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

181–190 of 313 posts

Re: The careless errors of credit reporting agencies

#181

Post by zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC »

superuser2 wrote: post #111
zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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? I think adopting this framing is what makes it really bad. Your identity cannot be stolen. The whole concept of "identity theft" is bullshit intented to shift blame. It only so happens that some entities are incompeten…

> some entities are incompetent at verifying people's identity Some entities are incompetent at verifying identity because some people are very loud about making sure a a modern ID verification system doesn't get built, because the ability to commit fraud is a civil right or something. We need .gov smartcards. Or at least a .gov OAuth provider. Instead we are in the dark ages of shared-secret numbers (SSN, credit car…

> We need .gov smartcards. Or at least a .gov OAuth provider.

That's not really a good solution either, though, because that requires trust in an essentially unverifiable system and the entity producing it.

> banks should be shipping hardware tokens, for example.

No, they absolutely should not. That's like saying banks should send out staff to take care of signing stuff for their customers, and then insisting that the government should enforce whatever their staff signed against the customer. That's a completely broken security model.

Re: The careless errors of credit reporting agencies

#182

Post by ThomPete »

SystemOut wrote: post #115
ThomPete wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are american you have a history and your parents have a history. This is not something that you can have different opinions about it's how the US credit history system works by definition. Not saying one is better than the other, it's just how it works in the US.

How do my parent's credit history have anything to do with my credit history in the US? Are you talking about co-signing for loans or possibly how a child can get a card under their parents' name? I didn't think either of those had any impact on the child's credit score.

You and your parents history in the US in general can have a an affect on whether you can convince a bank to give you a credit card or not not on the credit score.

I am not talking about credit card history but about history of being a US citizen, having a bank account etc.

I think a lot here are missing the point.

The question is not about your credit score but about getting the credit card to begin with. Once you get the card they assign you a credit score but in order to get it you have to start building debt (and as a foreigner I had to do that with my own money)

Re: The careless errors of credit reporting agencies

#183

Post by saryant »

ThomPete wrote: post #178
saryant wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Retail banking history is not a factor in credit scores.

I am well aware of that and I never claimed it did. I wasn't talking about credit history but about history as in, a customer in a bank for years. These are also factors for how easy/hard things like this is.

Having a history with a bank has no impact whatsoever on your credit report.

Re: The careless errors of credit reporting agencies

#184

Post by chipperyman573 »

popmystack wrote: post #155
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…

>Citi gave me a credit card with a $3,000 limit as a college freshmen. How old are you? Just a few years ago, despite making a very decent amount of money and having no marks on my credit, it took an entire year for me to get a credit card. Reason: lack of credit history. A lot of people have similar stories. >This depends on your definitions a little bit. The part where you spend money that isn't yours and then pay…

>Prevent landlords from pulling credit history. Your finances are not their business.

I disagree, if you have a terrible credit history, leasing to you may be very risky. They aren't loaning you money, but they are trusting that you will have the money every month to pay them with.

Re: The careless errors of credit reporting agencies

#185

Post by awqrre »

asddddd wrote: post #94
thechao wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For instance: Time Warner Cable screwed up my cable package, charging me 220$ (a la carte) rather than 90$ (bundle). I contacted them, they admitted the mistake, and fixed the next month---I still ended up out 65$. I'd really like that money (moral imperative), but there's no legal way for me to seek relief for that small amount. If TWC messes up 1/50 accounts, once a year, for 50$, then they stand to make 500k--1mm$…

File a complaint with the FCC or BBB and (at least with Comcast) they'll suddenly be very eager to fix the problem. Ran into a similar issue where I was told one thing and billed for another, a few days after a BBB complaint they had someone from "executive customer relations" calling/emailing me to get it resolved ASAP.

FCC yes... I did that when I had an issue with AT&T not wanting to unlock a phone that I just bought (pre-paid) and I got a call from AT&T the next day.

Re: The careless errors of credit reporting agencies

#186

Post by superuser2 »

zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC wrote: post #181
superuser2 wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> some entities are incompetent at verifying people's identity Some entities are incompetent at verifying identity because some people are very loud about making sure a a modern ID verification system doesn't get built, because the ability to commit fraud is a civil right or something. We need .gov smartcards. Or at least a .gov OAuth provider. Instead we are in the dark ages of shared-secret numbers (SSN, credit car…

> We need .gov smartcards. Or at least a .gov OAuth provider. That's not really a good solution either, though, because that requires trust in an essentially unverifiable system and the entity producing it. > banks should be shipping hardware tokens, for example. No, they absolutely should not. That's like saying banks should send out staff to take care of signing stuff for their customers, and then insisting that th…

What do you propose?

Re: The careless errors of credit reporting agencies

#187

Post by ThomPete »

saryant wrote: post #183
ThomPete wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am well aware of that and I never claimed it did. I wasn't talking about credit history but about history as in, a customer in a bank for years. These are also factors for how easy/hard things like this is.

Having a history with a bank has no impact whatsoever on your credit report.

This has nothing to do with your credit report or your credit history.

This has to do with your chance of getting a credit card to begin with. There is a difference between being a US citizen having had bank account most of your life and then being a foreigner who just got yours.

Not sure why you keep insisting I am saying something else than I am.

Re: The careless errors of credit reporting agencies

#188

Post by saryant »

ThomPete wrote: post #187
saryant wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having a history with a bank has no impact whatsoever on your credit report.

This has nothing to do with your credit report or your credit history. This has to do with your chance of getting a credit card to begin with. There is a difference between being a US citizen having had bank account most of your life and then being a foreigner who just got yours. Not sure why you keep insisting I am saying something else than I am.

Because you're not being at all clear and you're still incorrect.

Re: The careless errors of credit reporting agencies

#189

Post by maxxxxx »

ThomPete wrote: post #172
saryant wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Yet thats exactly what I had to do. I had to basically fund my own credit for some time and pay it off. All which cost money of course. As a foreigner thats how it's normally done. At least in a bank like Citibank.

I am foreigner. My first CC had a $49 yearly fee and something like 39% APR. I always paid it off and after a year other offers came. So the cost was $49 to get a credit history.

Re: The careless errors of credit reporting agencies

#190

Post by acdha »

pdkl95 wrote: post #46
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…

> How much is this connected to not having a real id card? None. The credit reporting agency should be verifying any facts they intent to include in a report. If the are including unverified hearsay, the their report may be libel[1]. Also, your own ID card wouldn't fix someone else with either no ID or fraudulent ID doing something in your name. If the bank gave a loan to someone else , that's their problem, not your…

One problem is that when the bank fails to adequately bet whoever they gave a loan to, it becomes your problem until you can convince them that they made a mistake (hope you can afford a lawyer). A standard ID card with a photograph would help if it meant that nobody would accept anything else (utility bills, etc. are much easier to steal or forge) and it would transform online banking if we had something like OpenID/U2F which would work online.

The other problem is that without a reliable primary key, it's much easier for correct information about different people to be incorrectly mixed. While this is not as bad as, say, when it hits a sex offender database or terrorist watch list but it does happen and would go down dramatically if everyone could just use something like a SSN as the link instead of trying various fuzzy heuristics and hoping for the best.

Post reply on HN