Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The careless errors of credit reporting agencies

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 313 posts

Re: The careless errors of credit reporting agencies

#161

Post by ThomPete »

dawnerd wrote: post #122
ThomPete wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's absurdly backwards because it's asking you to create debt which normally is the opposite of showing you are good with money and I would question the validity of seeing people paying back limited debt to be indicative of ex. borrowing for a house. You could instead just look at the history of their debit card usage to figure out whether they are trustworthy. As I said though I understand why they do it, it's just…

I think the way we do it in the states is reasonable enough. I wouldn't expect any person outside of those that are gambling to loan money without building up trust first. If you're making minimum wage and don't have a lot in assets you're not going to have a lot of available credit. A lot of people don't realize this I think but if you hold a balance, especially over whatever percent of your total credit, it hurts.…

It's not reasonable for a very simple reason. A lot of people who aren't good with money end up getting credit anyway.

You could learn about peoples financial maturity through simply checking their normal debitcard/bank transactions.

Does he/she pay is monthly rent, is he/she constantly hitting zero on their balance etc. None of this require credit card usage.

Re: The careless errors of credit reporting agencies

#162

Post by SystemOut »

ThomPete wrote: post #148
superuser2 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being an authorized user on a parent's credit card does build credit history for the child. I did not have that, or any cosigned loan.

But you are an american right? You spent your whole life in the US? So you have a history with a bank I am assuming. I don't understand exactly why I am being down-voted. The system is at it is it's not something I made up.

I'd assume you are being downvoted because you are making assertions about the US credit system without actually knowing how it works.

Re: The careless errors of credit reporting agencies

#163

Post by saryant »

ThomPete wrote: post #108
rco8786 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious why you think that is absurdly backwards. Not necessarily disagreeing, but it's not hard to justify wanting to see a history of repayment vs trusting by default.

It's absurdly backwards because it's asking you to create debt which normally is the opposite of showing you are good with money and I would question the validity of seeing people paying back limited debt to be indicative of ex. borrowing for a house. You could instead just look at the history of their debit card usage to figure out whether they are trustworthy. As I said though I understand why they do it, it's just…

There's absolutely no need to take out a penny in loans to build a credit score. That's a myth.

Re: The careless errors of credit reporting agencies

#164

Post by twblalock »

ThomPete wrote: post #108
rco8786 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious why you think that is absurdly backwards. Not necessarily disagreeing, but it's not hard to justify wanting to see a history of repayment vs trusting by default.

It's absurdly backwards because it's asking you to create debt which normally is the opposite of showing you are good with money and I would question the validity of seeing people paying back limited debt to be indicative of ex. borrowing for a house. You could instead just look at the history of their debit card usage to figure out whether they are trustworthy. As I said though I understand why they do it, it's just…

> It's absurdly backwards because it's asking you to create debt which normally is the opposite of showing you are good with money and I would question the validity of seeing people paying back limited debt to be indicative of ex. borrowing for a house.

First of all, you can have an excellent credit score without paying a penny of interest. All you have to do is buy things with your credit card, and pay the bill in full when it arrives. You will never pay any interest when you do this.

Second, the people who measure risk for a living have determined that people's history with small amounts of debt is indicative of their ability to manage larger amounts of debt. Do you think their actuarial models are incorrect, and if so, why?

Furthermore, it's not like a good credit score is all it takes to get a mortgage. Proof of income matters too. As anyone who bought a house since the 2008 debacle will tell you, mortgage lenders take great pains to verify borrowers' income and the source of the money they use for their down payment.

> You could instead just look at the history of their debit card usage to figure out whether they are trustworthy.

No, you really can't. A debit transaction is a direct deduction of money from a checking account -- it is not debt. The only thing that can go wrong is an overdraft, and even when that happens, the payee will probably be unaware of it. Debit is more similar to cash than it is to credit. People have very different psychology and behavior when they use debt instead of cash.

There are plenty of problems with the credit system in the US, but the things you have identified as problems are not real problems.

Re: The careless errors of credit reporting agencies

#165

Post by cortesoft »

bluedino wrote: post #4

The credit reporting system probably wouldn't work if you had to have the account holder's 'permission' to add events to it - you have to do it in this automated way. Although it can be a pain, the responsibility of if your credit report is accurate falls on you, the consumer. You should many of the free services to check your credit and then dispute any events that aren't correct. Most people don't have issues but y…

Are you saying the responsibility falls on the consumer in the factual sense or the moral sense? I mean, that it falls on the consumer in fact seem obvious, but I don't agree that it does morally. I think the person or group that makes he mistakes are morally responsible.

Re: The careless errors of credit reporting agencies

#166

Post by ThomPete »

SystemOut wrote: post #162
ThomPete wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you are an american right? You spent your whole life in the US? So you have a history with a bank I am assuming. I don't understand exactly why I am being down-voted. The system is at it is it's not something I made up.

I'd assume you are being downvoted because you are making assertions about the US credit system without actually knowing how it works.

I live in the US so yes I have a pretty good idea of how it works.

But please point to where I am wrong about the credit score system.

Re: The careless errors of credit reporting agencies

#167

Post by cortesoft »

bluedino wrote: post #4

The credit reporting system probably wouldn't work if you had to have the account holder's 'permission' to add events to it - you have to do it in this automated way. Although it can be a pain, the responsibility of if your credit report is accurate falls on you, the consumer. You should many of the free services to check your credit and then dispute any events that aren't correct. Most people don't have issues but y…

This wasn't a credit report, though... This was a background check service. There was no way for the consumer to proactively check it and correct errors.

Re: The careless errors of credit reporting agencies

#168

Post by ceejayoz »

orangecat wrote: post #9
kartan wrote: post #3

How much is this connected to not having a real id card? For me is always weird when you see things like "no flight lists" and it is just a list of names. In Spain or Sweden your ID will be listed and the rest of people named like you spared of being harassed. Another concept that I don't understand is that USA's social security number has to be kept secret or otherwise your identity can be stolen. How that is even p…

Another concept that I don't understand is that USA's social security number has to be kept secret or otherwise your identity can be stolen. How that is even possible? Doesn't your employer needs it? Yes, as well as utilities, banks, insurers, hospitals, etc, etc. Treating the SSN as a password is idiotic, to the point where I almost wish Anonymous or someone would publish every American's number so that we'd be forc…

> I almost wish Anonymous or someone would publish every American's number so that we'd be forced to stop doing it.

  for($i = 0; $i
There you go! Guaranteed to contain every American's SSN.

Re: The careless errors of credit reporting agencies

#169

Post by lettergram »

hellogoodbyeeee wrote: post #137
superuser2 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>you are trusted by definition I felt pretty "trusted by definition." Citi gave me a credit card with a $3,000 limit as a college freshmen. A few years later I had an $8,000 limit card and a $10,000 limit card. I bought my car certified-pre-owned under a program that writes favorable low-cost loans to recent college graduates with no or limited credit history (with an offer letter or paystubs). You just aren't truste…

It sounds like you are at least ten years out of college. Federal regulations have changed and now it is more difficult for a college student to access credit cards

I work for Capital One and their target customer is actually people without credit scores. As far as I know, it's the only company that actually targets these customers as the primary revenue stream and also makes money.

The way it works, is they usually only give someone a $500 limit, then double the limit every 6 months If you pay monthly.

Once you get a job you can get a bump to $2000 limit with the 1.5% back easy. You just need to get a job for that.

I'm 1.5 years out of college and have access to ~100k in credit cards with a score of 750. I started with a score of 540 1.5 years ago. It's really not hard at all.

Re: The careless errors of credit reporting agencies

#170

Post by saryant »

_puk wrote: post #73
kartan wrote: post #3

How much is this connected to not having a real id card? For me is always weird when you see things like "no flight lists" and it is just a list of names. In Spain or Sweden your ID will be listed and the rest of people named like you spared of being harassed. Another concept that I don't understand is that USA's social security number has to be kept secret or otherwise your identity can be stolen. How that is even p…

Love the fact that I can't use the automated global entry when I visit the states as there exists someone else in the world with my name and a different D.O.B.. I do still try it each time though as it's still quicker to fail and then get a wistful comment from the guy checking my passport about the issue with the system.

Err, Global Entry is a members-only program. Unless you're actually a member (or a member of a similar program in a country with a reciprocal agreement), of course you can't use those kiosks.

GE doesn't match by name and birthdate, it uses your known-traveler number.

Post reply on HN