For a 70% error rate, regardless of what an error is, THAT MEANS THE CRA'S ARE NOT DOING THEIR JOBS AND THE COMPANIES WHO ARE THE CREDITORS AREN'T EITHER... That means almost NOBODY could have a 100% PERFECT CORRECT CREDIT REPORT!!!
Actually, PIRG reported, "Twenty-nine percent (29%) of the credit reports contained serious errors - false delinquencies or accounts that did not belong to the consumer - that could result in the denial of credit." http://www.pirg.org/reports/consumer/mistakes/page1.htm Echoed by Congresswoman Lucille Roybal-Allard, in a statement before the House of Representatives: "... some studies have shown that up to one third of credit reports could contain serious mistakes." http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/R?r106:FLD001:E00544
SHOUTING won't help you make your point, George. By the way, are you saying that credit files and scoring should be abandoned and replaced with the old prejudiced (eyeball you) methods of awarding credit? If you reread this thread, you'll see that nobody disagrees that the present system needs serious overhauling; on the other hand, are you suggesting that we dump it completely and return back to the old pre-1970 way? Doc
Greg, Thank you for the links re racial discrimination and credit scoring in the housing market. They are excellent.
Uh, ok, lbrown59, then what did you mean when you said this: "Another serious flaw is scores are determined from information that is 70% inaccurate." Do tell. Doc
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- PsychDoc SHOUTING won't help you make your point, George. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- So...since I am "HARD OF HEARING" you want me to SHUT UP and quit YELLING... CAPS LOCK HAS NEVER BEEN PROVEN TO BE YELLING!!!
George, lol, it's pretty well accepted that all-caps is the way you shout at somebody over the internet. It's not considered to be too friendly, but, hey, they could be wrong! Look at the difference: GEORGE, YOU NEVER CLARIFIED WHETHER YOU THOUGHT CREDIT FILES AND SCORES SHOULD BE DUMPED AND REPLACED WITH THE PRE-1970 METHODS. versus George, you never clarified whether you thought credit files and scores should be dumped and replaced with the pre-1970 methods. See, how the second one seems less angry? By the way, what's your answer? Doc
I have NEVER been late, no BK, no collections, no over limit, oldest account 1978...but I get NO benefit for it because F.I.C.O. SCORING SYSTEM SAYS I HAVE TOO MUCH CREDIT...but I pay MOST off it every month... I have a 0.00% card WHO IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD PAY THAT IN FULL EVERY MONTH??? I KEEP IT WITH $5.00 TO SPARE!!!
lbrown59, you forgot to answer my question. I was curious what you meant when you said this above: "Another serious flaw is scores are determined from information that is 70% inaccurate." Doc
George, my question for you was this: In your opinion, should credit files and scores be dumped and replaced with the pre-1970 methods? Thanks, Doc
...more, I have been denied by F.I.C.O. score too many times...if a REAL PERSON looked at it, it would have been approved... 30 second instant DENIAL on-line is NOT acceptable.
Well, a "real person" could well have decided that $85,000+ in available lines of credit might be too much and denied the application for more as well, LOL. Finally, "real persons" bring their "real prejudices" to the table. Given the excellent points brought forth by breeze and G.Fisher that FICO may impose its own institutional prejudices as well, I think it's critical that the present system be overhauled and regulated (and completely demystified). On the other hand, I think it would be a terrible mistake to simply forget about credit scoring entirely and go back to the Good Old Days you remember with such fondness. Doc
Pre 70's I don't know... A 30 second DENIAL on-line is NOT the correct answer either. A "REAL" person would "SEE" I was doing a BT to get rid of most of my balances owed, and putting them at 0.00% and I owed $0.00 more than I did the day before before... I am NEVER denied on income, it is because of the F.I.C.O. reasons... F.I.C.O. 685-704 I GUESS THAT IS REALLY BAD!!!
They are working together with FICO to keep scores low so they can over charge folks. How could you when the Cras Creditors & Fico all three are using decks that are stacked against us? ----------------------------------------------------------- Finally somebody is sharp enough to grasp what I've been saying about the fico racket.Congrats George. ---------------------------------------------------------
The way most folks are getting the shaft from FICO I don't blame them for Shouting. In fact they should be SCREAMING Bloody Murder.
Well one thing about Fico: It Screws everybody instead of just certain groups. We've come a long way haven't we baby??
Why should I be denied ANY credit I can handle. I have the income to support it. I have 23 years of PERFECT payment history. I AM CONSISTENTLY DENIED FOR NEW CREDIT, I GUESS THEY MUST THINK I WILL MAX OUT THEIR CARD, AND MAX OUT ALL MY OTHERS AND SKIP TOWN??? I even had a denial say something like..."WHEN WE ADD THE AMOUNT OF CREDIT WE WOULD HAVE APPROVED, IT WOULD SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE YOUR DEBT LOAD"... DUHHHH I was doing a BT to their 0.00% card which means I would have the EXACT same amount owed, but at a lower interest rate!!!
PsychDoc, do you have any more on the Welcome Wagon/Equifax (Retail Credit) story? Was that, possibly, reported by Alan Westin? I once asked a librarian for some documents on the history of credit bureaus and he kind of laughed at me. It keeps me going.
