Found this on another board, i

Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by Momof3, Oct 25, 2000.

  1. Momof3

    Momof3 Well-Known Member

    I was always under the impression the being and AU on someone's account did nothing in terms of your credit scores. I came across this post and was curious if it is correct??

    According to Fair Isaac, "authorized users" ARE included in the Score just as if it was your own account.

    Fair Isaac decided to include the authorized user accounts because some department stores used to report joint account holders (spouses) as "authorized users."

    Obviously, this can be VERY beneficial to your Scores if you have FEW good accounts.

    Should the account holder pay late, you just dispute the reporting with the CRAs and they have to remove the account from your report as you are not liable for the account.
  2. Michael

    Michael Guest

    RE: Found this on another boar

    Only problem is that only about 60% of the creditors will report auth. users.

    A good many still do not report them, as for the dispute I think your right, as a user your not responsible!
  3. Cadillac408

    Cadillac408 Well-Known Member

    RE: Found this on another boar

    I am an authorized user on my boyfriends Am/Ex gold account and they reported after only one month!!!!

    On the flip side, my ex got an additional card in my name for a MC that he had and I cut it up and never used it. He funked off the account and it came up on my report as a charge off (also as an authorized user). I disputed w/ the company (Household financial? It was a GE MC) and they said that it wouldn't affect my credit in any way. We argued and they wouldn't remove it (after like 45 minutes)!!! So I disputed to the CRA's as Not mine and I think it came back unverified I guess cause they deleted it.
  4. curiouser

    curiouser Well-Known Member

    RE: Found this on another boar

    It's my understanding that being an authorized user does nothing to your credit scores. Fair, Isaac may have changed their scoring matrix so they do count, but I'm not aware of any such change. I'd like some more specific verification. The main reason I doubt it is this. An authorized user hasn't entered into a contract with a lender. He or she hasn't put anything on the line. If the account holder defaults, remember, the bank has no legal recourse against the AU. (That's not to say that they won't try to collect from the AU) As far as dept. stores reporting joint holders as AUs, that doesn't make sense in changing the entire scoring matrix. It's incredibly easy to get a creditor to change an incorrectly listed AU status to joint account holder status (it's to the benefit of the creditor).

Share This Page