Christine and I were discussing this topic at bayhouse.com and I just wanted to update everyone how bad multiple mortgage and auto inquiries hurt your score. They are counted the same as regular hard credit inquiries. This actually began when my husband and I pulled our reports recently and discovered that our mortgage lender had pulled each of our reports six times between preapproval and our settlement date. I assumed that mortgage, as well, as auto inquiries were labeled differently than regular inquiries....they're not. An inquiry is an inquiry. If you go into a dealership and they pull your report six times for six different creditors they are counted as six different inquiries. Personally, I find this unfair. Shopping around for the best bargain kills your credit score. The only way multiple inquiries is counted as one inquiry is if the same creditor pulls your report within 30 days. I verfied the above information with all three credit bureaus today and received the same answer from all three. The only way to get the inquiries off is to dispute them or have the creditor write a letter stating that the inquiries should be deleted (yeah, like any creditor is going to do this). Just a warning for any future auto and home buyers. Dani
Dani- According to the FICO score model these inquiries are supposed to be counted as one inquiry. This is bull****. I agree with you that in a potential creditors eyes they are seen as multiple inquiries. We purchased a vehicle in April. We brought a copy of our recent credit reports so that they could decide who would be our best bet as far as financing. The dealer gave us two potential lenders. We said fine run it by those two lenders only (2 inq.) and if the loan is not approved don't run it through anyone else. Well the loan was approved by the first lender, yet the dealer ended up sending it to 14 lenders (14 inq., most on TU). We were furious! I have disputed the ones on Experian other than the lender that gave us the loan. Those inq. have been deleted. Disputed the ones on TU online per the process some other members have had success with. No go. I get that stupid form letter from TU. I have sent a response back to TU regarding FCRA, etc. That was a couple of weeks ago and have not heard back yet. I have also attempted to contact the lendors directly via Planetfeedback or CRR. So far two have sent replies stating what the inquiry was for and why the loan was declined, but no solid hard copy proof as I had requested. I think I will write those lenders another letter demanding hard copy proof or deletion. I would like to see the application we signed to see if there is a clause stating the auto dealership can send out the application to whoever they please to either get approval or shop the lenders in order to make the most they can off the deal. Right now, I don't know what else to do to get these unauthorized inquiries off. I think that the consumer should have the right to determine if they want their application "shopped" to all sorts of lenders or to allow the consumer to chose which lenders they want to pull the credit with. Of course you are always better off bringing your own financing when buying a car. Of course all this happened before I found this board.
I wrote this letter to TU and got instant results regarding inquiries.. "To Trans Union Consumer Relations, In November 2001 I sent in a letter disputing incorrect information contained on my Trans Union Credit Report. Among other items being disputed were inquiries. I received a notification back when the investigation was completed some items were deleted some were updated along with an explanation of you policy on inquiries. In your explanation you state â?? inquiries are factual record of file accessâ?. Are other accounts listed on oneâ??s report considered factual reporting of account usage? I would assume and hope so. My Trans Union report as contained both adverse and positive account ratings from accounts that were not mine over the years. Could it not be assumed that inquiries can be attributed to oneâ??s credit report belonging to an account that is not their account in the first place? I would think so. If you can misplace and misreport accounts, I believe you could do the same with inquiries. Enclosed is also a copy of you letter admitting your willful noncompliance to § 611 of the FCRA. Let me remind you that as a Credit Reporting Agency, Trans Union is bounded in the terms set forth in the FCRA. Also let me remind you that under section § 611 of the FCRA that you are required to investigate the completeness and accuracy of any item of information contained in a consumer's file, not just items that Trans Union deems fit to investigate. This includes Names, Addresses, Account Numbers, Account Balances, etc, etc, and INQUIRIES. Being that inquiries can have an effect on the FICO statistical model and FICO score, you are even more obligated to investigate inquiries. Inquiries pose adverse results in consumer scoring by lower scores and extension of credit by grantors who sometimes deem â??too many inquiries with in a certain amount of hypothetical time adverseâ? and as a reason for denial. Again let me remind you § 611 of the FCRA. § 611. Procedure in case of disputed accuracy [15 U.S.C. § 1681i](a) Reinvestigations of disputed information. (1) Reinvestigation required. (A) In general. If the completeness or accuracy of any item of information contained in a consumer's file at a consumer reporting agency is disputed by the consumer and the consumer notifies the agency directly of such dispute, the agency shall reinvestigate free of charge and record the current status of the disputed information, or delete the item from the file in accordance with paragraph (5), before the end of the 30-day period beginning on the date on which the agency receives the notice of the dispute from the consumer. If I have reason to believe that an inquiry was unauthorized as per permissible purposed outlined in § 604 I contact the credit-reporting agency, not the creditor. It is not up to me to investigate items on my credit report. Trans Union is responsible by choice of being in business as a Credit Reporting Agency to maintain complete and accurate credit files on consumers for its subscribers. This requires you to contact the CRA to determine whether or not an inquiry was registered for a permissible purpose or not as outlined in section 611 of the FCRA. Let me also make Trans Union aware that if they are claiming â?? inquiries are factual record of file accessâ? then they have not only set up the subscribers for lawsuits for a $1,000 per non-permissible inquiry but also enable a suit to filed against Trans Union employees for $5,000 and/or imprisonment for per non-permissible inquiry. (§ 620. Unauthorized disclosures by officers or employees [15 U.S.C. § 1681r] Any officer or employee of a consumer reporting agency who knowingly and willfully provides information concerning an individual from the agency's files to a person not authorized to receive that information shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned for not more than 2 years, or both.) Furthermore your Trans Union letter states that Trans Union is required by law to keep in inquiries on record for two years. This again is false as § 604 only covers the scope of what Permissible purpose is and not how long inquiries may remain on file. I ask you to investigate these inquiries: 12/16/2001 HRS BEST BUY No Knowledge of inquiry, I have not applied and do not have account with HRS BEST BUY. No knowledge of permissible purpose. 12/16/2001 F C N B No Knowledge of inquiry, I have not applied and do not have account with F C N B. No knowledge of permissible purpose. CHASE/USA 10/16/2001 No Knowledge of inquiry, I have not applied and do not have account with CHASE/USA. No knowledge of permissible purpose. CAP ONE BANK 10/14/2001 No Knowledge of inquiry, I have not applied and do not have account with CAP ONE BANK. No knowledge of permissible purpose. NEXTCARD 10/09/2001 No Knowledge of inquiry, I have not applied and do not have account with NEXTCARD. No knowledge of permissible purpose. SEARS /ACCT 07/29/2001 No Knowledge of inquiry, I have not applied and do not have account with SEARS /ACCT. No knowledge of permissible purpose. LENDERS CRDT 07/17/2001 No Knowledge of inquiry, I have not applied and do not have account with LENDERS CRDT. No knowledge of permissible purpose. PROV FIN 03/21/2001 No Knowledge of inquiry, I have not applied and do not have account with PROV FIN. No knowledge of permissible purpose. ARROWHEAD 10/18/2000 No Knowledge of inquiry, I have not applied and do not have account with ARROWHEAD. No knowledge of permissible purpose. Let this letter serve notice that failure to investigate these inquiries will result in the filing of a law suite in district court to seek damages from your credit reporting agency for Willful refusal to investigate as per FCRA section 611, Non-permissible Credit Report Disclosures, Negligent Enablement of Identity Fraud, Reporting incorrect unverifiable information. Also be aware that this letter is also being forwarded to Local Consumer Advocate Groups, The Federal Trade Commission, My State Senators, My Local State Representatives, and other local and national authorities. Again let me remind Trans Union that as a CRA they are required by law to investigate any item on a personal credit report that an individual believes to be incorrect." It worked like a charm.. I now have no inquiries on my TU report... Happy Hunting. Kev bling bling club.
Kev- That was by far one of the greatest, well written letters I have ever read. Have you tried this for Equifax? Do you mind if I tried it with Equifax?cAgain KUDOS to you! KHM
Hi Dani, I promise I'm not taking your thread off-topic, but I have a question. You said that multiple inquiries are counted as one if they are pulled by the same creditor within a 30-day time frame. Forgive my ignorance, but is this in writing somewhere? I have multiple Citi inquiries on my EQF report, and it'll be a cold day in hell before I get any deletions from them. I also have multiple inquiries from my credit union on TU from my auto refi, but I'm disputing one as a duplicate. I'm probably opening up a can of worms here, but...I don't think inquiries should be reported, period. IMO, they aren't an accurate representation of one's credit worthiness at all. I have clean files and lots of inquiries--does that make me a greater risk to a lender than my fiance, whose files are a tangle of judgements, collections, chargeoffs, etc., but are virtually inquiry-free? I know I'm oversimplifying things here, but I think (I hope?) the point is clear. Thanks for the info--great post!
Coco, FICO (may) count them as one, but how would they know unless the credit bureaus label them as such? All three credit reporting agencies told me (that they the bureaus) count them as separate hard inquiries unless they are pulled by the same creditor within 30 days. Does this mean when Amex pulls your report and declines your application for credit and you ask them to reconsider that they pulling your report within the 30 days doesn't affect your score? How are we has consumers suppose to shop for the best deals when everyone in town feels the need to pull our credit report. Think about it. Every inquiry for satellite service, phone service (local and long distance), bank loans, credit cards, etc. affects our score. It is unjust. I think we need to revolt. Dani
Beaker, Concerning that inquiries pulled within 30 days by the same creditor count as one, take this advice with a grain of salt. I received this information with the rep I spoke with at Experian. Six out of my seven mortgage inquiries were pulled by the same creditor, but Experian says it doesn't count because the reports were pulled by different agencies that sell the reports - Credco, Advantage, etc. So apparently, the creditor needs to pull the same agency for the 30 day rule to take affect. I agree with you that inquiries should not be reported as well. It gives no indication of how I pay my bills nor handle my accounts. It's bad enough they know where I live, the car I drive, and the gum I chew. What business is it of their's who I apply for credit with...and then penalize me for it. Unreal. Dani
Kev, That was pretty much the letter I used in response to TU. Haven't heard anything yet, it is too soon after I sent it. It was the best letter I have seen as a response to a CRA. Thanks
KHM- Check the letters forum. I think this letter may be there. If I recall the original poster used this for Equifax. I don't know if it actually worked with Equifax though.
My point exactly. It is Fair Isaac that states for their scoring model those inquiries count as one. Citibank, Chase, etc. are not going to count it as one inquiry. They will send you a denial letter stating too many inquiries. I also agree with your point on multiple inquiries in order to shop for better deals (cell phone service, satellite, etc.) those should not count. Even if a consumer decides to shop for a better mortgage or auto finance rate it should not be viewed as excessive inquiries. However, as far as an auto loan goes, I did not want my credit shopped for the very reason that I knew it would be viewed as excessive inquiries. By the auto or mortgage industry if they are going to look excessive, I should have a say in how many times I wish my credit be pulled in order to get the loan. There is an auto dealership in our area that advertises "let the power of 27 lending institutions" get you into your dream car. Everytime I hear that I say go there to buy your car and "let the 27 inquiries their financial institutions pull wreck your credit for the next two years!" Yes, this is very unfair!
Can't people bound together and bring a class action lawsuit over this? I agree that inquires have no reflection on our creditworthiness. It would be great to be able to do something about this. Another issue that can be brought up is the damaging practice of creditors not reporting the high credit line of accounts, which lead to inaccurate portrayals of ones true debt ratio on credit reports.
Citibank has pulled my CR 3 times in the past 2 weeks other than that I have 2 other inquiries, so a total of 5 inquiries in the past 2 years. TU's reason for a low score is too many inquiries. So each inquiry DOES hurt. KHM
I think LKH address the class action thing in another thread. I think it is stated that it would take way too long for a class action and that the inquiries would be long gone. It's unfortunate, but I think one would get faster action filing their own individual lawsuit. I do think that this should be addressed in the FCRA and that the FCRA needs to be amended.
I'm going to give that letter a shot also. It's awesome! I disputed online with TU in December on some inquiries and got that "well, it must be true if it's there" bit in computer generated statments from them for me and hubby. It's worth a shot I guess. I got lucky with Experian, 3 for 3 of deletes requested for inquiries. Coco, can you please tell me how you get all those colors on your post?
Do a search on font or font colors, there were some threads on this awhile back. That's how I figured it out. For example you would use a bracket and then enter the code and then use a bracket to close. Another way is to go to the test forum and check out the test posts. If you use the quote button in a post that has color or special formatting in the body of the post (not the signature), you will see the code to create the formatting. To see the code, you can click on the quote button and see how it's done.
BTW in the mail today I received a response to one of my letters I sent directly to one of the companies that put an inquiry on my report from when we purchased our vehicle. It states that I need to contact TU, EQ, and EX and dispute the inquiry with them. TU and EQ says contact the company responsible and the company responsible says dispute through the CRA. I will try the CRA's one more time using a copy of this letter in the dispute and then if nothing happens, sue. This will make for an interesting suit.
