What you may not have known about Credit Checks and Credit Ratings. MUST KNOW AND SCREAM ABOUT

[Justice wanted]

(I expect this thread to be closed hopefully it won't)


COLD HARD FACT: You are a slave to your credit rating!


I was responding to a thread about College students credit rating being checked and students loans not allowing them to get jobs.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=652125


IT should be illegal for employers to check a person's credit for a job. It does not bare ANY reflection on them as an employee and this is why it should be illegal.

The Credit rating system is the only system I know where it penalizes a person because some check there credit. So you apply for a job and they check your credit Your credit score does go down.

Now more and more companies and businesses are checking peoples credit. You start services with Water or Gas or EVEN getting cable they are require (in most states) a credit check. Each time that check is ran it does knock points off your credit score.
NOW here is something that should piss people off SAY you are an existing customer and you are moving to a new house or moving to a new area and you want to keep your cable company. I did customer service for a cable company on the national level one thing I did do was transfer services--So I am speaking for what the protocol was for this company. Keep in mind that when you have X cable company that is a nationally known company it is basically franchised out (Like Mc Donald's.) Do whoever owns the franchise in New York isn't the same person who owns it in Texas or California. So one Franchise might demand a credit check that another franchise never did with you. LATELY HOWEVER this company was demanding credit checks. Now if you are moving within the same city you may think oh won't need a credit check you are just moving 3 streets over. Some areas require that credit check to transfer your services. You may think OR I'll just say I'm new start services than close the other account. Again a credit check is required.
NO the company will not take into account the fact you had service with them before. IF you are moving from New York to California THEY will not look at your score from your old residence THEY want another check done. REMEMBER -- CREDIT CHECK SCORE GOES DOWN

My friend recently got divorce He had a score of 850 at the start of his divorce. By the time everything was said and done he had a score of 200. How did that happen?

-He had to find a new place to live--Credit Check done by place he wanted to live.
-He had to get utilities set up for new place Water, Gas, Electric, and cable ALL required credit checks even though he had existing service --New account new credit check.
-He had 2 credit card with both his name and his ex's name. Credit Card companies (Worked for customer service for 1 company) Won't just close out the account --IT lowers your credit rating. So anytime you close a credit card it lowers your score.
-THAN he wanted cards to replace them. New Cards NEW account each card required a separate application (even though both card are Capital One card.) required a credit check so that is 2 more times his credit was check and lowered.

(This next set of events take place 3 months later)
So my friend is an IT/Computer programmer. He works for a company that is basically outsourced to other companies. So if a company doesn't have the money or doesn't want their own IT guys they hire my friend's company. My friend has his own set of "clients" He has served them well gotten 5 star reviews He basically is the one who trains other people working in this company. He is the best of the BEST --AT LEAST he thought that was how his company viewed him. The company got a new client and this new client required the WHOLE company employees be drug tested and credit checks ran. NOW even though my friend was not going to work for this company--different division company was handling their account--everyone had too to go thru the drug test and credit check. He goes thru the process then a few days later he gets called into the supervisor's office. Drug test came out fine BUT his credit score had a problem forcing them to put this employee of 15 years on a two month probation. The supervisor first ask how his life was going. Supervisor knew of the divorce and asked questions on his mental state and the like than he asked IF my friend had a gambling problem.

My friend couldn't understand the reason for the questions or the probation period. My friend was told that the credit check was 200 and that he recently took at lot of vacation time so they need to see if he is going to continue to perform at his normal level or if there is an issue they will have to reevaluate his standing in the company.

My friend e-mailed me today he is off the probation period and will not be getting any new clients because ALL the clients now have access to personnel files of those IT/programmers coming into their companies.

ALSO credit ratings can be wrecked by identity thief.

My husband when we first got married messed up my credit rating. I came into the marriage with my own car my mom co-signed for me. The financing company first demanded that I give them a copy of my marriage license in order to change my name or recognize my married name BUT my husband sent in the payment with my account number on the check that was accepted and processed.

Hubby said he's take care of that payment every month. He worked nights I worked days and my day would start at 5:30 a.m. getting up and ready for work than on the road. I would get home about 8:30 /9:00 at night. After a couple months of bills not getting paid on time and not having money for the weekend (both had credit unions that at the time didn't have MAC cards) we needed a system of some sort. Hubby would pay the bills and I did the grocery shopping (I had weekends off) and clean the house.

So I would see a stake of bill getting paid on time and we didn't any pass due bills and the like. So I thought everything was fine. My car got REPOed. It was the one bill hubby would forget about each month. That repo not only put a bad mark on my credit rating but on my mother's credit rating since she co-signed. eight years later she still can't get a car loan.


So much is now dependent on your credit rating and so much effects a person's credit rating that Bankers and companies basically have people in an never ending cycle and some trapped in a hopeless situation.

A credit rating isn't going to determine how well a person will do a job. It doesn't do anything but effect someone negatively and it should be illegal.

[unblock]

1. credit pulls FOR CREDIT are different than other credit pulls.

my understanding (and i once wrote a program to do credit pulls from 3 bureaus for a car loan company) is that the credit pulls that are inquiries for credit have a different coding, and yes, those (likely, but not always) do lower your credit score.

however, non-credit inquiries are supposed to be coded differently and are not supposed to lower your credit score. for instance, doing your own pull for your own purposes does not affect your score. my understanding is that pulls for utilities and such are supposed to be coded as non-credit inquries and are not supposed to affect your score.

[Justice wanted]

2. They aren't suppose to affect your credit but what I've been hearing is that they are affecting

scores.

When I worked for the cable company I was told ONLY WHEN ASKED BY THE CUSTOMER "will this affect my credit score?" The company told us to tell them. "Any check on a credit score will affect your rating". They told us that credit checks done by us do affect credit.

They may be required to be coded differently but it seems they are not being done correctly.

[unblock]

4. that sounds like a company lawyer's response.

they may not want to be making a whole lot of promises to customers, just in case some programmer screws up.

but i do believe those pulls are not supposed to affect credit scores, and can be challenged.

[Justice wanted]

7. I do understand what you are saying that it isn't suppose to affect credit but I'm saying companies

may not be setting things up right and perhaps people should be looking at things that can be challanged on their credit scores.


That just it. IF a computer programmer screws up OR if the company didn't have the check set up right IT still is affecting people negatively and shouldn't.

I'm just saying we need congress to protect us because it seems Corporate America has the American people by the throat and is using a stupid score to decide who and what they are.

It kind of reminds me of the Company Town from the 1900s (I live in an area of PA where serveral towns started as company towns.) The company owned the houses stores and was your employer. You ended up indebt to that company and almost slave labor to them.

I'm just saying credit scores are in a sense becoming nooses around peoples necks. What companies are SUPPOSE to do and WHAT THEY ACTUALLY DO seem to be two different things in this country and perhaps they aren't doing what they are suppose to do.

How does one make a challange to a check affecting your score is done?

[unblock]

8. i agree that credit scores are chock full of errors and the accuracy standards suck

basically, anyone can post negative information about anyone. it helps if you're a merchant or lender, but if you're willing to pay for a setup with one or all of the credit bureaus, they just take whatever information you give them (as long as it's formatted properly).

victims of any incorrect information are not notified, so unless they do their own pull and notice the error(s), they're in the dark until it noticeably affects their ability to borrow (or other situations as noted in the o.p.).

if you do notice an error, you can contact the relevant credit bureau(s) and ask that the incorrect information be removed. generally, they ask the merchant for supporting data and if the merchant fails to respond (i believe they have 30 days) then the information is removed.

however, sometimes it is a challenge. i became familiar with wasilla, alaska long before anyone heard of sarah palin because someone reported my address as being from there (id theft; i've never even been to alaska). it took years for them to remove it, they claimed that they didn't have to because it's not "negative" information. but they do.

[Justice wanted]

10. This is why I posted this. Credit checks shouldn't affect people but they are. Credit Reports

should not be allowed to be used by potential employers (This is my belief.) A score has nothing to do with what type of person or what type of employee a person is.


Last year I almost died. I was in the hospital for a month took two and 1/2 months of home rest to recover.

I didn't have insurance --could afford it--so the hospital-wanting to get paid- helped me get Medicaid coverage to help with the bills.

First off I had to call 2 companies 3 different times with the medicaid number than I get a letter saying that I've been put in collections. HOW can I be put in collections when I check with medicaid and EVERYTHING is STILL pending?


So I'm saying the system is broke and needs to be changed.

We should not be slaves to a number.

[unblock]

28. yowza, hope all the medical problems are behind you.

i had medical problems years ago due to a car accident.

whenever i got a bill, i sent it to my lawyer, who sent them a letter saying that a lawsuit was pending and a settlement was expected (i was a passenger in a cab that stalled out in the middle lane of an interstate at night and we were read-ended. no way i'm losing that battle). they were all happy with that and they all eventually got paid in full (very little leftover for me after reimbursing doctors, lawyers, and insurance, but at least i wasn't out of pocket beyond loss of income for being out of work for a few months.


saying the system is broke is almost too generous, because it kinda implies that it once worked. the credit scoring system has never been intended to be any form of justice relative to individuals. it was designed to work in the aggregate from the lenders' point of view. individual errors are too small for lenders to care about.

[Justice wanted]

29. Thank you.

[ashling]

9. I was talking to a mortgage guy

he told me that they are not supposed to affect your score, but if your score id "sketchy" or "on the edge" it may very well affect. Just like everything else, the less money you have, the more you have to pay. So I start out with an expectation that my interest rate will be higher and on top of that my credit score is affected so it goes higher. My wife tried to check on refinancing the car online. Her computer or something was wrong and so it got hung up. She called the bank and they said that they would just deny it and toi run it again right then. Then it turns out that we have 2 credit dings and the bank says that the second time it went through they had to deny it because the other was still pending.

So if you try to do what you can to downsize and lower your expenses you are just SOL. Its called capitalism - at least that's the way capitalism works in the good ole' USA.

[Ruby the Liberal]

3. Credit scoring isn't that black and white.

If your credit is repeatedly checked by people who send you unsolicited credit offers, that is no ding, but if you initiate requests for credit, it is. Same for employers checks, utility checks, etc - not you initiating, so no adverse effect.

Same difference when looking to buy or refinance a house. If you start making requests, those are negative UNTIL you complete the transaction, then they are noted as 'rate shopping'.

Credit also looks at outstanding credit vs credit limits - so yes, closing unused credit cards can have an adverse effect on that ratio. I have one card with a $15,000 limit that I haven't used in 5 years, but will not close for that reason - it does help that portion of the score.

Late payments (and missed payments) will kill a credit score in a nano-second. Faster than you can say "what happened", but changing apartments (or jobs) and their related checks do not factor in.

[Justice wanted]

6. Yes, I realize late payment and missed payment affect credit BUT The first example I gave of my

friend this guy never missed a payment in fact he was ALWAYS early with payments.

When I worked with customer service Capital One account we where told someone having a credit card and not using it will affect credit scores as well.

I'm just telling you what I was told by my employers and by my friend. Utility checks/cable checks do affect credit ratings. THEY ARE NOT SUPPOSE to but I am seeing that they are.


This is the infomation I know. I am seeing a lot of friends who credit ratings are being affected by things you didn't think would affect credit ratings

BESIDES answer me this WHAT REASON SHOULD an employer check someone's credit rating WHEN if that employee was going to be working with money or something like that they can do a criminal check--which I had done working with mentally challanged and disabled people.

[bluesbassman]

11. Sorry, but there is no possible way a FICO score would move 650 points due to inquiries.

Something else transpired to do that. I work with credit reports as a routine part of my job. I've seen many reports with multiple inquiries. Movement of 40 points tops. To get down to a 200 FICO there would have to be late payments, and a major derogatory event like foreclosure or bankruptcy.

BTW, I do agree with you that employers shouldn't be using credit checks for employment, just too much can be in error on these reports.

[Justice wanted]

16. He can't image what else other than inquieres did that. He was always on time with payments-usually

EARLY and he had no other debt.


When his employer did his check it came back 200. Now this is a man who checks his own scores 3 times a year basically every 4 months. The last check was 850 before the divorce . NEVER declared banruptcy, never had anything Repoed Never had a late payment OR even non payment.

[bluesbassman]

22. Something is certainly wrong then. He should contact the Credit Bureaus to investigate.

Seriously, I have reviewed thousands of credit reports in my career and I never seen one that low without some major deragatory information.

[Stargazer09]

80. A judgement against him, perhaps?

I know that some states will divide the debts between the spouses, and a judgement against the person with the higher income may be ordered by the court. That would probably cause a significant drop in the score. Has he requested copies of all of his credit reports since the divorce? There's got to be a reason for that large of a drop.

We've had a huge loss of income here, and I'm late on a lot of bills. My score is still around 600. Something major must have happened to drop your friend's score down to 200.

[tridim]

70. I had a foreclosure and owe a CC company about $1000..

(75% of which is fees and penalties BTW)

And my credit score is still at the high end of "poor".

I just got approved for a lease. According to the leasing agent, "poor credit" is the norm, she said most of her tenants have a foreclosure.

This guy probably had massive CC debts, like maybe $50 grand worth.

[unblock]

13. i'll agree that credit pulls for employment is a poor boss's crutch.

bureaucrats love quantifiable metrics, even if they're silly. great for covering your lazy decisions.

actual management is hard.

i can sorta kinda maybe understand it in a hiring situation. you've got so little to go on, many people can fake an interview, especially for fairly junior positions. interviewers are grasping at straws and this is a thin straw to grasp. but certainly, an employee of 15 years has an actual performance history that's far more valuable than anything a credit score can tell you.



i'm sure that some merchants get it wrong and do the pulls in a way that affects scores when they shouldn't. however, i also think people may think they're a victim of this when they're actually not, because it can be difficult to isolate the exact cause for a credit score to move. quite often, a pull from a utility doesn't happen in isolation. maybe you switch electric companies and your credit situation is otherwise virtually unchanged. but more often, when this happens, you've moved and there may be a number of factors affecting your score at the same time. so how much (if anything) is due to the utility pull and how much is due to other factors is hard to say.

[ashling]

12. unsolicited credit offers

that used to be illegal and still should be if it is not. It used to be that someone [strike through]had to[/strike tthrough] was supposed to have your permission to do a check on your credit.

[unblock]

15. unsolicited lenders are allowed to use a limited credit pull that doesn't affect your score

i don't know the details, but i think the idea is that they can ask for a batch of names and adresses within certain geographical and credit score range so they can prepare a marketing campaign to, say, residents of the southwest with credit scores between 620 and 680. they don't get a full credit report, i think it's just the contact information but then they know you're score is within the requested range, too.

[Ruby the Liberal]

26. You have the right to block them.

But it doesn't count against your score.

Only credit that you request does (and as mentioned, rate shopping on cars, mortgages, etc - are only temporary marks and then they are reclassified as rate shopping).

The only way to move a credit score by hundreds of points is failure to make payments, leins, bankruptcy, foreclosures, etc.

I know a lot of people say "all I did was" - but that may be because they are assuming how scoring works and didn't realize certain actions were score destroyers, so they don't mention it as they think it is irrelevant.

Things like paying cash for cars all ones life and never using a credit card are score 'destroyers' as well and can add up.

For a score to move hundreds of points, there is more to the story than what has been shared (and in many cases, too personal to share).

[ashling]

33. I'm not talking hundreds of points,

but it just galls me. They tell you that you will not be penalized for shopping for a good rate, etc. Then one thing is added to your credit - 2 applications for credit score - and our rates goes down a little. And the little things add up - or subtract, as it were.

[Ruby the Liberal]

36. Sorry - was referring to the original comments

that insinuated an 850-200 (650 drop) based on credit offers and utilities. It doesn't work that way.

As for rate shopping, that can ding you, but again - not even as much as if you continually paid cash (which is no indication of credit worthiness, they speak to savings discipline - but could also be inherited/unearned money).

[ashling]

43. What's the saying, if you owe the bank $150,000 they own you,

if you owe the bank $1,500,000 yow own the bank.

[Ruby the Liberal]

55. Yeah, it is - and when you have that kind of cash

they find ways of making your "interest rate" negligible for fear you will take your cash somewhere else.

[Fuddnik]

40. You can go to the FTC website and opt out of unsolicited offers.

My wife and I were getting 70-80 credit card solicitations per week. One week we got 25 from Citibank alone. The offers would fill up a shredder every week.

I went to the FTC website. It was simple. Now I get less than 2 a week. It also covers insurance solicitations.

[ashling]

46. I'll certainly follow up on that,

but the shame in the system is that its opt out and not opt in

[Liberal_in_LA]

5. double kick!!!

important stuff to know.

[joeglow3]

14. Great bullshit post

First of all, someone is NOT going to see their credit score drop 650 points for the things you listed. Second reason that claim is impossible: the lowest credit score you can have is 300.

So you claim this person had the highest possible score (850) and dropped 100 points below the minimum because people checked his credit.

At least check if the things you are making up are even possible.

[Justice wanted]

18. I AM NOT MAKING THING UP!

[joeglow3]

27. Yeah. He went from 100% perfect score to the only person 100 points below the minimum.

[REP]

62. No, but this story is wrong or missing MAJOR details

Friend of a friend stories are like games of Telephone - things get lost.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

77. "I AM NOT MAKING THING UP!"

May I steal that line?

[sibelian]

83. No fair!

We should share it amongst the brethren equally.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

86. I will gladly

rent it or lease it.

[guardian]

32. I agree

that the OP is a bullshit post. Basically urban myth and hysteria.

Regarding the lowest score. The OP doesn't specify WHICH credit score: FICO, TransUnion, Equifax, or Experian. They all have different ranges and can be different.

[joeglow3]

37. My understanding is that all 3 use the same basic FICO model

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_score_(United_States)

[guardian]

42. I think there are some differences.

Equifax score ranges from 280 to 850. Is calculated slightly differently than the standard FICO Score
Equifax calls the FICO score the BEACON Score

Experian Score ranges from 330 to 830. The FICO score is often called the Experian/Fair Isaac Risk score.

TransUnion uses the standard FICO scoring system, also called EMPIRICA.

FICO score range is from 300 to 850


To my knowledge though....NONE have a valid low score range of 200 as claimed in the OP.

[Egalitarian Thug]

50. While the poster, or the poster's friend, obviously got the numbers wrong,

that does not negate their point in any way. Neither you nor any of the other naysayers in this thread know how credit ratings work because they are "proprietary intellectual property" and therefore secret and protected by both U.S. law and international treaty.

Sure, you get a vague "do as you're told and we will raise your rate" guideline, but that is not knowing how it works.

[joeglow3]

87. We know the poster was discussing the impact of credit checks

FICO has stated that roughly 10% of your credit score is effected by credit checks. Thus, his post is BS.

YOU are trying to change the point of the topic, even though someone else started it.

[Control-Z]

17. There is a woman

whose full name is one letter different than mine. At first glance even I thought it was my name. Her bad credit has been on my credit rating for years. They tried to repo a car from me I didn't even own. It was hers, but the repo guy didn't believe me and threatened me to the point of hysterics on my part. Even the IRS has sent inquiries about her SS number which is different, of course. I haven't had problems with IRS since I filled out the proper paper work for them but I'll be damned if I can get her off my credit report. My report actually shows me as having two different SS numbers. One is mine. One is hers. And her unpaid student loans are in the neighborhood of 90,000.00.

Periodically I make a new effort to rid myself of her. Call her creditors. Call her collections agencies. Report it to the credit rating agencies...But I've pretty much given up. The first repo call came just after I had given birth to my 18 yo daughter. That is how long I've been trying. So thoroughly effed up.

[Justice wanted]

19. hmmm, Maybe this is something my friend should into if someone has a name similar to him OR

perhaps a close Social Security number. It might explained the PLUNGE everyone is CLAIMING I"M LYING ABOUT.

[slackmaster]

20. I hate seeing threads like this that spread misinformation.

Only credit checks made pursuant to credit applications submitted by you as a consumer have any effect on your credit scores.

http://www.myfico.com/crediteducation/creditinquiries.aspx

[Justice wanted]

21. I am not misinforming people. Your credit score is affecting you more than you THINK!

[bighart]

24. I am sure my credit score impacts much more than I am aware of,

but unless you can site specifics to refute the facts posted in response to your claims, you are indeed misinforming people.
For example if the lowest possible FICO score is indeed 300 and yet you say your friends dropped to 200. That is a known factual error and if that is incorrect, how much more of your op is also incorrect?

[slackmaster]

25. I'm very well aware of how Bank of America has messed up my credit scores through false reporting

I've been actively fighting them for several months. I've spent about $5,000 on legal fees, and I still have derogatory information on my credit files for a Visa card that I never consented to be responsible for, have never used, and has been written off because the real borrower filed Chapter 13 bankruptcy.

Don't try to tell me I don't know about credit reports, credit scores, and how they affect a person's reputation, or what I think.

BTW, I've given this thread a DU Rec just because there is no Unrec feature.

[REP]

64. The story you're telling is missing details and is wrong in others

1) A perfect score of 850? Really? An absolutely perfect score.

2) Lowest credit score is 300, not 200

3) Credit checks don't lower your score 650 points

[WhollyHeretic]

23. That is not how credit scores work. First there is a difference between hard and soft credit checks

Most of those you listed are soft so they do not affect your score. Even if they were all hard they would not affect your score that much. My wife and I have about 6 hard checks on our report right now due to buying a house, car, and furniture in a short period of time. It did ding our credit by 40 points. The only thing that would lower your score by hundreds of points is defaulting a a bunch of stuff.

That said I don't think companies should be allowed to require credit checks. It's more punish the poor bullshit.

[jimlup]

30. I have no data to back this up but I strongly suspect that credit ratings are

a great example of capitalism run a-muck.

[slackmaster]

34. Not Capitalism. The problem is Fascism.

The weak consumer protection laws like the Fair Credit Reporting Act have given the credit reporting agencies status worthy of unbiased public entities. The laws serve mainly to ensure that lenders like the big banks can put whatever they want in peoples' credit files. The dispute, investigation, and re-investigation processes that are supposed to protect people from abuses by the corporations are basically cruel jokes - Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion basically do whatever the banks tell them to do.

Your ultimate recourse as a consumer is to sue a lender who intentionally or negligently reports incorrect information and refuses to cooperate with you. How many of us can realistically afford to litigate against a company like Bank of America?

[magic59]

82. Corporate and state rule

= Fascism and that is exactly what we have become, a fascist state.

[Horse with no Name]

31. I agree. There is also a very insidious use here as well

which I haven't seen anyone else note.

When a potential employer checks your credit, then your current employer has access to that information. Okay if you get the job...not okay if you don't.

Also...it can let competing employers know who else is interested in you.

Can also let your credit card companies know that are looking to change jobs and alert them to an instability in your work record.

These credit scores are out of control.

People that are creditworthy don't always have good scores and people that have good scores aren't always creditworthy.

[guardian]

35. The OP is urban myth and hysteria

This is either completely made up, or your friends are not telling you the whole truth.

Regarding the repo. The fact that neither your husband nor you couldn't figure out how to pay your bills is NOT the credit company or the loan company's fault. YOU didn't pay your bills. The reason is irrelevant. Take responsibility for your actions and stop blaming others.

[REP]

61. Pretty much. 850 score, for one, is suspicious; 850 to 200 from score being alone pulled is fantasy

800+ scores don't just go down like that without foreclosure, bankruptcy, etc. A credit check sure as hell won't do it.

- someone who actually has an 800+ score

[SoCalDem]

38. Divorce itself can be a major "event" that affects credit scores

credit ratings are a pain in the ass for most people, but are with us forever, it seems.

Our own credit rating took a hit because we have only ONE credit card which we pay in full each month and we finance nothing but what we still owe on our house.

[bl968]

39. Hello Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Sounds like a job for the good folks at the CFPB > Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. A rule prohibiting the penalizing of individual credit scores based on the fact that a credit check was issued is needed.

[slackmaster]

44. Such a rule already exists. See § 614 of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

§ 614. Restrictions on investigative consumer reports [15 U.S.C. § 1681l]
Whenever a consumer reporting agency prepares an investigative consumer report, no adverse information in the consumer report (other than information which is a matter of public record) may be included in a subsequent consumer report unless such adverse information has been verified in the process of making such subsequent consumer report, or the adverse information was received within the three-month period preceding the date the subsequent report is furnished.

[FarCenter]

41. If employers didn't find useful information, they would not pay to do the credit check

So clearly they do find out things that help them better select candidates to hire for jobs.

Your credit score is an indicator of how financially responsible you are, and a person who is irresponsible in one aspect of their life is likely to be irresponsible in other aspects.

[guardian]

48. "irresponsible in one aspect of their life is likely to be irresponsible in other aspects"

I find this to be true. As a landlord I pull credit checks as well as criminal background checks on prospective tenants. It is common for people with bad credit often to have criminal histories and poor rental history/evictions.

I find that people who will stiff the cell phone company or the electric company for a few hundred bucks will have no compunction about stiffing me for rent or damages.

I'd rather have a vacant unit than a problem tenant.

[magical thyme]

56. and for financial companies, a good credit rating is an indication of "something left to lose"

I applied to a financial firm a couple years ago for a phone support job. They fear that somebody with a bad credit rating is more likely to become desperate enough to try something desperate. We were (I worked there for a year while in school) handling personal investment accounts sometimes worth millions and even billions, with full access to their client's identities when processing transactions for their funds.

I processed the transaction for a famous teevee doctor once (not Dr. Oz, a different famous one). He was leaving my investment company for another one. I was extremely gracious. I think it annoyed the account rep who was getting his business. He thought he was going to make me feel bad. I disliked the company I supported, though, so I was secretly laughing at their loss.

[blackspade]

57. Then maybe it would be wise for all potential employees to do a credit check

on their potential employers as well.

There might be useful info that might indicate what kind of problems the company has.

[FarCenter]

59. That's a very good idea

You need to carefully check out the organization, plus the person you will be reporting to and that person's manager (two levels!).

[guardian]

66. Maybe not?

It is certainly a good idea to investigate a company that you want to work for. Check with BBB or Dun & Bradstreet. Though a D&B report will cost a couple hundred bucks. Though many small businesses don't belong to BBB or have a current DUNS. You are probably better off just searching the internet, Linkedin and the like if a smaller business. If the company is publicly traded then there should be plenty of free info available. Review the financials from the SEC filing if you feel you can understand the data.

As far as running a personal credit report on your boss....I think that would be detrimental to your being hired. First, you need a person's written approval to legally run a credit report. I doubt you'll get it and probably kill your chance of being hired if you ask for it. Secondly, you'll have to apply to and join a credit check company who will first verify who you are, and verify that you have a legitimate reason to run credit checks on people. By law you cannot just "run a credit report" on another person without permission and a good reason. I'm not sure wanting to check out a future employer would qualify as a legally valid reason. Then you'll have to pay a fee to run a check once accepted and verified with a credit check service.

Then there are reporting requirements if you turned down an applicant (in this case the employer by not accepting the job) where you are legally bound to send a formal notice of declining the applicant based on information in the credit report.

[blackspade]

74. Well thanks!

It's nice to know that the rules were written for the benefit of people/companies with power over others.
The rest of us have to have "permission and a good reason."

The whole 'credit check' industry is a racket.

[guardian]

78. I don't disagree.

I'm just interjecting how the current system is set up.

[Zalatix]

67. Nice job pissing on the working class there.

Employers get scammed all the time. The credit check for employment concept is a scam. Your credit score is NOT an indicator of who you are as a worker. Lots of people work hard to rescue their credit score and to pay off bills.

At least here in California we have shut a lot of that employment credit check bullshit down.

http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2011/12/28/california-to-restrict-credit-checks-in-hiring/

[rucky]

75. Your credit score is an indicator of how valuable you are to a creditor.

It does not take into account responsible people in unfortunate circumstances.

It wasn't designed to be a measure of overall character, and it shouldn't be used that way.

[LanternWaste]

84. I imagine Bernie Madoff and Ken Lay had outstanding credit ratings...

"Your credit score is an indicator of how financially responsible you are..."

I imagine Bernie Madoff and Ken Lay had outstanding credit ratings...

[Indykatie]

45. While I agree that Credit Checks are a Problem, OP is Incorrect on One Point

Inquiries made to a person's credit history that are NOT related to a consumer loan (car, personal, mortgage, store credit etc) do not negatively impact a person's score. These other types of inquiries can include things like utilities. car insurance, apartment rentals etc. Our credit scores have a big impact on car insurance rates which many folks may not know. This is an area where there has been all kinds of abuse and one that hopefully will begin to get more attention.

[Egalitarian Thug]

47. How about either requiring credit rating agencies to publicize their criteria

and to liable for their mistakes, or simply outlawing them?
K&R

[slackmaster]

49. Their criteria are published and well-documented. Their specific algorithms are proprietary.

Secret Sauce.

The biggest problem with the system IMO is that the playing field is not level. You as a consumer have almost no say in what goes into your credit history files. Getting false information corrected or removed can be extremely difficult.

[Egalitarian Thug]

51. No they aren't. What is "public information" are vague guidelines with no specific

criteria. But, we're quibbling over semantics and essentially agree on the main point.

Making them liable for their mistakes and the damages they cause would go a long way to correcting this scam. Outlawing them altogether would not only solve this issue, but would also make being "too big to fail" much more difficult, if not impossible.

[slackmaster]

53. The courts have ruled that credit agencies and lenders CAN have private actions brought against them

...for damages, in addition to regulatory penalties that can be assessed by the courts at both the state and federal levels.

The PROBLEM in practice is that few of us can afford the up-front cost of litigating against a big bank, or one of the credit reporting agencies. Or to put it another way, you have to be able to prove some very substantial damages before it's worth pursuing.

In my case, I've only been able to definitively document about $10,000 - $20,000 in actual damages caused by Bank of America's ongoing false credit reporting. Specifically, I was denied premium terms on a refinance loan that I applied for in January. The difference in costs and interest that I would see over the life of the loan would be no more than $20 K, so it's not worth the risk for me to put up a $50 K retainer to hire a good law firm to go after BOA. I didn't bother with the loan BTW, because I may have my credit fully cleaned up within a year or two and wouldn't want to have refinanced only to have to do it again.

I've been screwed, and there isn't much I can do about it at this point besides keeping the pressure on BOA. I have escalated complaints to the Federal Trade Commission and the California Attorney General over the last two weeks. That doesn't cost anything, but the probability of me getting what I want seems low.

[Egalitarian Thug]

63. I've been down that road myself, I can certainly understand your dilemma.

There is a big difference between allowing a civil suit to be filed and a law that places the onus on the agencies themselves. And even with such a law, we often find that law enforcement is often reluctant to enforce it against Big Money.

I think our situations are both very common and indicative of the difficulty we have in reigning in this monstrosity. My beef with the credit reporting agencies was secondary to the outright fraud committed by Citigroup to the tune of about $500K. And just as you have found, buying justice is far too expensive for most of us (especially when they take all your money). The NY AG (Spitzer's office) agreed that they broke the law and caused me significant harm (ruined me, actually), but in the end they "declined to pursue my case" because Citi is huge and I'm just me.

[slackmaster]

65. Bank of America is clearly in violation of the California Civil Code in my case, but I doubt...

...that the AG will do anything substantial about it.

The State of California contracts with BOA to disburse all government benefits, including AFDC, WIC, unemployment, and state disability payouts. I wouldn't be surprised if they also handle compensation for state employees.

With that kind of relationship, there must have been some mutual hand-washing between the bank and the highest levels of government. BOA must realize millions of dollars per day in float on unemployment insurance payouts alone.

[Egalitarian Thug]

89. I'm afraid you can "bank" on it. Too many of "our" representatives have made fortunes

through questionable connections to these thieves to ever allow broad investigations. Sorry to welcome you to the club.

[slackmaster]

90. The worst case for me is the fraudulent derogatory credit ages off

When I'm 61 years old.

[Major Hogwash]

52. Orange Julius used to play for the 76ers.

IBTL.

[KansDem]

54. I've often wondered why a credit check negatively affects the credit score.

What's the reasoning?

[slackmaster]

58. People who have made numerous application for credit are statistically a bit more likely to default

...in the future than are people who have not made numerous applications for credit. But that has nothing whatsoever to do with credit checks done for pre-employment screening, which DO NOT affect your scores.

[KansDem]

79. Thanks

[REP]

60. You don't go from 850 to 200 from having your credit score pulled

I actually have an 800+ score. And I recently bought a house. So my score got pulled pretty often. Guess what? It went UP.

[NCTraveler]

68. I run credit ratings every day. The op is bs.

A detailed credit report gives you a good idea of a persons ability to pay monthly bills. You cannot look at a score alone. Very few people do anymore. You have to look at the details of the credit report and the persons circumstances. Credit reviews are invaluable. Many banks don't even look at the score anymore. My business would be almost impossible if it weren't for the ability to pull credit history.

[Justice wanted]

69. YOU KNOW FOR ALL THOSE PEOPLE WHO CLAIM I AM TALKING OUT OF MY ASS I WILL TELL YOU

THE TRUTH WILL COME OUT AND PROVE I AM NOT LYING!!!!!


When I worked for the cable company on the national division I would have people who called couldn't complete there set up over the phone so the infomation would get "encrypted" Which basically kept the infomation from getting saved. And some of the information that was saved would basically not allowed to be used by us again we could only reference it as they did try to start an account but did not finish it!


MORE THAN ONE Time I see where a customer started to set up services credit check was done it read no pre-payment or make a deposit YET for whatever reason they couldn't schedule an appointment IF THE APPOINTMENT WASN"T SET we couldn't hold infomation.


Lots of times they call back within a few hours or a few days later and I SAW FOR MY FUCKIN SELF THE CREDIT RATING CHANGING!!!!

I spoke to a person who Had a score of Green go to yellow. AND they gave us the ratings for their color code.

850-700 Green

699 - 500 Yellow (9 times out of ten had to pre-pay and in some case make a deposit as well.)

499- Below Red Prepayment with Credit card or reoccuring payment deposit and prepayment.

RED ALERT Possible fraud or the some other reason --Never had credit or new to the country

They had to go to a store to set everything up!

In some of these reasons You'd go into the local account services system you pull up the address with gave the name of the last person who tried to set up the account and GREEN YELLOW, RED. NOW HOW THE HELL DOES SOMEONE TRY TO SET UP AN ACCOUNT ON FRIDAY BUT CAN"T COMPLETE IT CALLS IN ON SATURDAY - THE VERY NEXT DAY-TO SET EVERYTHING UP GO FROM GREEN TO YELLOW?!

BUT PLEASE CALL ME A LIAR THIS TRUTH WILL COME OUT AND YOU WILL HAVE THIS POST PROVING I AM RIGHT!

[REP]

71. I used to work Credit and Collections for SWBell. Credit reports don't work that way.

They really don't.

[guardian]

72. RE post 69: "I AM TALKING OUT OF MY ASS"

I couldn't have said it better myself.

I have no idea how your company internal process works. But apparently it has little to do with actual credit reports. Still doesn't change the fact that the OP has about as much veracity as saying the moon is made of green cheese.

Your example of 'proof' doesn't support the OP either. Okay a person had a score go from green to yellow. Maybe their score went from 700 to 699. That I can believe. But 850 to (a non-existent) 200 is not believable.

Apparently you cannot understand the difference between a one point drop and a 650 point drop based on your question of "NOW HOW THE HELL DOES .... GO FROM GREEN TO YELLOW?! "

[slackmaster]

76. Sounds like post hoc ergo propter hoc

Is it possible that there were other things going on in those peoples' lives besides having trouble setting up cable service? I mean things that might actually affect their credit scores, such as applying for loans, closing out credit card accounts, etc.

[lumberjack_jeff]

81. This thread is exemplary of something I see often.

So long as the basic premise is defensible ("credit scores aren't a useful or just measure of an employees worth&quot then inventing facts in support of this premise is justifiable.

[napoleon_in_rags]

73. Its definitely a reflection of the power the private sector can wield.

The scary thing is not about legitimate debts and defaults being reported to others, its that the whole system is controlled by private individuals who can basically say whatever they want.

My job title was misrepresented on my credit report for a long time, as something like "forced to live at home", which I don't understand. It was never my job title. As an outspoken progressive, I have to wonder if this little mistake isn't there for a reason, (Its supposed to imply I'm living in mom's basement or something? I'm not.) and because the system is outside of government, what rights do I have about what they choose to report about me?

You get these little flashes about the terrible power of an unregulated private sector, and that's why I'm a Dem. Reporting people's credit worthiness is a useful part of a functional society that practices lending, but when you see hints of a system for sale and subject to lies and distortions to satisfy third party interests, the potential evil of the thing becomes clear.

[mainer]

85. I pay for monthly credit reports on myself

as a protection against identity theft. Does that affect my credit score?

[Left Coast2020]

88. Get it out of employment...Period!!

Its discrimination. People who read these things based on employment may not be qualified to judge someone who may be VERY qualified for a position.