What Do You Think Would Make Credit Reporting More Fair?

[MidnightVoice]

---

Woody wrote:

I know the creditor will make more money from example A but aren't I being a better steward of credit if I pay off a loan before it's due?  hmmmmmm.....

---

No, you are indicating you don't know enough about credit to get the correct loan in the first place 

[Anonymous]

OK I'd like to amend my previous answer.

How about if Pallisades and the other JDB scumbags were rounded up put in a pen and each person they have illegally screwed over had a chance to beat them with a heater hose until their arms got tired?

[Anonymous]

The biggest problem with the current system is lack of quality control in the data contained in CRA databases. Newspapers have to carefully check their facts when they report information on an individual, and if they report information that is false, they must print a retraction. Moreover, if negligence can be shown, they can be sued for libel.

If I were king, I would place the locus of responsibility for accuracy in CRs squarely with the entities that maintain and publish CRs: the CRAs.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

It is very obvious who was in the room when these laws were drafted (the financial industry - not the public). What are your thoughts on how the system could realistically be changed?

---

Was in the room? Try WROTE THE LAWS! You don't actually think congress writes them? If they did then what would be the need for the MILLIONS of lobbyists in DC!?

My biggest complaint is that 7 YEARS IS TOO LONG! 7 years ago I was making about $25K a year, now I'm pushing six figures. 7 Years is a QUARTER of my life. 7 Years is almost 2 complete presidential terms. 7 Years is more time than a lot of violent criminals spend in jail!

It is too long of a time frame, so much can change in that amount of time. In fairness it really should be more like 3 years as long as there is no more derogatory information reported, if additional information is reported then the 3 years should reset. This would give such a better understanding of someone's credit worthiness.

[Anonymous]

Nice reply.  You must do this for a living.  You have a bright future.  Keep up the good work.

[pkatta]

My suggestion would be to:

By and large, only creditors that report positive history should be able to report negative stuff about you. For example - If Sprint PCS does not report a 3 year positive history, they should not be able to report a $7 collection. If Questar does not report my payment every month, they should not be able to report me for $19.99 collection.

Both the above tanked my scores about 110 points and made my hair stand on end when I saw my lowered scores. Luckily, thanks to Credit Boards I was able to nuke both of them from my reports.

[Anonymous]

I agree - if cell phone companies don't report your positive payments, they should not be allowed to report any negative information. 

[Anonymous]

Actually I have 1 more complaint / suggestion to make reporting more fair.

The whole approval process is really 1 sided when it comes to CCs. I believe that they should have the ability to approve me, but then if I am unhappy with their terms I should then have the ability to deny them, thus the account would never be opened and never reported to the CRAs - just an inquiry should be reported.

When you get a home equity loan there is a waiting period so that you can back out of it if you choose to. Something similar should be put in place for credit cards and other forms of revolving debt.

An example from my recent applications. BofA approved me for a 5K CL with a 13% APR. WAMU approved me for a $500 CL with a 22% APR - both pulled EX within a few days of each other. In my perfect world I would have had the chance to deny WAMU and say thanks but no thanks and never see an account show up on my CRs.

I don't believe this is an unreasonable request at all. Guess you could call this Credit Card Coyote Ugly

[Anonymous]

I didn't read every single reply, so excuse me if I'm repeating:

I would like derogatory information removed if one can PROVE that a stupid judge awarded a house or car to a stupid ex-spouse who didn't care about making timely payments!! Ahhh. Much better!