Why does Experian encourage locking?

[SouthJamaica]

It seems that Experian.com is trying to encourage users to lock their credit files.

Why?

[Anonymous]

Probably because of the rampant data security breaches that seem to be the norm these days.. 

[Ardecko]

You give them too much credit(no pun intended).

The free accounts you can get from Experian.com and creditscore.com don't include free locking. To get that*feature*, you must upgrade to a paid account.

Yes, I know there's supposed to be another way to get it free, but there's no mention of that on either of these accounts.

[Anonymous]

SouthJamaica ... some where on the MyFico forum was a discussion on some of the challenges related to "locked" and "security freezes" of CB files. After reading the various posts I ended up more confused than before I read why I would "lock" my files. Truth, the post scared me into leaving the "Security Freezes" in place and stop at that point so I didn't end up with other challenges. After following AJC's challenges of trying to communicate with a real person at Experian, I am trying to lay low.

[DaveInAZ]

---

@Ardecko wrote:
You give them too much credit(no pun intended).

The free accounts you can get from Experian.com and creditscore.com don't include free locking. To get that*feature*, you must upgrade to a paid account.

Yes, I know there's supposed to be another way to get it free, but there's no mention of that on either of these accounts.

---

Well, the invite was in an email from EQ but I got the Experian IDnotify service for free and it can lock & unlock EX, in fact that's about all it can do, plus alerts for inquiries & new accounts. I was paying $9.99 for the EX IdentityWorks Plus for lock/unlock plus unlimited EX Fico scores. I cancelled that when I got IDnotify, I get monthly EX Fico scores from Amex and Discover Scorecard and that's enough for me, my scores are pretty stable.

As for why Experian is pushing lock, I think it's less work and headaches for them than freezes, plus Congress eliminated the fee for freezes, so they can't make money on that anymore.

[Anonymous]

They encourage locks because they can’t be held liable for damages if anything goes wrong like they can with freezes. 

Obviously they have extra incentive since they’ve monetized locking but the bureaus all like locking more anyway because they can force arbitration on it. 

This is also likely why EX is the only one that doesn’t have a login lift process. You have to fill out the stupid form and use your PIN every time you want to lift your freeze. 

[Anonymous]

I agree totally: because they monetized the locks and because they have reduced liabilities for locks.

[DaveInAZ]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

They encourage locks because they can’t be held liable for damages if anything goes wrong like they can with freezes. 

Obviously they have extra incentive since they’ve monetized locking but the bureaus all like locking more anyway because they can force arbitration on it. 

This is also likely why EX is the only one that doesn’t have a login lift process. You have to fill out the stupid form and use your PIN every time you want to lift your freeze. 

---

What liabilities? Equifax manage to allow someone to nab 140 million credit files, nearly half the country, and hasn't suffered a dime in liability so far.

[Anonymous]

---

@DaveInAZ wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

They encourage locks because they can’t be held liable for damages if anything goes wrong like they can with freezes. 

Obviously they have extra incentive since they’ve monetized locking but the bureaus all like locking more anyway because they can force arbitration on it. 

This is also likely why EX is the only one that doesn’t have a login lift process. You have to fill out the stupid form and use your PIN every time you want to lift your freeze. 

---

What liabilities? Equifax manage to allow someone to nab 140 million credit files, nearly half the country, and hasn't suffered a dime in liability so far.

---

Neither has anyone who had their data stolen though. I was reading an article the other day about how the data never ended up being posted anywhere for sale despite the value attached to such a breach and that it was likely used to see the finances of key people in government for targets to flip or something by a foreign government. 

Damages have to be proven for a lawsuit to be won and nobody has sustained damages as a result of this breach. Damages can be proven with a botched credit freeze though, especially if one was set up and then the file was able to be pulled anyway — this is the kind of thing that the CRAs want to make sure they can force through arbitration with their locking tools. 

[mitchblue]

It's just common sense to freeze all 3 credit bureaus.