The backdoor options refuse to work for me

[Anonymous]

---

@Jerry45 wrote:

Be careful on a second recon with Barclay's. It will result in another Hard Pull

---

Really?! I just try again in another year maybe.

[FinStar]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Jerry45 wrote:

Be careful on a second recon with Barclay's. It will result in another Hard Pull

Why? They already pulled your credit.. No addtional HP.. Unless, they ask you to pull another report.. So, if they pulled TU and you recon and they say "I can reconsider but i have to look at your EQ report, is that ok?  You would have to consent to that extra pull.. They cant HP without permission... Now, sometimes people get a bad CSR who swear a CLI is a SP.. when it turns out it's not.. but a credit analyst or underwriter should always be giving the correct information and usually do.

---

You are essentially requesting for the lender to reconsider an originally declined application.  And yes, it is considered permissible purpose and they can HP again.  Please reference the various threads sprinkled around these and other forums associated with Barclays involving a second HP for folks who have gone through the reconsideration process.  It varies on a case by case basis, but they can HP.  Other lenders like Citi, BOA and Chase do so as well, whether it involves reviewing a secondary CR or not.

[ojefferyo]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Jerry45 wrote:

Be careful on a second recon with Barclay's. It will result in another Hard Pull

---

4 recons here. Same single (1) hard pull on TU for Sallie Mae.

---

Someone will cave in lol

[Anomalous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@CreditCuriousity wrote:

Also alot of of it depends on your credit profile on how how thin or thick it is... and tons of fators go into it and whether recon will work, etc... What was the decline reason on Barclay's?  

---

The resaon for the decline is because of my debt to income ratio bascially my student loans. I may not be able to get aroung that.

---

I have large student debt as well, but the flip side of that is I don't have a mortgage (own house). Figured if the loans caused a DTI ratio denial I'd mention that during a recon attempt. 

[Anonymous]

---

@FinStar wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Jerry45 wrote:

Be careful on a second recon with Barclay's. It will result in another Hard Pull

Why? They already pulled your credit.. No addtional HP.. Unless, they ask you to pull another report.. So, if they pulled TU and you recon and they say "I can reconsider but i have to look at your EQ report, is that ok?  You would have to consent to that extra pull.. They cant HP without permission... Now, sometimes people get a bad CSR who swear a CLI is a SP.. when it turns out it's not.. but a credit analyst or underwriter should always be giving the correct information and usually do.

---

You are essentially requesting for the lender to reconsider an originally declined application.  And yes, it is considered permissible purpose and they can HP again.  Please reference the various threads sprinkled around these and other forums associated with Barclays involving a second HP for folks who have gone through the reconsideration process.  It varies on a case by case basis, but they can HP.  Other lenders like Citi, BOA and Chase do so as well, whether it involves reviewing a secondary CR or not.

---

This just means they are doing lending process incorrectly. I have been in lending for 10 years now, well 10 years come February. When any attempt is made for credit it is unlawful to hard pull another report without authorization once a decision has been made. This is called "stale slate". When a report is pulled and a decision has been made not to grant credit then the application will be "stale slated" which means we can use this report for reconsideration for up to 30 days internally, OR we can pull a new report BUT only with authorization because the application has already been granted a decision. Have banks pulled without authorization? Yes. Is this illegal? Yes. This is like saying "Banks aren't allowed to give out bad mortgages and never would!"... Of course they aren't allowed to.. but read Forbes, read WSJ.. They do, and have and are still paying billions because of it in penalties.. Trust me, it's illegal to HP again AFTER a decision has been made, UNLESS the borrower gives permission to do another HP. Simply asking for reconsideration is not permission to do another HP. The lender must make the borrower aware that another report will be pulled just like the original application states the first attempt will result in a credit pull for an attempt at granting credit. So, yes some banks will do a HP upon reconsideration without asking, however that just means they are not following proper government compliance standards. The problem here is that the law doesn't specify if the reconsideration hard pull authorization has to be in writing or verbal, so banks get away with the "he said she said" argument.. If you try and fight the recon hard pull the bank will simply say you gave verbal authorization and since 99% of those conversations aren't recorded (they are where I work) the bank wins.

[FinStar]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@FinStar wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Jerry45 wrote:

Be careful on a second recon with Barclay's. It will result in another Hard Pull

Why? They already pulled your credit.. No addtional HP.. Unless, they ask you to pull another report.. So, if they pulled TU and you recon and they say "I can reconsider but i have to look at your EQ report, is that ok?  You would have to consent to that extra pull.. They cant HP without permission... Now, sometimes people get a bad CSR who swear a CLI is a SP.. when it turns out it's not.. but a credit analyst or underwriter should always be giving the correct information and usually do.

---

You are essentially requesting for the lender to reconsider an originally declined application.  And yes, it is considered permissible purpose and they can HP again.  Please reference the various threads sprinkled around these and other forums associated with Barclays involving a second HP for folks who have gone through the reconsideration process.  It varies on a case by case basis, but they can HP.  Other lenders like Citi, BOA and Chase do so as well, whether it involves reviewing a secondary CR or not.

---

This just means they are doing lending process incorrectly. I have been in lending for 10 years now, well 10 years come February. When any attempt is made for credit it is unlawful to hard pull another report without authorization once a decision has been made. This is called "stale slate". When a report is pulled and a decision has been made not to grant credit then the application will be "stale slated" which means we can use this report for reconsideration for up to 30 days internally, OR we can pull a new report BUT only with authorization because the application has already been granted a decision. Have banks pulled without authorization? Yes. Is this illegal? Yes. This is like saying "Banks aren't allowed to give out bad mortgages and never would!"... Of course they aren't allowed to.. but read Forbes, read WSJ.. They do, and have and are still paying billions because of it in penalties.. Trust me, it's illegal to HP again AFTER a decision has been made, UNLESS the borrower gives permission to do another HP. Simply asking for reconsideration is not permission to do another HP. The lender must make the borrower aware that another report will be pulled just like the original application states the first attempt will result in a credit pull for an attempt at granting credit. So, yes some banks will do a HP upon reconsideration without asking, however that just means they are not following proper government compliance standards. The problem here is that the law doesn't specify if the reconsideration hard pull authorization has to be in writing or verbal, so banks get away with the "he said she said" argument.. If you try and fight the recon hard pull the bank will simply say you gave verbal authorization and since 99% of those conversations aren't recorded (they are where I work) the bank wins.

---

Since you have some "vast" lending experience, how your institution handles re-reviews for a credit reconsideration will differ from others.  Lenders have not been fined over the interpretation and applicability of the FCRA (Section 604) for permissible purpose reviews that fall under the criteria for a reconsideration process for each institution whereby a HP is utilized.  So, contrary to your argument, it is NOT illegal.  I'm sure you are familiar with the FCRA (Section 604) - Title 15 U.S. Code § 1681b and its respective subclauses where such is determined.

[CreditCuriosity]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@FinStar wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Jerry45 wrote:

Be careful on a second recon with Barclay's. It will result in another Hard Pull

Why? They already pulled your credit.. No addtional HP.. Unless, they ask you to pull another report.. So, if they pulled TU and you recon and they say "I can reconsider but i have to look at your EQ report, is that ok?  You would have to consent to that extra pull.. They cant HP without permission... Now, sometimes people get a bad CSR who swear a CLI is a SP.. when it turns out it's not.. but a credit analyst or underwriter should always be giving the correct information and usually do.

---

You are essentially requesting for the lender to reconsider an originally declined application.  And yes, it is considered permissible purpose and they can HP again.  Please reference the various threads sprinkled around these and other forums associated with Barclays involving a second HP for folks who have gone through the reconsideration process.  It varies on a case by case basis, but they can HP.  Other lenders like Citi, BOA and Chase do so as well, whether it involves reviewing a secondary CR or not.

---

This just means they are doing lending process incorrectly. I have been in lending for 10 years now, well 10 years come February. When any attempt is made for credit it is unlawful to hard pull another report without authorization once a decision has been made. This is called "stale slate". When a report is pulled and a decision has been made not to grant credit then the application will be "stale slated" which means we can use this report for reconsideration for up to 30 days internally, OR we can pull a new report BUT only with authorization because the application has already been granted a decision. Have banks pulled without authorization? Yes. Is this illegal? Yes. This is like saying "Banks aren't allowed to give out bad mortgages and never would!"... Of course they aren't allowed to.. but read Forbes, read WSJ.. They do, and have and are still paying billions because of it in penalties.. Trust me, it's illegal to HP again AFTER a decision has been made, UNLESS the borrower gives permission to do another HP. Simply asking for reconsideration is not permission to do another HP. The lender must make the borrower aware that another report will be pulled just like the original application states the first attempt will result in a credit pull for an attempt at granting credit. So, yes some banks will do a HP upon reconsideration without asking, however that just means they are not following proper government compliance standards. The problem here is that the law doesn't specify if the reconsideration hard pull authorization has to be in writing or verbal, so banks get away with the "he said she said" argument.. If you try and fight the recon hard pull the bank will simply say you gave verbal authorization and since 99% of those conversations aren't recorded (they are where I work) the bank wins.

---

This is exactly how i got a HP removed from Experian from a chase CC as it was recorded and the U/W stated it was a TU pull only and no other pull was going to be used in reconsideration other then the original TU pull...  The pulled EX then.. Long story short complained to EO, gave time it happened and asked them to listen to conversation, they did, they sided with me being the EO office and it was removed.  Was it for customer service to make me happy or did I have a valid case?  I don't honestly know..  Just stating you should fight for what you believe is right.

[Anonymous]

---

@FinStar wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@FinStar wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Jerry45 wrote:

Be careful on a second recon with Barclay's. It will result in another Hard Pull

Why? They already pulled your credit.. No addtional HP.. Unless, they ask you to pull another report.. So, if they pulled TU and you recon and they say "I can reconsider but i have to look at your EQ report, is that ok?  You would have to consent to that extra pull.. They cant HP without permission... Now, sometimes people get a bad CSR who swear a CLI is a SP.. when it turns out it's not.. but a credit analyst or underwriter should always be giving the correct information and usually do.

---

You are essentially requesting for the lender to reconsider an originally declined application.  And yes, it is considered permissible purpose and they can HP again.  Please reference the various threads sprinkled around these and other forums associated with Barclays involving a second HP for folks who have gone through the reconsideration process.  It varies on a case by case basis, but they can HP.  Other lenders like Citi, BOA and Chase do so as well, whether it involves reviewing a secondary CR or not.

---

This just means they are doing lending process incorrectly. I have been in lending for 10 years now, well 10 years come February. When any attempt is made for credit it is unlawful to hard pull another report without authorization once a decision has been made. This is called "stale slate". When a report is pulled and a decision has been made not to grant credit then the application will be "stale slated" which means we can use this report for reconsideration for up to 30 days internally, OR we can pull a new report BUT only with authorization because the application has already been granted a decision. Have banks pulled without authorization? Yes. Is this illegal? Yes. This is like saying "Banks aren't allowed to give out bad mortgages and never would!"... Of course they aren't allowed to.. but read Forbes, read WSJ.. They do, and have and are still paying billions because of it in penalties.. Trust me, it's illegal to HP again AFTER a decision has been made, UNLESS the borrower gives permission to do another HP. Simply asking for reconsideration is not permission to do another HP. The lender must make the borrower aware that another report will be pulled just like the original application states the first attempt will result in a credit pull for an attempt at granting credit. So, yes some banks will do a HP upon reconsideration without asking, however that just means they are not following proper government compliance standards. The problem here is that the law doesn't specify if the reconsideration hard pull authorization has to be in writing or verbal, so banks get away with the "he said she said" argument.. If you try and fight the recon hard pull the bank will simply say you gave verbal authorization and since 99% of those conversations aren't recorded (they are where I work) the bank wins.

---

Since you have some "vast" lending experience, how your institution handles re-reviews for a credit reconsideration will differ from others.  Lenders have not been fined over the interpretation and applicability of the FCRA (Section 604) for permissible purpose reviews that fall under the criteria for a reconsideration process for each institution whereby a HP is utilized.  So, contrary to your argument, it is NOT illegal.  I'm sure you are familiar with the FCRA (Section 604) - Title 15 U.S. Code § 1681b and its respective subclauses where such is determined.

---

They absolutely have been fined. You couldn't be more wrong. Check the BBB reports for major banks and you'll see all of the complaints that resulted turnovers which then resulted in fines for non-compliance with regard to unauthorized hard pulls. If the bank removes the hard pull, no fine is warranted, however banks have been fined and numerous times. The problem? the fine is so small its cheaper to pay the fine than to pay a team of internal employees to track down where the problem aka pull began. You have given out a wealth of knowledge here, but some of the posts can hurt readers if the information is incorrect. I promise you, it is illegal without consent and banks have been fined for lack of evidence and  for not responding within the proper time limit given. Are they fined 100% of the time? Not even close.. But regardles, they have been... if i have time later i'll go through the compliance reports and cite specific occasions.

[Anonymous]

---

@CreditCuriousity wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@FinStar wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Jerry45 wrote:

Be careful on a second recon with Barclay's. It will result in another Hard Pull

Why? They already pulled your credit.. No addtional HP.. Unless, they ask you to pull another report.. So, if they pulled TU and you recon and they say "I can reconsider but i have to look at your EQ report, is that ok?  You would have to consent to that extra pull.. They cant HP without permission... Now, sometimes people get a bad CSR who swear a CLI is a SP.. when it turns out it's not.. but a credit analyst or underwriter should always be giving the correct information and usually do.

---

You are essentially requesting for the lender to reconsider an originally declined application.  And yes, it is considered permissible purpose and they can HP again.  Please reference the various threads sprinkled around these and other forums associated with Barclays involving a second HP for folks who have gone through the reconsideration process.  It varies on a case by case basis, but they can HP.  Other lenders like Citi, BOA and Chase do so as well, whether it involves reviewing a secondary CR or not.

---

This just means they are doing lending process incorrectly. I have been in lending for 10 years now, well 10 years come February. When any attempt is made for credit it is unlawful to hard pull another report without authorization once a decision has been made. This is called "stale slate". When a report is pulled and a decision has been made not to grant credit then the application will be "stale slated" which means we can use this report for reconsideration for up to 30 days internally, OR we can pull a new report BUT only with authorization because the application has already been granted a decision. Have banks pulled without authorization? Yes. Is this illegal? Yes. This is like saying "Banks aren't allowed to give out bad mortgages and never would!"... Of course they aren't allowed to.. but read Forbes, read WSJ.. They do, and have and are still paying billions because of it in penalties.. Trust me, it's illegal to HP again AFTER a decision has been made, UNLESS the borrower gives permission to do another HP. Simply asking for reconsideration is not permission to do another HP. The lender must make the borrower aware that another report will be pulled just like the original application states the first attempt will result in a credit pull for an attempt at granting credit. So, yes some banks will do a HP upon reconsideration without asking, however that just means they are not following proper government compliance standards. The problem here is that the law doesn't specify if the reconsideration hard pull authorization has to be in writing or verbal, so banks get away with the "he said she said" argument.. If you try and fight the recon hard pull the bank will simply say you gave verbal authorization and since 99% of those conversations aren't recorded (they are where I work) the bank wins.

---

This is exactly how i got a HP removed from Experian from a chase CC as it was recorded and the U/W stated it was a TU pull only and no other pull was going to be used in reconsideration other then the original TU pull...  The pulled EX then.. Long story short complained to EO, gave time it happened and asked them to listen to conversation, they did, they sided with me being the EO office and it was removed.  Was it for customer service to make me happy or did I have a valid case?  I don't honestly know..  Just stating you should fight for what you believe is right.

---

Good for you!! fight the fight when you know you're right

[Jerry45]

Sorry, I need to clarify. If you wait more than one day to recon, it will result in a second HP. It happened to me last Summer. Barc first pulled TU, I was denied, and then I waited 2 days to recon, and they did a HP at Experian.