Ethics or not

[Anonymous]

Why are we soooooo concerned with ethics on this board? Since when are the lending institutions, collection departments, collection agencies, lawyers, and/or judges worried about ETHICS when it comes to YOUR credit report??? Sure, there are nice people who work in these fields who would give you a break for one missed payment, however the vast majority of them could care less about you or your reports. Each and every one of them will use the LAW when it comes down to it. Is it ethical for a company such as you insurance provider to pull your credit bureau and then not report that you have met the obligation of paying your bill on time? Is it ETHICAL to perform an action that could harm someone's credit without them doing ANYTHING to restore the harm done? There are people here who have complained about the injustices done to them by CCCs, CAs, CRAs, etc.. These injustices happen because the agencies can and do screw up and, they don't have to do a thing about it LEGALLY unless YOU find the error and request that it be fixed. That sometimes doesn't even happen. If you screw up they will NAIL YOU TO THE CROSS AND CRUCIFY YOU with the LAW! They won't be concerned with ethics. Why should we be willing to afford them something that they won't give us? I think we can all agree that the ethical thing to do when someone is down is to give them a hand and help them. I ask you, will they do that for us? NO! Can ANYONE here tell me an ILLEGAL way to have derogs removed from their credit report? I've been thinking about this all day. Apart from having friends that work at all 3 of the CRAs, I don't think it's possible. The whole point behind ALL of us being here is to obtain GOOD credit. That won't happen without paying your bills on time and biting off more than you can chew. Let's see.......It takes me 1-4 years (and in some people's cases up to 7) to build GOOD credit. I take all that credit, run up a bunch of bills and then default. Now, I've got some repo man at my door trying to take away my Lexus that I've been paying on for 3 years. Claim bankrupcy? I don't think so. Telephone conversation: "I need to talk to your mother/father. Police." "Hi, this is (insert your name here). What is the trouble?" "Yes, this is (insert the name of collector here) with (insert collection agency name here). I'm calling about the past due amount of $____." "Little (insert your child's name here) said you were the POLICE!" "No, I said 'I need to talk to your mother/father, PLEASE,' he/she must have heard me wrong." I've gotten that call. Is it ethical? NO! If we get a traffic ticket for going 90mph in a 45mph zone AND YOU KNOW YOU DID IT. Is it ethical to defend yourself? NO, but it's perfectly legal. Can anyone here (including our moderator) say that they wouldn't defend themselves in THAT situation?

Message Edited by billiards on 07-21-2007 01:33 PM

[fused]

http://ficoforums.myfico.com/fico/board/message?board.id=generalcredit&message.id=16881&query.id=119...

[Anonymous]

Trust me, I've read it. I ask the question before. Why are so many here concerned with the "ethical" thing to do?

Message Edited by billiards on 07-21-2007 01:39 PM

[Anonymous]

While I agree with your premise that CAs often operate outside of the law, I would also assert that just because the guy at the CA is a jerk- I am not.

To be perfectly honest, I am in my situation soley by my hand. I couldn't care less whether some pimply-faced moron at Acme Credit Hounds calls me every name in the book. Irritating? Yes! Often outrageous? Hell Yes! But I just picture a little barking chihuahua when I get some jackass like that on the phone - all HE can do is his annoying barking.

And yes - the police tactic was obviously hatched by someone with no soul.

But as far as disputing things on my CR - I only dispute what I THINK shouldn't be there. If they can prove it to me, well ok then. I'll pay - but you can bet your sweet bippy: No PFD - No money. Period.

I had another post regarding a mortgage I am holding - and the folks just decided that since he went back to school, and since she accidentally got pregnant, and since their oldest son just went to college - etc, etc - Well, I should just understand that they don't want to make a house payment right now. As an after thought, I look up the state court dockets and find out that -Hey! Guess what? -  They do this to seems like everybody. I don't call them, I send everything in writing. From an attorney. I am ethical - as a borrower and as a lender.

[fused]

---

billiards wrote:
Trust me, I've read it. I ask the question before. Why are so many here concerned with the "ethical" thing to do?

Message Edited by billiards on 07-21-2007 01:39 PM

---

It's just a matter of FICO House Rules but I see where you're coming from.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:
Trust me, I've read it. I ask the question before. Why are so many here concerned with the "ethical" thing to do?

Message Edited by billiards on 07-21-2007 01:39 PM

---

Because after all is said and done I believe I will reap the physical and spiritual consequences of what I do...for good or evil, right or wrong.

Now about that CA impersonating the police...if I were you, next time they do that, as soon as the conversation ends, call the police. Ask them if they called you. Of course, they're going to say no...and most likely they will ask for information on who did call you and claim to be a police officer. Police HATE to be impersonated, for both safety and ego reasons. So you might be able to legitimately and lawfully bring down a lot of heat on the CA. Impersonating a law enforcement officer IS a crime.

[Anonymous]

I didn't say that all of the people that work in those fields are unethical. Just most of them.

My last question in my post. Having to do with a traffic ticket, is it ethical to defend yourself in a court of law when you know darn good and well that you are guilty of the offense?

I say OF COURSE it's unethical. That doesn't mean that we won't try.

The argument here is weather or not to dispute things on the reports. Is it unethical to request that they prove what you KNOW to be true? Most here would say no, it's not unethical.

If there is a perfectly legal means by which you can have derogs removed....why not do it?

Someone else recently posted that they had over 50 derogs removed by some law firm. By his own admission, these were legitimate. Is it ethical to ask for these to be removed?

The whole point behind the Credit Reporting Agencies is to allow lenders to look at the account/payment history of a particular individual. Requesting/asking/having ANYTHING removed from these reports that does, in fact, belong there is unethical. How can we congratulate someone, on one hand, for having these items removed and then on the other say that discussing things that are deemed "unethical" is a violation of the TOS?

It sounds like hypocracy to me.

[MidnightVoice]

Ethics is relative. 

The people who own, run and pay for this board have the absolute and total right to determine what happens here, and as they are a company, they should ensure that nothing illegal is done here or suggested here.  I might or might not agree with their decisions, but by signing on I did agree to abide by their rules.  So I will

[Anonymous]

I came to the same conclusion earlier today.

Ethics is relative and subjective.

For the most part, I have not seen many posts removed.

I have, however, seen people scolded for "unethical suggestions".

Legal issues...By all means...PULL THE POST.

Ethical issues...we've all got our own set of morals and ethics.


By the way, I do still appreciate all the good advice I've received here. My scores are up by 90+ points in exactly 1 month. Largely due to you guys!

[Anonymous]

I think the whole credit scoring and reporting system needs to be reformed, at several levels.

First, I think a CRA should be required to mail proof of an item to a consumer at the time the item is entered onto the consumer's credit report. This includes the original instrument that resulted in the debt being incurred. Any item on a CR would have to include the original creditor, the contact information for the current creditor, the account number, the balance, and the type of debt. Double-listing of a bill would be eliminated. If you owed $379 to the power company, and the power company charged off the account to a collection agency, the entry for the power company would be eliminated and replaced with the CA's entry.

This would prevent about nine-tenths of disputes, and substantially decrease inaccuracies in credit reports. Some shady collection agency couldn't just phone a CRA and say, "John Doe owes Mountain Dental some money," and put something on John's CR. The CRAs could essentially turn to questionable CAs and say, "we've upped our standards, now up yours!" If an item was on your report, odds would be about 30 to 1 that the item was accurate. This would make it more difficult by far for people to abuse the dispute process, while making the process itself unnecessary in the vast majority of cases.

Second, the reporting and scoring system needs to be overhauled to make it at least a bit more friendly to people trying to settle past debts. FICO should decrease the hit the consumer takes for charge-offs and collections that are paid. Right now consumers are obsessed with nuking baddies off their CRs because they have no other way to deal with baddies that will actually make any difference to their credit scores. Collection agencies should have to report a payment to all CRAs within seven business days--no exceptions.

Third...people in this country need to manage their money better, and not rack up huge bills in the first place. Now I'll concede in some cases people go into the red on medical bills, and that is at least substantially beyond the control of some people. (Of course, we can't have a national health care system or we would be impoverished, diseased and starving like everyone in Europe, right?) ;-) But in many others, people treat credit cards like cash assets. Wrong.