Have Your Say: Credit cards breathing space

Interest charges will still rack up during the 30-day period

Major credit card companies have agreed to offer a bit of a breathing space to people struggling with repayments.

The new set of "fair principles" comes after the firms faced pressure from the government to give more help to customers in arrears.

Among the measures announced, is that card providers will delay raising interest rates when customers get into difficulties.

But is a 30 day breathing space going to be enough for people who are seriously in debt?

Will the changes will make any difference to you?

Do you trust the credit card companies to stick to their promises?

Maybe you think 30 days should be long enough for anybody to sort out their finances.

Or perhaps you work for a credit card company and have a view.

Let us know.

We asked for your comments, a selection of which are below. The debate is now closed.

Well I see from the 11 December Lloyds TSB is putting their monthly rates up on their credit cards! So much for helping, after all the help they got! And merry Christmas to them to as well!
S . Windley, Camelford

I don't think credit card companies are helpful at all. Due to an error I made when cancelling a direct debit, I missed some repayments on one of my cards. Despite my pristine record to date, and the fact that I called them up to both explain and settle my arrears (at which point they told me all was well and my account was rehabilitated) they somehow decided to default me a couple of weeks later and refused to discuss the matter with me. I have no idea how to sort this out as apparently their complaints department doesn't speak to people. It's ridiculous.
Sarah, London

Surely if somebody is in serious debt then they should not have a credit card, should they?
Raymond Whyman, Middlesex

The comments we publish are not necessarily the views of the BBC but will reflect the balance of views we have received. It is helpful if contributors state if they work for any organisation relevant to an issue discussed. Readers should form their own views on whether messages published represent undeclared interests, or views prompted by a common source.