I am about ready to have a Boston Tea Party protest and throw CCA's into the Bay

[Madison]

The way CCA's have set up and calculate the Credit Scores is costing the American consumer hundreds of millions of dollars each year. They don't accomplish the original purpose of letting lenders know who is credit worthy. Credit score calculations cannot be calculated except by the CCA's are bias and unfair to the consumer. I have been working diligently for nearly a year and I feel like I am swimming upstream. They penalize the American consumer way too long for bad marks. They make it practically impossible for Americans to fix their credit scores within a 1-2 year period. It is just a scam and people have to pay good money to monitor their scores. Credit Scores is the biggest rip off to the American consumer of all times. How did our legislators allow this monster grow to control our lives? Enough is enough!

[MidnightVoice]

---

Madison wrote:

 Enough is enough!

---

Nuking South Dakota and Delaware would help 

[marty56]

Dont forget Utah.

While some people have cleaned up their credit act in 1 to 2 years it took me 5 years to get out off debt and improve me credit scores and I am 51.

I took me much longer to get ionto debt then to get out of it so I consider it a bargin that it took 5 years.

If someone has lates on their report (I did and still have a 120 day late), 2 years clean is what a lot of lenders want to see.

It takes time but it will happen.  Keep working on it and keep the faith.

[RobertEG]

Please, an explantion of who you feel is to blame.?  By CCA do you mean the credit card companies? Credit reporting agencies?  Credit card companies have nothing to do with calculating credit scores, they just report payment data to the credit agencies.  And credit agencies, while they do report FICO scores, they dont originate the scoring.  The agorithm used to produce FICO scores is generated by FairIsaac.  Soi where is the beef?  Casting blame requires a source to cast the blame upon, and I dont see the focus of the blame in this thread.

I am not agreeing or disagreeing, I just dont understand the focus.

[Madison]

I am blaming the people who came up with the rules and regulations, the people who came up with this secret FICO scoring formula that nobody can explain how to calculate, the people who want to keep one 30 day late payment on your credit history for 10% of your life span, the people who would allow credit credit companies to rate jump your cc interest rates based on credit report which has a reporting error and the person who came up with this whole system which costs millions of $'s to the consumer to give them something else to worry about.

[haulingthescoreup]

Multiple targets, there!

[Anonymous]

Granted there are some aspects of credit scoring that are a pain in the rear. The fact that you don't get any score improvement for paying charge-offs and collections is my pet peeve.

So, Madison, if you were a bank or credit card company, what system would you use to process credit applications?

[marty56]

i agree 7 years for a late payment to fall off seems too long (I dont buy the stat argument),  lates after 2 years dont seem rto kill your score as much so unles you have someon who does a weird manual review, it is still possible to get what you want credit wise even with a 30 day late or 120 day for that matter.

While I suppose any scoring system can be improved, I still think FICO is better then any system that involves income,job or  "I can vouch for Marty, he will pay on time".

[Anonymous]

The seven-year reporting period comes straight from the gummint, via the FCRA.  It's not anything FI came up with on their own.

[RobertEG]

The credit scoring algorithms are not generated at the idle whim of the programmer, but are based on historical risk analysis that identifies those factors that are indicators of probability of future repayment of debt, and the experience of years and years of data taken from millions of actual credit reports.  In my opinion, disagreement with the factors and their value is more a criticism of the poor past credit history of the masses, which is not always stellar or logical in and of themselves.  

I would place more faith in the historical predictive data on risk potential than the opinions of individual consmers angered by their affect on individual scores.