transaction. Thresholds are set in connection with the cardholder
credit score 420 so that those with a larger credit score are more
likely to be permitted to use the extended grace period than those
with a lower credit score. In this example, the cardholders with
the very lowest credit scores are not extended any benefit from the
charitable nature of the transaction; this is evident from the fact
that the client allocation table 310c' identifies the same account
qualification table BQ-X 315i' for the lowest credit scores as it
does for all noncharitable transactions.
[0060] Details of this account qualification table BQ-X 315i' are
provided in FIG. 5D. Like the fee-based account qualification
tables AQ, the non-fee-based account qualification tables BQ are
illustrated herein with three decision elements, the number of
delinquent payments 505, the account balance 510, and the number of
billing cycles that a payment is delinquent 515. In the case of
account qualification table BQ-X 315i', all of the entries are
"Remove," indicating that the default method is to be applied in
all cases. This has the effect of ensuring that no extended grace
periods are provided for charges related to noncharitable expenses
nor for those with the lowest credit scores.
[0061] If the credit scores for the cardholder are mediocre, client
allocation table 310c' indicates that a method override for
charitable transactions will be considered as set forth in account
qualification table BQ-Y 315j'. An example of this account
qualification table is shown in FIG. 5E and uses a combination
of"Remove" and "Assign MO3" designations. The "Assign MO3"
designations correspond to a method override, such as providing a
one-month grace period for the relevant transaction. In this
example, the "Remove" designations are more prevalent with
increases in account balance 510 and with the number of delinquent
payments 505. This causes the extended grace period to be provided
only where the cardholder has a relatively low balance and
relatively few delinquent payments.
[0062] When the credit scores of the cardholder are high, client
allocation table 310c' indicates that the method override for
charitable transactions will be considered as set forth in account
qualification table BQ-Z 315k'. An example of this account
qualification table is shown in FIG. 5F and differs from the one
shown in FIG. 5E in the distribution of the "Remove" and "Assign
MO3" designations. This different distribution reflects the fact
that an extended grace period for charitable contributions may be
provided for despite somewhat larger account balances 510 or number
of delinquent payments 505 if the cardholder has a high credit
score.
[0063] It will be appreciated that the AQ and BQ account
qualification tables of FIGS. 5A-F are illustrative and that
variations and modifications are possible. For instance, any number
of decision elements may be included in each account qualification
table. In some embodiments, the maximum number of decision elements
that a card issuer may select for inclusion in an account
qualification table may be limited (e.g., to 20) in order to reduce
the potential size and complexity of the tables. In the exemplary
tables shown in FIGS. 4A, 4B, and 5A-5F, the set of decision
elements included in the account qualification tables of FIGS.
5A-5F is disjoint from the set of decision elements included in the
client allocation tables of FIGS. 4A and 4B, but this is not
required. It will also be appreciated that each of account
qualification tables may employ different decision elements,
different numbers of decision elements, and/or different threshold
values associated with particular decision elements. In addition,
the result values described herein for an account qualification
table lookup operation are illustrative, and a person of ordinary
skill in the art will recognize that other result values or other
combinations of result values may be implemented.
[0064] In some alternative embodiments, account sorting is
performed exclusively with account qualification tables. Such an
embodiment may be implemented by configuring each CA table to be a
transparent pass-through that always returns the same account
qualification table reference. For instance, in FIG. 3A, table 310c
may be configured to return a reference to AQ-W table 315h for all
cardholders. One skilled in the art will recognize that
implementations with a nontransparent CA table such as table 310a
provide additional flexibility. For instance, CA table 310a may be
used to sort account holders based on the processing strategy
assigned to the account--e.g., "classic," "gold," or "platinum"--by
returning a reference to AQ-C table 315a for "classic" cardholders,
to AQ-G table 315b for "gold" cardholders, and to AQ-P table 315c
for "platinum" cardholders. Because each AQ table may establish
different decision rules for applying a method override, it is
possible for a card issuer to implement multiple processing
strategies where each processing strategy has different default
methods and different method overrides, as well as different
conditions for applying the method overrides.
[0065] In other embodiments, additional levels of account sorting
tables may be included between the CA tables and the account
qualification tables to provide further account classification. One
of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that the additional
levels may be implemented by providing a hierarchy of levels of
lookup tables, with tables at each level returning references to
tables at the next level. For instance, a CA table lookup may
return a reference to a table at an intermediate level, and a
lookup in a table at the intermediate level may return a reference
to an account qualification table.
[0066] 4. Illustrations
[0067] FIG. 6 is a flow chart of an exemplary process 600 for
applying method overrides to cardholder accounts. Process 600 may
be executed by decision engine 125 of FIG. 1A. Process 600 involves
accessing an account record 200 from account data store 110-1, then
performing table lookup operations using look-up tables from rules
data store 110-2 and account data from the account record 200 to
determine whether a method override is to be applied to the
account. For purposes of illustrating process 600, the exemplary CA
table 310a of FIG. 4A and the exemplary AQ tables 315a, 315b, 315c
of FIGS. 5A-C will be referred to herein; it will be appreciated
that other tables may be substituted. In addition, it will be
presumed for illustrative purposes that account data store 110
includes account records for hypothetical cardholders X, Y, and Z,
and that each of these account records includes the respective data
shown in Table 1. The various entries in Table 1 will be described
further below. It will be appreciated that records for other
cardholders may also be included in account data store 110-1 and
that an account record may include other data not shown in Table
1.
1TABLE 1 Cardholder X Cardholder Y Cardholder Z Processing Strategy
Classic Gold Platinum Current Int. Rate none M02 none Method
Override Last Different Int. none MO1 MO2 Rate override Credit
score 420 550 777 Income $22,000 $35,000 $80,000 Account age 3
years 4 years 3 years No. Delinquencies 1 0 1 Average Balance
$1,500 $500 $2,500 No. Cycles 1 0 1 Delinquent Transaction Type
Charitable Noncharitable Charitable
[0068] Referring to FIG. 6, at step 601 an account record is
selected. For instance, decision engine 125 may be configured to
select each account record sequentially. Alternatively, an operator
may select an account record or a set of account records via user
interface 120. At step 602, one of the overrideable methods is
selected. For example, the overrideable interest rate method may be
selected. Method selection may be performed automatically by
decision engine 125 (e.g., by cycling through all overrideable
methods for each cardholder account) or manually by an operator via
user interface 120. Next, at step 603, the decision engine 125
selects the appropriate CA table by performing a table lookup in
the method selection table (e.g., table 305 of FIG. 3A) using the
method selected at step 602. The table lookup returns a reference
to a CA table; for instance, a table lookup in table 305 using the
interest rate method returns a reference to CA table 310a.
[0069] At step 604, the decision engine identifies the decision
elements used in the selected CA table. In CA table 310a of FIG.
4A, the decision elements are credit score 405, cardholder income
410, and account age 415. At step 605, the decision engine 125
retrieves the corresponding account data from the account record.
For instance, for cardholder X, the decision engine 125 would
retrieve a credit score of 420, an income of $22,000, and an
account age of three years. For cardholder Y, the decision engine
125 would retrieve a credit score of 550, an income of $35,000, and
an account age of four years. For cardholder Z, the decision engine
125 would retrieve a credit score of 777, an income of $80,000, and
an account age of four years.
[0070] It will be appreciated that a decision element need not
correspond exactly to a field in the account record 200. For
instance, the account record 200 may include the opening date of
the account, which is constant, rather than the account age, which
would require periodic updating. If the opening date is stored, the
account age may be readily computed based on the opening date and
the current date. Thus, step 605 may include performing
computations to convert data in the account record 200 to a format
corresponding to the decision element.
[0071] At step 606, the decision engine 125 selects the appropriate
account qualification table by performing a table lookup in the
selected CA table 310a using the cardholder data. The lookup
returns a reference to an account qualification table. For
instance, a table lookup in CA table 310a (FIG. 4A) using the
characteristics given in Table 1 for cardholder X would return a
reference to the AQ-C table (table 315a of FIG. 5A); for cardholder
Y, a reference to the AQ-G table (table 315b of FIG. 5B); and for
cardholder Z, a reference to the AQ-P table (table 315c of FIG.
5C).
[0072] At step 607, the decision engine 125 identifies the decision
elements used in the selected AQ table. For instance, in table 315a
in FIG. 5A, the decision elements are number of delinquent payments
505, account balance 510, and number of cycles delinquent 515. At
step 608, the decision engine retrieves the corresponding data for
the cardholder account. This step is generally similar to step 605
and may include converting data in the account record to a format
corresponding to the decision element. In an alternative
embodiment, the corresponding account data have already been
retrieved at step 605, and step 608 may be skipped.
[0073] At step 609, the decision engine 125 performs a table lookup
in the selected account qualification table using the account data,
and the lookup returns a result. For example, for cardholder X of
Table 1, a result of "Assign MO1" would be obtained from AQ-C table
315a; for cardholder Y, a result of "Remove" would be obtained from
AQ-G table 315b; and for cardholder Z, a result of "Last Different"
would be obtained from AQ-P table 315c. It should be noted that the
result for a particular cardholder may depend in part on which
account qualification table was selected at step 606. For instance,
Table 1 shows that each of cardholders X and Z has one late
payment, a balance between $1,000 and $5,000, and a payment one
cycle delinquent. But because these two cardholders would be
referred to different AQ tables (based on other characteristics),
cardholder X would receive a result of "Assign MO1" while
cardholder Z would receive a result of "Last Different."
[0074] At step 610, the decision engine 125 acts upon the result.
If the result is "Assign," then at step 611 the method override
associated with the "Assign" result is applied to the cardholder
account. For example, cardholder X would have the "MO1" override
applied, meaning that cardholder X's interest rate would be changed
to 18%. The mechanism for applying a method override depends on the
implementation of an account record. For instance, in one
embodiment, the account record includes fields for storing method
override identifiers, and a method override is applied to an
account by modifying one of these fields. In an alternative
embodiment, a list of all method overrides currently applied to the
account is maintained in the account record or in an associated
file; in this embodiment, step 611 includes adding the newly
applied method override to the list.
[0075] If the result is "Same," then at step 612, the account
record is left unchanged, i.e., no new method override is applied,
while any currently applied method override remains applied.
[0076] If the result is "Remove," then at step 613, it is
determined whether a method override corresponding to the method
selected at step 602 is currently applied to the cardholder's
account. If so, then the method override is removed. For example,
Table 1 shows that cardholder Y currently has a method override
"MO1" applied. The "Remove" result obtained for cardholder Y would
cause this method override to be removed at step 613, restoring the
default interest rate parameter. Removal of a method override is
implementation-dependent and may involve, for instance, modifying
an appropriate field in the account record or removing the method
override from a list of method overrides currently applied to the
account. Upon removal, processing history information in the
account record may be updated accordingly.
[0077] If the result is "Last Different," then at step 614, a
formerly applied method override is determined. In an exemplary
embodiment, information related to method overrides that were
previously applied to and removed from an account is stored in a
method override history file associated with the account record,
and step 614 includes retrieving the identifier of the most recent
formerly applied method override from the method override history
file. At step 615, the method override identified at step 614 is
applied to the cardholder account. For example, for cardholder Z, a
result of "Last Different" would be obtained. At step 614, the
account record for cardholder Z would be accessed to determine the
last method override for interest rate that was applied; Table 1
shows that for cardholder Z, the last method override was "MO2."
Then, at step 614, method override "MO2" would be applied to
cardholder Z's account, changing the interest rate parameter
(currently set by the default method) to 21%.
[0078] While the above illustration has been discussed in some
detail for a fee-based method, it will be appreciated that the same
procedure may be used for any of the methods, including the
non-fee-based methods. For example, Table 1 also indicates a
specific transaction type for consideration for each of the
cardholders. Using the method outlined in FIG. 6, a determination
would be made for each cardholder whether to provide an extended
grace period for that transaction. In accordance with blocks 602
and 603, the CA table used for the rewards methods is table 310c'
shown in FIG. 4B. According to table 310c', the override
determination for Customer X is made in accordance with account
qualification table BQ-Y 315j' shown in FIG. 5E, which provides the
result "Remove" according to the midrange account balance of $1500
and the midrange single delinquency. This determination indicates
that no override should be applied so payment for the transaction
is due in accordance with the default method despite it having been
made for a charitable purpose. Similarly, the determination for
Customer Y is made in accordance with account qualification table
BQ-X 315i' shown in FIG. 5D, which provides the result "Remove"
irrespective of account balance and number of delinquencies. This
determination indicates that no override should be applied so that
payment for the transaction is due in accordance with the default
transaction; this is a consequence of the fact that the transaction
was made for a noncharitable purpose. Finally, the determination
for Customer Z is made in accordance with account qualification
table BQ-Z 315k' shown in FIG. 5F. Despite the midrange account
balance of $2500 and midrange single delinquency, similar to
Customer X, the higher credit rating of Customer Z results in a
determination of "Assign MO3." In accordance with this
determination, an extended grace period is provided for the
charitable transaction made for Customer Z.
[0079] One skilled in the art will also recognize that process 600
may be varied or modified, and that steps may be omitted,
reordered, or combined. For instance, method selection may precede
selection of a cardholder account. Process 600 may also be modified
to apply decision rules implemented using tools other than lookup
tables.
[0080] As noted above, decision engine 125 of FIG. 1A may have a
number of operating modes. These operating modes may be implemented
using process 600 or variations thereof. For instance, in one
operating mode, decision engine 125 may be used to determine the
terms and conditions applicable to a prospective account. In this
operation, a process similar to process 600 may be used. At step
601, cardholder data for a prospective cardholder may be obtained
via user interface 120; and at step 610, instead of updating an
account record, a statement including terms and conditions for the
prospective account may be generated and presented via user
interface 120 or via other methods, such as printing an offer for
mailing to the prospective cardholder.
[0081] In some embodiments, an estimator may be provided using
decision engine 125 and variations of process 600. An estimator
enables a card issuer to test a set of decision rules without
actually affecting any cardholder accounts. For instance, in the
exemplary embodiment described above, a card issuer defines a set
of decision rules by building a set of lookup tables. The set of
lookup tables (or individual tables within the set) may be large
and complex, for instance, where several methods are overrideable
or where a lookup table includes numerous decision elements. To
verify that the lookup tables are selecting the desired accounts, a
proposed lookup table or set of lookup tables may be stored in a
test area within rules data store 115. Decision engine 125 may then
be operated in an "estimator" mode to perform table lookup
operations on the tables in the test area using account data from
some or all of the account records in account data store 110. The
operation of decision engine 125 in estimator mode is generally
similar to process 600, except that the account-updating steps
(steps 610-615) are not performed. Instead, information about which
accounts return which results is compiled and presented to the card
issuer, e.g., via user interface 120. Information compilation and
presentation may be performed using any suitable data-gathering and
presentation tools and methods. The information provided enables
the card issuer to verify that the proposed lookup tables are
performing as intended.
[0082] In some embodiments, an estimator also allows edit checks to
be performed to determine whether a combination of processing
methods and/or method overrides that could be applied to an account
creates a conflict. A conflict may occur, for instance, when a
method override is inconsistent with another method or method
override, with industry rules, or with government regulations. For
purposes of edit checking, decision engine 125 may be used to
determine all combinations of method overrides that may be applied
to an account. Each possible combination is then tested for
conflicts by reviewing selected parameter values resulting from the
combination.
[0083] The following example illustrates the edit check process.
Suppose that a card issuer defines an interest rate method override
with parameter values establishing that interest accrues daily
based on the average daily balance, and suppose that the default
statement production method has parameter values establishing that
the statement displays only a monthly average balance and reports
interest accruing monthly. If this interest rate method override
and this statement production method were simultaneously applied to
a cardholder account, the statement would not accurately reflect
the interest charge. The conflict can be avoided if the decision
rules pertaining to the interest rate and statement production
methods preclude this combination. If, however, the decision rules
do not preclude this combination, then the respective parameters of
the interest rate method override and the statement production
method would be compared, and the conflict would be detected.
[0084] Likewise, other comparisons of parameter values may also be
implemented to detect other types conflicts. For example, an
industry rule may provide that cash advance transactions cannot be
included in a daily balance computation. If a card issuer defines a
method override that sets a parameter value causing cash advances
to be included in the daily balance computation, the edit checking
process detects this conflict by inspecting the values of the
parameters set by the method override.
[0085] Upon detecting a conflict, a warning message is generated,
identifying the conflict. The card issuer is then able to adjust
the parameter values set by the methods and/or method overrides in
order to eliminate the conflict before any accounts are affected.
In some instances (such as the interest rate and statement
production example given above), the card issuer may also be able
to eliminate the conflict by modifying the decision rules to
prevent a conflicting combination of methods and/or method
overrides from occurring. Whether the conflict prevents a proposed
set of decision rules and method overrides from being implemented
may depend on the severity of the conflict. In one exemplary
embodiment, the edit check process identifies each conflict as
either an error or an exception. An "error" causes a warning but
does not require the card issuer to eliminate the conflict before
proceeding. An "exception" requires modification and may be
generated, for instance, when a conflict renders a computation
impossible (e.g., dividing by zero) or results in illegal activity
(e.g., interest rates in violation of applicable usury laws).
[0086] 4. User Interface
[0087] Access to method override information for individual
cardholder accounts may be made available via user interface 120.
For example, in one embodiment, an operator (e.g., a customer
service representative of the card issuer) enters a cardholder
account number and requests method override data for that account.
Server 105 accesses account data store 110, retrieves the account
record 200, and displays the method override information to the
operator.
[0088] FIG. 7A shows an example of a Cardholder Method Override
(CMO) screen 700 that may be used to present method override
information for a particular cardholder (John Doe). CMO screen 700
shows information including a list 705 of method overrides that are
currently applied to the cardholder's account. In this example,
each method for which a method override has been applied to the
account is identified by a first code, e.g., "CP IC IM." The method
override is identified by a second code, e.g., "BA0022." The
operator may select one of the methods (e.g., "CP IC IM"), for
instance by navigating a cursor to the code name of the method on
screen 700 and then pressing "S" to select the method. Upon
selection of a method, an Audit History screen 750, shown in FIG.
7B, is displayed.
[0089] Audit History screen 750 displays additional details related
to the "CP IC IM" method override on the cardholder's account.
Audit history screen 750 displays information such as when the
current method override was applied to the account (transaction
date 760), the last method override that was applied for the method
(the "Last Different" value 765), and the decision element(s) 770
that caused the current method override to be applied. Display
screens such as screens 700, 750 may be used, for instance, when a
cardholder contacts the card issuer's customer service center with
a question about why some aspect of the cardholder's account
processing has changed. The customer service operator reviews
information on screens 700, 750 to determine the answer and relays
the information to the cardholder. It will be appreciated that
screens 700, 750 are illustrative and that other formats may be
used to provide method override information for a particular
account. In one alternative embodiment, complete account history
data is provided to a user, and the user is able to design
customized display screens for reviewing the data.
[0090] While the invention has been described with respect to
exemplary embodiments, one skilled in the art will recognize that
numerous modifications are possible. For instance, the present
invention may be used to manage account processing methods and
method overrides associated with any aspect of account processing
in addition to those discussed explicitly. Likewise, a method
override may modify one, all, or any number of the parameters of
its associated account processing method. Further, while the
invention has been described with reference to credit card
accounts, it will be appreciated that the invention may be applied
to other types of financial products that have associated terms and
conditions or other processing parameters that may be varied, such
as loans or deposit accounts. In addition, the invention may be
practiced by a third party that provides services to one or more
account issuers. Accordingly, the above description should not be
taken as limiting the scope of the invention, which is defined in
the following claims.
* * * * *