Why do we have to PAY for FICO Scores??

[haulingthescoreup]

Hey, everyone, can we please keep this discussion on a civil level?

It's a legitimate topic for debate, and it touches a lot of raw nerves, but if it degenerates into a series of ad hominem posts, the thread will have to be locked.

thanks

Message Edited by haulingthescoreup on 08-15-2008 04:52 PM

[score_building]

This is not some socialist agenda class issue.  PERIOD. 

---

Nowhere in this thread does anyone say that it's a "socialist agenda class issue". In fact fico doesn't even consider income so not sure what that even really means.  The point is that the score can be crucial in obtaining basic things like housing and if you can't afford it you are at a disadvantage, period. yes there are wonderful resources to assist in obtaining cr's and info. including this forum that are free, that wasn't being debated here by anybody either.

One analogy would be the student who doesn't take a review course for the college entrance exam when stats show that 99% of students at a certain school do take a course.  Those from the 99% review course taking school who do not take a review course have been shown statistically to be at a disadvantage in gaining entrance to college.  it's really just that simple and apolitical.

why do you keep talking about monied classes? that's the type of us and them mentality that will hold an individual back. if you think you can't comete, you won't, so you will never strive to better yourself or your situation.

keep talking about? umm, obviously that phrase is meaningful and resonates w/ you and some others.  i was just trying to distinguish people who are poor like the OP from people who have money unlike the OP.  Peolple like the OP didn't set up the system.  Sorry, that is a fact not a political agenda, i'm not making any kind of political commentary.  As it turns out, there is a difference incidentally, one group has a lot of money the other group does not.  hope this fact doesn't offend.

Message Edited by score_building on 08-15-2008 05:07 PM

Message Edited by score_building on 08-15-2008 05:16 PM

Message Edited by score_building on 08-15-2008 05:40 PM

[Anonymous]

I'd better post now because I sense the lock being put on the door for this thread as we speak..........

Bottom line, people:   We have to pay because myFICO does not offer it for free.   It is a significant source of revenue for them, so why would they not try to get a fair price for them?

It will NOT change EVER unless Congress passes a law to change it.  Just like they did with FACTA to allow us one freebie report a year.

Unless someone has something new to add, then maybe this thread should be locked...........

[Anonymous]

I do believe legislative steps should be taken to improve the accuracy of information on credit reports. Credit reports should be considered a published document, like a newspaper, with libel laws in place. Just like a newspaper can be sued for substantial damages if it prints something false about me, so a CRA and creditor should likewise face defamation of character liability if they put something false on my CR, or, through inaction, allow false information to be propagated.

If the penalty for inaccurate data was $2500 for the first offense and $5000 for subsequent offenses rather than $1000 for any number of occurrences, I'm willing to bet we'd see a LOT less bad data on credit reports, and correcting bad data would be far easier for consumers.

That's really the source of probably 80% of consumer frustration expressed on these board: getting bad data corrected is like pulling teeth, if not worse. If the accuracy of data on CRs was near 100%, much of this anger would evaporate.

[Anonymous]

I am sorry Atlantabelle for yelling at you. I had a bad week and didn't mean to take things out on you. I am deeply sorry.

But.. I will give you a few examples of why I think the FICO score is not important. Four months ago I THOUGHT I had an OK or Average FICO score. But.. When I applied for a car loan the finance company used Auto Enhanced FICO scores. I was unable to get the best rate because my Auto Enhanced score was 610. That was about a 50 point difference.

When I got my homeowner's policy renewal three months ago.. I was informed because my FICO score was 579. My Home Owner's policy went up 20%.  My insurance company uses insurance enhanced FICO scores. That is about a 90 point difference than my true FICO score.

Rather than complain about prices.. We should complain the other scoring products are not offered to the General Public.

Again I am sorry for yelling. I didn't mean to do that..

Message Edited by Pants on 08-15-2008 10:05 PM

[Anonymous]

Pants, then I accept.

It just felt like you were discounting my experiences. I know dealing with the government, you can lose jobs over them. It's frustrating because it's like 'hi, have you seen the embezzlers in office? check on them first' and I say this as someone who has friends that work with money within the system. I also have a friend with an economic degree. And the apartment thing is very WTF but it's part of the deal. I think part of it is because of the weird position the city's in. It's not so much related to the various sliding scales (like the different types). People are just very, very cautious. If you have a lower score, you're clearly not going to be reliable. Catch 22. Around here things are massively flux.

It's terrible about your auto enhanced FICO score changing. For that I'm glad I didn't have to lease/make payments on my car. It seems like a shady practice to use those in relation to cars to because they're looking to get more money out of the consumers. Since they're not using the real scores. Same with your homeowner's policy. There should be a legislation that there can't be a 50 point difference between FICO and the company's. It seems very slimy. It's like finding out people are using your TC scores instead.

[Anonymous]

The problem is that although it sucks, it makes perfect sense for an auto finance compnay to base their decision on your past history of auto debt.  This is essentially what the Auto ficos or the Mortgage enhanced ficos do.  They look at your file and determine a number that correlates to your history and ability to repay a certain type of debt.  Perfectly understandable.

They really do need to make it easier to get items removed from your CR with financial costs if information is allowed to be renentered or mistakes are not fixed correctly.  Also, there needs to be guidelines as to what determines a debt had been verified.  For example, I disputed a unauthorized CC that had been accepted by someone living with us.  It had 3 purchases all in that person's name as far as shipping goes, but on "our" card.  When I disputed it, the CA called First Premier and they said the address matches so it must be valid.  This even after I had submitted proof to them that the charges were in someone elses name and were never authorized by us, and that the phone number listed was not ours.  And, miraculously enough the account was "closed" with a forwarding address a week after our "roomate" moved out.  We never got a bill, a call, or nothing.  It still took 6 months to get it removed.

[Anonymous]

---

score_building wrote:

---

imducky wrote:

i would agrue that i am a paragon of will and morality (by your stanadrd at least), as i work for a living. anyone can find any number of programs to find there way out of so called "cyclical urban or rural poverty", but it starts with personal responsability and sheding of the "i'm owed that" mentality.

who would you be arguing w/? not me, i don't know you.  and you have zero idea what my standard is (which is also irrelevant to the discussion).

hey, you used the term first.

plight of the poor? have you seen the standard of living for the "poor" in this country? in almost any country in the world our "poor" would be mid

 

patently false.  you clearly have not been exposed to the living condition of the poorest in our nation.  even more woeful in some respects is their suffering considering we live in a country that has the resources for every single citizen to have a decent standard of living.  Judging from the ignorant, smug moralisms you feel entitled to, having not been in their position you clearly aren't willing or able to acknowledge certain truths. so there is really no point.  plus i'm not big on thread jacking.  The fact that you so glibly marginalize the suffering of the poorest of our nation, yes- right here in the US and look at their condition as choices speaks volumes.  So does the idea that despite this you feel you are in a position to compare suffering (as if it were an olympic competition) of the poorest here vs. other countries. whew, there's really no words.

i was part of the poorest in the nation, so not knowing me and my experience, don't assume i am not speaking from a knowledgeable position. so having been one of them am i speaking in tones of smug moralisms or personal life experience?

i made the choice to not be one of the poorest, found a job (most of the time 2 or 3), broke the welfare cycle i was raised in, continued my education and now enjoy the results of making choices that made me a productive member of society.

i never said it was a competition, just that comparitaly speaking even our poorest are well off, so that in and of it self speaks to the system you seem to think is somehow more responsible for the "plight" of those "suffering", more so than the personal decisions that led them to be in considered by some among the "poorest".

 i really fail to see how the monied classes are manipulating the financial system, please elaborate. better yet contact the fbi or other appropriate law enforcement, regulatory agencies.

i didn't say they are manipulating it  -they created it, sorry you feel the need to twist my words at every turn.  you apparently aren't just a paragon of will and morality- you're a barrel of laughs to boot!  maybe you should contact your nearest local comedy club and sign up.

i'm really not going to go back and look, but if i miss-used your words i'm sorry.

Message Edited by score_building on 08-15-2008 03:54 PM

---

clearly we are both very opionated and feel strongly about our views. i respect the fact that all have not shared my experinces that formed my views, i also acknowledge that others have had experiences that formed thier views.

that being said we could debate these matters until our fingers bleed, but that serves no purpose. instead let's agree to disagree and be thankful we live in a country that we can have differing opinions, debate them, and still live our lives.

i suggest we just continue to use the political process to voice our opinions, and save this venue for helping each other build our credit profiles and scores.

[Anonymous]

---

score_building wrote:

This is not some socialist agenda class issue.  PERIOD. 

---

Nowhere in this thread does anyone say that it's a "socialist agenda class issue". In fact fico doesn't even consider income so not sure what that even really means.  The point is that the score can be crucial in obtaining basic things like housing and if you can't afford it you are at a disadvantage, period. yes there are wonderful resources to assist in obtaining cr's and info. including this forum that are free, that wasn't being debated here by anybody either.

One analogy would be the student who doesn't take a review course for the college entrance exam when stats show that 99% of students at a certain school do take a course.  Those from the 99% review course taking school who do not take a review course have been shown statistically to be at a disadvantage in gaining entrance to college.  it's really just that simple and apolitical.

why do you keep talking about monied classes? that's the type of us and them mentality that will hold an individual back. if you think you can't comete, you won't, so you will never strive to better yourself or your situation.

keep talking about? umm, obviously that phrase is meaningful and resonates w/ you and some others.  i was just trying to distinguish people who are poor like the OP from people who have money unlike the OP.  Peolple like the OP didn't set up the system.  Sorry, that is a fact not a political agenda, i'm not making any kind of political commentary.  As it turns out, there is a difference incidentally, one group has a lot of money the other group does not.  hope this fact doesn't offend.

Message Edited by score_building on 08-15-2008 05:07 PM

Message Edited by score_building on 08-15-2008 05:16 PM

Message Edited by score_building on 08-15-2008 05:40 PM

---

are you offended that some people have a lot of money and some don't?

as for setting up the system, last i looked my vote counts as 1 just like every other citizen. if enough voters felt the system was broken, there's a mechanism in place to remedy it.

[Anonymous]

I have no problem with Auto Enhanced FICOs.. But those type of products are not available to the general public. So many people buy credit scores from other websites and they think it is a true FICO score.. Its bad enough when you buy a true FICO product before applying for a loan, you have all intentions it is the "gospel truth".. Then go to a car dealer and the FICO score they  how is 30 to 60 points lower. The rate ends up being 5% higher than what you thought you were going to get.  From reading the posts on here. It seems most Auto Enhanced scores are higher than true FICO scores. But my gripe is if it is so important knowing your FICO scores when car dealers, mortgage lenders, insurance companies and Credit Cards buy different scores enhanced for each specific category of lender?

What about the bankruptcy score? Seems more lenders are picking up that product. Another product not offered to the general public.