Check out this link. It's Bill AB 2498: http://www.assembly.ca.gov/acs/acsframeset2text.htm In case you don't want to click on the link. I'll post the text in another message below.
BILL NUMBER: AB 2498 AMENDED BILL TEXT AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MAY 6, 2002 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 18, 2002 INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member Jackson FEBRUARY 21, 2002 An act to add Section 1785.15.3 to the Civil Code, relating to credit. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 2498, as amended, Jackson. Consumer credit reporting agencies: credit scores. Existing law governs the collection and disclosure of information in consumer credit reports by consumer credit reporting agencies, also known as credit bureaus. This bill would prohibit a person or entity from calculating a consumer's credit score in a manner that results in an adverse impact based upon the fact that inquiries have been received, or upon the number of inquiries that have been received which are related to transactions not initiated by the consumer. Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: no. State-mandated local program: no. THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Section 1785.15.3 is added to the Civil Code, to read: 1785.15.3. A person or entity may not calculate a consumer's credit score, as defined by subdivision (b) of Section 1785.15.1, in a manner that results in an adverse impact based upon the fact that inquiries have been received, or upon the number of inquiries that have been received, which are related to transactions not initiated by the consumer.
Does this say what I think it says? If you live in Cali, potential creditors may NOT factor inquiries into your score? OR If the creditor in in Cali, this creditor may NOT factor inquiries into your score? Sorry, I'm a little slow!
I USE TO PUMP GAS INTO THIS GUYS CAR...Bill Campbell If I read it right...he voted AGAINST the bill...HE WANTS INQUIRES TO HURT US???
Not slow, just not able to read a piece of legislation intentionally written to look like it does some good for the consumer, but actually doesn't do much of anything. It is a waste of the paper it will be printed on, and a waste of the legislature's time to debate unless it is amended to take out the words: "which are related to transactions not initiated by the consumer." It would make law what is reported to be the current practice of not counting the promotional inquiries. It might be interpreted to stop the collection inquiries where CAs try to harrass through inquiries, but if the collection relates to a transaction made by the consumer, it probably doesn't stop that. It doesn't say that the fact that someone applied for a credit card in the last year can't be counted in the scoring.
I thought about something: Most inq's are not known by the consumer. IE: Someone pulling your credit and then you finding out later. OR In the case of identity fraud. This law will have a good effect on credit scores in California and it just might provide a bit more ammo if one wanted to go after CRA's for not allowing inquiry disputes. Someone was saying that they might start checking your credit when you board an airplane. I believe one day the scoring models will not include inquries anymore because everyone will be checking your credit. You won't be able to goto the liquor store on the corner without them knowing your FICO score. At least that's the way I'm beginning to see this whole POST 911 thing. Working on the inside I've seen more BS than I want to come out of government agencies.
Great thread! I think it's worth noting that this development bodes well for the entire country and not just California. Remember that it was California that legislated that credit reporting agencies had to provide credit scores to consumers. There has been NO legislation anywhere else in this regard. Regardless, the three CRAs all came to the same decision that it wasn't worth the money or service inconsistency to treat California consumers differently from everybody else, and that was the reason credit scoring suddenly opened up to everyone. I predict the same thing for the neutering of inquiries. If California passes this legislation (when's the final vote?? did it already happen??), then it is only a matter of time before inquiries cease to have a scoring impact for everyone irrespective of geography. Doc
The bill is still being amended and reformed. This is not what the final wording will ultimately be. If you live in CA I would send a letter to uour rep and get them to change the wordage to protect the consumer. Heck, even if your not in the state of California, given what the good doctor has said above I would contact a representative. I know California paves the way for a lot of the things that other states do. A lot of states come to California to see how we handle automobile traffic. Just one example....
At the very least there should be another category separating inquiries related to application for debt from inquires for insurance, opening checking/savings accounts, employment etc. My friend got a great job with a Wall Street firm that pays him beaucoup bucks. As part of pre-employment screening they hired a firm that ran his credit. Securing a high-paying job made him a greater risk HOW? Similar thing happened to me when I opened up a money market account at my local credit union. They ran a credit check and it lowered my score by 6 points. What about inquiries when you ask for a lower APR. You are just being a smart consumer! I can understand that CCCs want to know if someone is out there applying for tons of new loans. But there has to be a distinction. Or just do away with the entire thing. After all-- if the person GETS the loan, it will show up on his report. If he doesn't, what harm was done?
Happened to me when I simply took advantage of a Balance Transfer Offer. Never applied for "new" credit, only using that which was already agreed to...
ABOUT A NEW INQUIRY FOR ALREADY OPEN ACCOUNT... I got a REAL (NO INQUIRY) "PRE-APPROVED" $5,000 limit increase on my FIRST USA card...a couple of months later I got a BT offer...I took advantage of it...THEY DID A HARD!!! I DISPUTED IT...it came off!!! ------->"I APPLIED FOR NO SECOND CARD, PLEASE REMOVE"
After all-- if the person GETS the loan, it will show up on his report. If he doesn't, what harm was done? [/B][/QUOTE] That's the POINT...so let's start the fight to neutralize inquiries...
That's the POINT...so let's start the fight to neutralize inquiries... [/B][/QUOTE] I have a security clearance..which means every six months...inquiry on TU...who you ask would do such a thing? The government. 12 inquiries to date. That's why my TU score never gets above 600...everytime it gets anywhere up there.. poof..inquiry time.. and splat.. down goes the score..
It seems to me that this bill does nothing, its telling fair isaac not to factor in inquiries the consumer didn't initiate, but fair isaac has no control over nor knowledge of whether the consumer initiated the inquiry. Only the credit bureaus can be the watchdogs of whether or not a credit inquiry is authorized.
