Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FICO secrets

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • elaich
    replied
    FICO secrets

    On Sun, 16 Apr 2006 00:15:29 GMT, Larry <[email protected]> wrote:
    Who said you need recourse? A lender can deny you credit withoutproviding a reason, unless applicable law says otherwise.
    If the lender represents that you will be judged fairly, and you
    decide to take the lender's word that you will be judged fairly, and
    proceed to apply, which is to the lender's benefit, but the lender
    turns out not to judge you fairly after all, he has commited fraud
    against you, because there was an implied contract, that you would
    invest in the process of applying for credit, to the lender's benefit,
    and that your investment was motivated by the lender's representation
    of fairness. The implied contract basically says, "if you will agree
    to submit your application to me, at your cost, I will agree to judge
    it fairly, and we will both benefit, by having a certain probability
    of being able to do mutually beneficial business together."

    Therefore, credit decisions do have to be fair, or they will be
    fraudulent. The only way unfair credit decisions could avoid being
    fraudulent would be if the lender disclosed to the applicant up front
    that the credit decisions would be unfair.

    Leave a comment:


  • elaich
    replied
    FICO secrets

    On Sun, 16 Apr 2006 00:15:29 GMT, Larry <[email protected]> wrote:
    Who said you need recourse? A lender can deny you credit withoutproviding a reason, unless applicable law says otherwise.
    If the lender represents that you will be judged fairly, and you
    decide to take the lender's word that you will be judged fairly, and
    proceed to apply, which is to the lender's benefit, but the lender
    turns out not to judge you fairly after all, he has commited fraud
    against you, because there was an implied contract, that you would
    invest in the process of applying for credit, to the lender's benefit,
    and that your investment was motivated by the lender's representation
    of fairness. The implied contract basically says, "if you will agree
    to submit your application to me, at your cost, I will agree to judge
    it fairly, and we will both benefit, by having a certain probability
    of being able to do mutually beneficial business together."

    Therefore, credit decisions do have to be fair, or they will be
    fraudulent. The only way unfair credit decisions could avoid being
    fraudulent would be if the lender disclosed to the applicant up front
    that the credit decisions would be unfair.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gordon Burditt
    replied
    FICO secrets

    >>>> I disagree. It is up to you to make sure that the information is
    > *FAVORABLE TO YOU*, not accurate. You are under no obligation to> correct errors you believe are in your favor.I'm not sure the legality of that statement. I'm not disputing it, butI could see how it might be construed to be fraud. I don't see how it could be fraud unless I put the error in there in the first place.If you state that an entry is false whan you know it isn't, that's fraud.Your only recourse is to attempt to make the record factual.
    Agreed, disputing an entry that you know to be accurate, then
    applying for credit is fraud. But failure to dispute an entry you
    know to be inaccurate but think is more favorable to you (unlikely
    to happen, but it can) is not (unless you state that it is accurate).
    At least if acreditor or anyone had you state that you believe all the information inyour report to be accurate. I doubt that will ever be an issue. No creditor has ever been willing to show me my credit report, even when I asked and said that if I was getting charged a fee for it, I should be able to get a copy of it. They will tell me how I can get my own copy, but not show me the same copy THEY got.Why should they? Thay paid for it, you didn't. In fact they may neversee it, rather only the results.
    Then how can I possibly state that I believe all the information in
    THE REPORT THEY GOT is accurate? If I get my own copy before or after
    (or both) they did, it might have different errors in it. Also, what
    I see of my credit report is different from what they see.
    Also, I would never sign such a statement anyway, on the grounds that a nontrivial portion of it is unintelligible codes that I do not understand.They aren't required to give you credit either. Seems fair to me.
    But I doubt they'd ever ask the question. Have you ever heard of
    anyone being asked that? Do you think it is a common practice for,
    say, mortgages?
    For the record, I do not believe that there has been an accurate credit report in the entire history of the world.I think you're an idiot.
    I hope you don't regret taking someone else's credit report too seriously.

    Gordon L. Burditt

    Leave a comment:


  • Gordon Burditt
    replied
    FICO secrets

    >>>> I disagree. It is up to you to make sure that the information is
    > *FAVORABLE TO YOU*, not accurate. You are under no obligation to> correct errors you believe are in your favor.I'm not sure the legality of that statement. I'm not disputing it, butI could see how it might be construed to be fraud. I don't see how it could be fraud unless I put the error in there in the first place.If you state that an entry is false whan you know it isn't, that's fraud.Your only recourse is to attempt to make the record factual.
    Agreed, disputing an entry that you know to be accurate, then
    applying for credit is fraud. But failure to dispute an entry you
    know to be inaccurate but think is more favorable to you (unlikely
    to happen, but it can) is not (unless you state that it is accurate).
    At least if acreditor or anyone had you state that you believe all the information inyour report to be accurate. I doubt that will ever be an issue. No creditor has ever been willing to show me my credit report, even when I asked and said that if I was getting charged a fee for it, I should be able to get a copy of it. They will tell me how I can get my own copy, but not show me the same copy THEY got.Why should they? Thay paid for it, you didn't. In fact they may neversee it, rather only the results.
    Then how can I possibly state that I believe all the information in
    THE REPORT THEY GOT is accurate? If I get my own copy before or after
    (or both) they did, it might have different errors in it. Also, what
    I see of my credit report is different from what they see.
    Also, I would never sign such a statement anyway, on the grounds that a nontrivial portion of it is unintelligible codes that I do not understand.They aren't required to give you credit either. Seems fair to me.
    But I doubt they'd ever ask the question. Have you ever heard of
    anyone being asked that? Do you think it is a common practice for,
    say, mortgages?
    For the record, I do not believe that there has been an accurate credit report in the entire history of the world.I think you're an idiot.
    I hope you don't regret taking someone else's credit report too seriously.

    Gordon L. Burditt

    Leave a comment:


  • keith
    replied
    FICO secrets

    On Sun, 16 Apr 2006 01:01:33 +0000, Gordon Burditt wrote:
    I disagree. It is up to you to make sure that the information is *FAVORABLE TO YOU*, not accurate. You are under no obligation to correct errors you believe are in your favor.I'm not sure the legality of that statement. I'm not disputing it, butI could see how it might be construed to be fraud. I don't see how it could be fraud unless I put the error in there in the first place.
    If you state that an entry is false whan you know it isn't, that's fraud.
    Your only recourse is to attempt to make the record factual.
    At least if acreditor or anyone had you state that you believe all the information inyour report to be accurate. I doubt that will ever be an issue. No creditor has ever been willing to show me my credit report, even when I asked and said that if I was getting charged a fee for it, I should be able to get a copy of it. They will tell me how I can get my own copy, but not show me the same copy THEY got.
    Why should they? Thay paid for it, you didn't. In fact they may never
    see it, rather only the results.
    Also, I would never sign such a statement anyway, on the grounds that a nontrivial portion of it is unintelligible codes that I do not understand.
    They aren't required to give you credit either. Seems fair to me.
    For the record, I do not believe that there has been an accurate credit report in the entire history of the world.
    I think you're an idiot.

    --
    Keith

    Leave a comment:


  • keith
    replied
    FICO secrets

    On Sun, 16 Apr 2006 01:01:33 +0000, Gordon Burditt wrote:
    I disagree. It is up to you to make sure that the information is *FAVORABLE TO YOU*, not accurate. You are under no obligation to correct errors you believe are in your favor.I'm not sure the legality of that statement. I'm not disputing it, butI could see how it might be construed to be fraud. I don't see how it could be fraud unless I put the error in there in the first place.
    If you state that an entry is false whan you know it isn't, that's fraud.
    Your only recourse is to attempt to make the record factual.
    At least if acreditor or anyone had you state that you believe all the information inyour report to be accurate. I doubt that will ever be an issue. No creditor has ever been willing to show me my credit report, even when I asked and said that if I was getting charged a fee for it, I should be able to get a copy of it. They will tell me how I can get my own copy, but not show me the same copy THEY got.
    Why should they? Thay paid for it, you didn't. In fact they may never
    see it, rather only the results.
    Also, I would never sign such a statement anyway, on the grounds that a nontrivial portion of it is unintelligible codes that I do not understand.
    They aren't required to give you credit either. Seems fair to me.
    For the record, I do not believe that there has been an accurate credit report in the entire history of the world.
    I think you're an idiot.

    --
    Keith

    Leave a comment:


  • X
    replied
    FICO secrets

    In article <[email protected]>,
    [email protected] (Gordon Burditt) wrote:
    I disagree. It is up to you to make sure that the information is *FAVORABLE TO YOU*, not accurate. You are under no obligation to correct errors you believe are in your favor.I'm not sure the legality of that statement. I'm not disputing it, butI could see how it might be construed to be fraud. I don't see how it could be fraud unless I put the error in there in the first place.
    If you ever held out the credit report as accurate, you'd be committing
    fraud. But you might be legally OK to neither correct an error nor
    comment on it one way or the other.
    At least if acreditor or anyone had you state that you believe all the information inyour report to be accurate. I doubt that will ever be an issue. No creditor has ever been willing to show me my credit report, even when I asked and said that if I was getting charged a fee for it, I should be able to get a copy of it. They will tell me how I can get my own copy, but not show me the same copy THEY got. Also, I would never sign such a statement anyway, on the grounds that a nontrivial portion of it is unintelligible codes that I do not understand. For the record, I do not believe that there has been an accurate credit report in the entire history of the world.
    Mine are accurate.

    Leave a comment:


  • X
    replied
    FICO secrets

    In article <[email protected]>,
    [email protected] (Gordon Burditt) wrote:
    I disagree. It is up to you to make sure that the information is *FAVORABLE TO YOU*, not accurate. You are under no obligation to correct errors you believe are in your favor.I'm not sure the legality of that statement. I'm not disputing it, butI could see how it might be construed to be fraud. I don't see how it could be fraud unless I put the error in there in the first place.
    If you ever held out the credit report as accurate, you'd be committing
    fraud. But you might be legally OK to neither correct an error nor
    comment on it one way or the other.
    At least if acreditor or anyone had you state that you believe all the information inyour report to be accurate. I doubt that will ever be an issue. No creditor has ever been willing to show me my credit report, even when I asked and said that if I was getting charged a fee for it, I should be able to get a copy of it. They will tell me how I can get my own copy, but not show me the same copy THEY got. Also, I would never sign such a statement anyway, on the grounds that a nontrivial portion of it is unintelligible codes that I do not understand. For the record, I do not believe that there has been an accurate credit report in the entire history of the world.
    Mine are accurate.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gordon Burditt
    replied
    FICO secrets

    >> I disagree. It is up to you to make sure that the information is
    *FAVORABLE TO YOU*, not accurate. You are under no obligation to correct errors you believe are in your favor.I'm not sure the legality of that statement. I'm not disputing it, butI could see how it might be construed to be fraud.
    I don't see how it could be fraud unless I put the error in there
    in the first place.
    At least if acreditor or anyone had you state that you believe all the information inyour report to be accurate.
    I doubt that will ever be an issue. No creditor has ever been
    willing to show me my credit report, even when I asked and said
    that if I was getting charged a fee for it, I should be able to get
    a copy of it. They will tell me how I can get my own copy, but not
    show me the same copy THEY got.

    Also, I would never sign such a statement anyway, on the grounds
    that a nontrivial portion of it is unintelligible codes that I do
    not understand.

    For the record, I do not believe that there has been an accurate
    credit report in the entire history of the world.

    Gordon L. Burditt

    Leave a comment:


  • Gordon Burditt
    replied
    FICO secrets

    >> I disagree. It is up to you to make sure that the information is
    *FAVORABLE TO YOU*, not accurate. You are under no obligation to correct errors you believe are in your favor.I'm not sure the legality of that statement. I'm not disputing it, butI could see how it might be construed to be fraud.
    I don't see how it could be fraud unless I put the error in there
    in the first place.
    At least if acreditor or anyone had you state that you believe all the information inyour report to be accurate.
    I doubt that will ever be an issue. No creditor has ever been
    willing to show me my credit report, even when I asked and said
    that if I was getting charged a fee for it, I should be able to get
    a copy of it. They will tell me how I can get my own copy, but not
    show me the same copy THEY got.

    Also, I would never sign such a statement anyway, on the grounds
    that a nontrivial portion of it is unintelligible codes that I do
    not understand.

    For the record, I do not believe that there has been an accurate
    credit report in the entire history of the world.

    Gordon L. Burditt

    Leave a comment:


  • X
    replied
    FICO secrets

    In article <[email protected]>,
    [email protected] (Gordon Burditt) wrote:
    But what if FICO has trouble parsing the information that indicates whether an account is open or closed?It's not that hard to "parse" the information. There isn't muchdiscrepancy or grey area between "open" and "closed." But there often are errors involving that state on the credit report. The report may not have up-to-date data. Or the consumer asked for the account to be closed, and thinks it is, but the creditor ignored him. These errors aren't an issue of "parsing" the credit report, though.
    True, and these examples are also the rationale behind the law that says
    you're entitled to a free copy of a credit report when you're denied
    credit based on that report. To make sure its accurate.

    That's a key distinction, too. You can correct mistakes in your credit
    report, but you have no right to make a lender extend credit to you.
    Even the one who initially denied you credit based on an erroneous
    credit report doesn't have to reconsider their decision.

    The credit bureaus specifically say they act on the information providedto them. Its up to you to make sure that information is accurate, notthe credit agencies. I disagree. It is up to you to make sure that the information is *FAVORABLE TO YOU*, not accurate. You are under no obligation to correct errors you believe are in your favor.
    I'm not sure the legality of that statement. I'm not disputing it, but
    I could see how it might be construed to be fraud. At least if a
    creditor or anyone had you state that you believe all the information in
    your report to be accurate.

    Leave a comment:


  • X
    replied
    FICO secrets

    In article <[email protected]>,
    [email protected] (Gordon Burditt) wrote:
    But what if FICO has trouble parsing the information that indicates whether an account is open or closed?It's not that hard to "parse" the information. There isn't muchdiscrepancy or grey area between "open" and "closed." But there often are errors involving that state on the credit report. The report may not have up-to-date data. Or the consumer asked for the account to be closed, and thinks it is, but the creditor ignored him. These errors aren't an issue of "parsing" the credit report, though.
    True, and these examples are also the rationale behind the law that says
    you're entitled to a free copy of a credit report when you're denied
    credit based on that report. To make sure its accurate.

    That's a key distinction, too. You can correct mistakes in your credit
    report, but you have no right to make a lender extend credit to you.
    Even the one who initially denied you credit based on an erroneous
    credit report doesn't have to reconsider their decision.

    The credit bureaus specifically say they act on the information providedto them. Its up to you to make sure that information is accurate, notthe credit agencies. I disagree. It is up to you to make sure that the information is *FAVORABLE TO YOU*, not accurate. You are under no obligation to correct errors you believe are in your favor.
    I'm not sure the legality of that statement. I'm not disputing it, but
    I could see how it might be construed to be fraud. At least if a
    creditor or anyone had you state that you believe all the information in
    your report to be accurate.

    Leave a comment:


  • X
    replied
    FICO secrets

    In article <[email protected]>,
    "SpammersDie" <[email protected]> wrote:
    "Ernie Klein" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
    Exactly. That's why why I took exception to what you said above: "Your "credit score" is simply a representation of one of your credit reports." If one is denied credit because of their FICO _score_, pulling their credit report won't necessarily give a clue as to why they were *really* denied credit because FICO contains other _unknown_ (to everyone except FICO) things.
    Well is that really the reason for the right to a free credit report on credit denial? Seems to me the legit reason for that right is to check if you've been a victim of identity theft or if the CR is simply reporting something factually wrong about you.
    Exactly.
    It's not a way to let you snoop into exactly how the lender makes the decision to invest his own money. Unless you're a shareholder of that loaning company, that is NOYB.

    Exactly. If a lender wants to deny you a loan or credit because you
    have blond hair, they're perfectly entitled to. It might not be a good
    business decision, but you're out of luck.


    As would be expected. I believe one CA Senator attempted to introduce a bill last year and may try again this year to outlaw the use of FICO scores in giving or denying credit unless the person seeking the credit is given full disclosure as to exactly what the FICO numbers mean, where they come from and how they are arrived at. In other words, if the law passes, they will not be able to deny credit based on any secret or proprietary methods but will have to say exactly why the credit was denied. Of course, the very same consumers that champion this bill would squeal like a stuck pig if they passed a law requiring prospective borrowers to disclose exactly why they chose not to borrow from a particular lender. (Imagine that, it'd be a felony to shred that unsolicited credit card app junk mail without writing back to the sender and disclosing exactly why you chose not to respond to their junk mail....)

    Leave a comment:


  • X
    replied
    FICO secrets

    In article <[email protected]>,
    "SpammersDie" <[email protected]> wrote:
    "Ernie Klein" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
    Exactly. That's why why I took exception to what you said above: "Your "credit score" is simply a representation of one of your credit reports." If one is denied credit because of their FICO _score_, pulling their credit report won't necessarily give a clue as to why they were *really* denied credit because FICO contains other _unknown_ (to everyone except FICO) things.
    Well is that really the reason for the right to a free credit report on credit denial? Seems to me the legit reason for that right is to check if you've been a victim of identity theft or if the CR is simply reporting something factually wrong about you.
    Exactly.
    It's not a way to let you snoop into exactly how the lender makes the decision to invest his own money. Unless you're a shareholder of that loaning company, that is NOYB.

    Exactly. If a lender wants to deny you a loan or credit because you
    have blond hair, they're perfectly entitled to. It might not be a good
    business decision, but you're out of luck.


    As would be expected. I believe one CA Senator attempted to introduce a bill last year and may try again this year to outlaw the use of FICO scores in giving or denying credit unless the person seeking the credit is given full disclosure as to exactly what the FICO numbers mean, where they come from and how they are arrived at. In other words, if the law passes, they will not be able to deny credit based on any secret or proprietary methods but will have to say exactly why the credit was denied. Of course, the very same consumers that champion this bill would squeal like a stuck pig if they passed a law requiring prospective borrowers to disclose exactly why they chose not to borrow from a particular lender. (Imagine that, it'd be a felony to shred that unsolicited credit card app junk mail without writing back to the sender and disclosing exactly why you chose not to respond to their junk mail....)

    Leave a comment:


  • X
    replied
    FICO secrets

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Ernie Klein <[email protected]> wrote:
    In article <[email protected]>, Larry <[email protected]> wrote:
    If FICO scores were that easily predictable, the company that comes up with them would be out of business, since they wouldn't be necessary.
    Exactly. That's why why I took exception to what you said above: "Your "credit score" is simply a representation of one of your credit reports." If one is denied credit because of their FICO _score_, pulling their credit report won't necessarily give a clue as to why they were *really* denied credit because FICO contains other _unknown_ (to everyone except FICO) things.
    Is it because FICO considers unknown factors in addition to what's in
    your credit report, or is it that FICO considers the entries in your
    credit report and gives unknown weight and significance to different
    things that appear therein? I think it's the latter.
    I regularly (once a year) get my credit reports from the three main credit bureaus. My scores from each are generally in the same ballpark, but they're not identical. Each one has their own formula and weight different factors differently.
    They presented several pairs of credit reports where one obviously was a better credit risk than the other, but the better credit risk (in their opinion based on the credit report) had the lower FICO score. They concluded that the FICO score must be skewed by factors not found in the underlying credit report.
    So you've just made the argument FICO scores are not completely accurate representations of the credit-worthiness of the person. So what? No one said they're perfect. The argument being put forward in the CA hearings was that people denied credit because of their FICO scores have no recourse and can't really find out the real reason they were denied credit, notwithstanding Federal and State laws to the contrary, because FICO is secret and not even subject matter experts can figure why that person was denied credit based on their credit report.
    Who said you need recourse? A lender can deny you credit without
    providing a reason, unless applicable law says otherwise.

    As I recall a FICO representative was called but refused to testify citing proprietory business secrets. As would be expected. I believe one CA Senator attempted to introduce a bill last year and may try again this year to outlaw the use of FICO scores in giving or denying credit unless the person seeking the credit is given full disclosure as to exactly what the FICO numbers mean, where they come from and how they are arrived at. In other words, if the law passes, they will not be able to deny credit based on any secret or proprietary methods but will have to say exactly why the credit was denied. It wouldn't outlaw FICO outright, just say that creditors couldn't use or cite a FICO score to deny credit unless the exact source of the FICO score was revealed.
    I would think this law would have serious commerce clause problems.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X