Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by fingrrrl, Jun 12, 2001.
Barclaycard Ring™ Mastercard®
No annual fee, No balance transfer fees, No foreign transaction fees, Low interest!
CREDIT CARD WITH NO ANNUAL FEEBarclaycard Ring™ Mastercard®
Credit One Unsecured Visa®for Rebuilding Credit
Credit card for people with bad credit to rebuild credit!
BAD CREDIT CREDIT CARDCredit One Bank® Rebuild Credit
First Access VISA® Credit Card
Access to credit even with bad or limited credit! Reports to 3 major credit bureaus and accepted wherever you see the Visa® sign. Get application response in 60 seconds.
CREDIT CARD FOR BAD CREDITFirst Access VISA®
Green Dot primor® Visa®Classic Secured Credit Card
Credit lines available up to $5,000! Reports to three national credit bureaus; perfect card for reestablishing credit.
SECURED CARD FOR REBUILDING CREDITprimor Secured Visa Classic
Credit One Bank® Unsecured Visa® with Cash Back Rewards
Get cash back on every purchase. Unsecured credit card with monthly monitoring for credit line increases. Improve your credit history with responsible use.
CASH BACK UNSECURED VISACredit One Bank
While having legitimate information deleted can be done, I donâ??t see how in this case it would benefit you. The subject account shows a paid status, and presumably paid as agreed. Itâ??s not a negative per se to have closed an account, especially when a paid status is showing.
Bottom-line? Iâ??d suggest leaving well enough alone
Something I'd like to understand.
You seem to be saying that it was paid in full, closed account closed by consumer's request.
Yet later you call it "erroneous"
Ugh, that wasn't the word I meant. Not erroneous, more like insignificant. I was under the impression that such an account, paid and closed at my request had no impact on my FICO score and that I should have it deleted. I guess perhaps not since it shows a good history in the past. Oh never mind.
Closed and paid in full never late accounts may not help F.I.C.O. SCORE...but if a credit card company or loan officer "LOOKS" at your report and sees old paid good accounts...it may help "SEAL" the deal...
Unfortunately they drag FICO scores down. I don't have a clue why this is in the FAIR ISAAC MODEL. Also from my experience with being a FNI guy, you barely ever look at someone's credit if it is good. It is only when you are looking at their low fico or credit scores in general, does someone look through the report wondering if there is any hope. The credit scoring system is what most lenders base their total decisions upon...It sucks and it is not fair, but those are the rules they are playing by. Yet another reason that consumers should exercise their rights to credit repair....
Well, can't resist the temptation to "pick a bone" with you over your post. No malice intended, but you raise an interesting question that might spice things up a bit.
Does one have a right to do credit repair???
If I read what is put out by the government in it's propaganda efforts as well as that put out by the CRAs and CAs, then I must conclude that one does not.
If on the other hand, I look to the law, then I do have the right. But not because the law says I do, but because I find no place in the law specifically forbidding it even though I do find references to sections of the law regulating it's practice to some extent. What I see is that only specific acts are forbidden, but not the practice itself.
What is not specifically forbidden by the law is not a subject of the law and therefore the law has no control over it.
Now then, without flames please (specifically mentioned just in case) please tell me what you think.
Anyone's comments are welcome.
Laws don't give you rights. My rights, outlined in the articles of the Constitution, give me freedom to do all of what you ask as long as what I do is NOT forbidden or restricted by law. Credit repair is within my rights...at least in the U.S.
Ok, That's one opinion.
Just for everyone's information, I'm not going to dispute anyone's opinion.
I just wanted to see what as many people as possible might have to say on the subject.
The government has even set the precedence for rehabilitation of our credit in this statute:
Section 674.39 Loan Rehabilitation
We believe it is helpful to review the aspects of loan
rehabilitation that relate to borrower benefits and institutional responsibilities that are required by law, and therefore cannot be changed. Under the 1998 Amendments, a defaulted loan is considered rehabilitated if the borrower of a loan made under this part who has defaulted on the loan'' makes the required 12 payments. Accordingly, loan rehabilitation is available to all defaulted borrowers with a loan.
This is in reference to student loans. Even our very own government sees that there are reasons to negotiate and alter our credit histories. This was signed and sealed by our former president in 97" If the government can repair credit, then it is allowed as far as Im concerned....
Of course it goes without saying that the creditor must agree to or otherwise make the loan rehabilitation process and it's terms and conditions known to the debtor.
Too bad they didn't go a ways further and make it manditory that companies and banks SHALL offer loan rehabilitation to debtors as an alternative to the ruined credit and sue the debtor mentality we have always been forced to live in.
Is there a SOL in student loans after which they will not even listen to rehab pleas by the debtor?
When do they "slam the door"?
Please give us a link to what you're talking about.
I'm curious how you know this to be true? I have quite a few (20+) closed, R1, I1, paid entries. I've always wondered if they helped or hindered.