The problem is, as you articulated, they are required by law to provide credit reporting information about you to you. They have no incentive to do this because they make their money by collecting and selling data about us. They have every reason to use this reporting requirement to collect more information about you. They have every reason to conflate credit freeze with credit hold , and confuse consumers in order t…
After all things seemed to work fine before credit scores. Perhaps we put too much "stock" in them in the first place. There has to be better ways to manage this.
One way I could forsee is a government agency that acted as a reporting depot. Then you could forbid the sale of information, and create legislative firewalls for it to keep it out of the hands of other agencies[1].
Though I will continue to argue that credit scores are deeply flawed[0].
[0]: FWIW, I have excellent credit too, so I hardly run into any real issues with it, but I have see the other side of this table. They are often used in such a way I would classify it as prejudiced discrimination with extra steps. For bigger / riskier loans. You could instead opt for point in time financial audits, for example.
[1]: Two things of note. One, last I looked into this, the government very much pulls credit reports on pull without any oversight as it sits today. Two, there is a history of legislative firewalls that do work, they need clear and strong oversight provisions, and today we have almost zero oversight of the credit bureaus. I'd roll the dice on creating something akin to the GAO or Federal Reserve type agencies (that is to say, very independent from lawmakers and presidents but still have competent oversight), but for something that functions for the intentions behind what these scores are suppose to be for.