| FICO 2008 is more evidence that changes will be made not to help consumers establish and re-establish credit but rather to continue to long-term punish those who fall on hard times, to look the other way when it comes to poor and iacurate credit reporting, and to reward those who creditors can make a fortune off of by giving them a shiny gold star. Sadly a real gold star can be had a cheaper price. |
|
| Above Posted By:
Jason
| Sun, 13 Jul 2008 17:10:52 EST |
| Common Sense, I respectfully disagree. If you keep everything separate, then one person will likely carry the bulk of the credit load. I recommend a mixture of separate and joint cards.
On the piggybacking issue, it always come back to consumer harm. Will it harm consumers to have to build credit through a secured card first, where people have to save some money before they start using credit. This is a great debate. I think this has the opportunity to teach young people about credit if they can't start by using the auth user route.
Education is the key. |
|
| Above Posted By:
Andy
| Fri, 27 Jun 2008 12:11:29 EST |
| Someone is going to have to explain to me what’s so bad about piggybacking on someone else’s credit!! My mom did this for me several years ago, and I was over 700 by the time I was 21. I was later able to help my husband boost his credit score the same way. This is BS! My credit history is going to drop from being 12 years old to something like 4. I guess I should be thankful I’m not going to need another car loan or mortgage for a few years. |
|
| Above Posted By:
POed
| Fri, 23 May 2008 06:45:15 EST |
| Fair Issac is a joke. I got my first credit card in 1967, FICO says 1986, so I don't get as much added to my score. I have paid off 15 cars, 3 houses, and many store credit cards (Sears, Penny's, Mervyn's, Dillards, Neiman Marcus, and other local ones. I pay my credit card balance completely each month so I never carry a balance except during the month between bills (no interest payments). That penalizes me also. They need to have some way to look at the past history and give a lot of credit for ALWAYS paying on time and completely paying off mortgages and car loans. My credit score should be 850 because I have never, since 1967 paid late, paid less that due (often I paid more than due) and as I mentioned above, have paid off multiple loans. I would venture to guess that Warren Buffett and Bill Gates don't have a score of 850 either because they probably don't ever use credit. The FICO is a joke. |
|
| Above Posted By:
Chuck
| Mon, 5 May 2008 10:34:49 EST |
| .the working people of this country suffer over how unfair fico scoring is.you pay collections and charge offs and they start the date over like it just happened how can you make things better with your credit if the rules keep changing. paying your debt when you find out its on your report and you get punished for paying past due debt,were is the incentive to pay.fico is not for the consumer they are for big companies buying there scoring system's they are allowed to report anything on your report that they say is verified by people that buy there products. this a game to them. When you pay your debts and still get treated this way why should you pay, you still have to wait 7 years from the date is was reported oh i forgot fico likes to reset the clock from that payment so it stays on your report for another 7 years ,last date of activity .Were is the truth who is being unfair here.Is all this for money for interest rates or does fico think that its OK to hurt peoples credit intentionally. Who in there rite mind would ever reset a clock after a debt has Benn paid?this is flat out wrong.I believe its all about money and big companys.this fico system is severely flawed and definitely needs improving were is the FTC who the heck is defending the consumer. |
|
| Above Posted By:
jenifer
| Sun, 6 Apr 2008 00:14:05 EST |
| I think it should be illegal for medical collection to report on your credit report also companies selling out to other collection agency. They should have to report the orignal companies name & contact # and the orignal date of service the orignal date account was opened and the orignal last transaction date . Because the way they report now people will never be able to improve their credit scores so they can get better interest rates. medical bills is something that can't be helped. also these creditors should only be able to contact you by mail no phone calls should be allowed. |
|
| Above Posted By:
anonymous
| Fri, 14 Mar 2008 09:55:04 EST |
| fico score should only effect some one who has multiple late payments each month and several accounts. for collections and charge offs if they are paid in full and the consumer sends in a paid in full letter then they should be deleted only because they do not have a recurring balance once they are paid.the judgements should be deleted as well and score should only drop only a minimum of 15 points for any of those accounts i listed. the credit agencies are wrong for not helping the consumer when we pay money every time we want to order our reports, such a rip off. they are taking money from us but will not help us make ammends. |
|
| Above Posted By:
aneatraaz
| Wed, 27 Feb 2008 18:35:06 EST |
| FICO 08 has not happened yet.
Authorized Users are still impacting the credit score!!!!
|
|
| Above Posted By:
joseph
| Fri, 22 Feb 2008 07:00:39 EST |
| A Major concern today is Hospitals and Medical offices, who choose not to do their own billing after payment arrangements are set up. They turn them over to collecion companys to collect the payments and therefore turning a "Arranged Payment Plan", now into a Collection even when payments are received on time, it show the client paying on a collection payment, Not a "Arranged Payment Plan". A collection even when paid can lower the FICO score dramtically. I think the Collection Companies should be Held to A Higher Reporting Standard. It is a shame that they can get buy with reporting this way. Any help with this matter is very much appreciated. |
|
| Above Posted By:
Sherri
| Mon, 18 Feb 2008 12:11:33 EST |
| As the CEO of Mortgage123.com, I see hundreds of credit reports. One major contribution to a borrower's credit score (FICO), is the ratio of actual balances to credit limits. I believe they call this "credit availability", and of course having access to credit is certainly better than having no credit availability.
I believe Fair Isaac, and I will be writing to them about this issue, inaccurately scores homeowners that have negative amortization loans. Fair Isaac scores are negatively impacted when an account is "maxed out" - when their is no available credit left on an account and that makes sense.
But consider homeowners with negative amortization mortgages. When a homeowner actually uses the negative amortization feature provided to them (and some actually use neg am effectively), they now show a balance greater then the original amount borrowed. The amount they are negative is then deducted from the available credit they may have to determine their "credit availablility".
It is my contention that if lenders allow negative amortization on a mortgage, the available amount of negative amortization allowed should be added to the available balance. Currently it is not calculated that way. If a lender allows a borrower to go negative up to 125% of the original loan amount how is that any different than a borrower that has a home equity line of credit?
Here's an example: Say a borrower takes out a $200,000 neg am loan. The allowable negative amortization is capped at 125% of the original balance (this is typical although some states like New York have lower limitations). This means that the balance of the loan can actually go all the way to $250,000. But as the borrower dips into that available negative amortization, the "high credit limit" will stay at $200,000. As the actual balance exceeds $200,000, the borrower score is negatively impacted. That same borrower, had he a $50,000 HELOC instead of a negative amortization loan, he would have quite a bit of available credit which would hlep his credit score. One hurts the score, one helps the score. This is an imbalance which needs correction.
Fair Isaac needs to revise FICO 08 to include negative amortization as "available balance". In this way, those homeowners that seek to get out of their negative amortization loans will have an easier time in doing so. |
|
| Above Posted By:
Ron Borg
| Thu, 24 Jan 2008 08:26:34 EST |
| Concerning FICO the system should have a major over haul to help those for example who have paid off collections these account should be deleted within a year in which a person could see an increase in ther FICO Score. Also this is an incentive for a person to pay off bills if they feel that the system will give the creditor justice for makinng the arrangements to clear up the debt. |
|
| Above Posted By:
Red
| Sat, 19 Jan 2008 10:58:34 EST |
| Tracy:
There is a difference between a "hard" pull and "soft" pull on your credit report. What you are describing is when a company looks at your credit report to determine if they want to spam you with offers. This does not affect your credit score. A hard pull (which does affect your score) is in response to some action on your part (i.e. applying for credit, rental verification, utility bill verification etc.). Also, these hard pulls stay on your report for about 6 months and then fall off. A typical hard pull deduction to your credit score is around five points. So, don't worry about soft pulls they are not hurting you.
Just remember to use your credit wisely, pay bills on time, don't go crazy applying for credit, and shop safely online.
Regards, Z |
|
| Above Posted By:
JZ
| Mon, 14 Jan 2008 10:42:35 EST |
| I think that they need to do something about companies who are debt collectors who sell out to other debt collectors making it look like you have multiple collections when in fact it is the same original bill. This not only hurts your credit score by the multiple charges but keeps the same old debt from "falling off" as now it appears to be a new debt.
It is alos like chasing your tail when you go to pay off that debt. It takes foreever to get it corrected. Not fair to the consumer who would like to straighten up their credit. |
|
| Above Posted By:
MC
| Mon, 14 Jan 2008 08:09:21 EST |
| Hey Charles Perdue you dummie complainer you wrote:
"more bush adminstration corporate rascism blacks will feel it the most"
Idiots like you keep making these RASIST statements that hurt us Africian Americans.
I don't care about Bush but as Africian American that works hard to get ahead I don't need some LOSER like you saying we need special treatment because we get traeted unfairly.
This credit issue with FICO has to do with all of us so STOP trying to DIG OPEN OLD WOUNDS and pick yourself up and get strong and be a responsible adult. |
|
| Above Posted By:
No Excuses
| Sat, 12 Jan 2008 15:44:50 EST |
| They should also give credit to those people who have collection accounts but pay every penny. That should count for something. |
|
| Above Posted By:
tracey
| Thu, 10 Jan 2008 11:48:48 EST |
| My biggest complaint is when my credit score drops because too many companies that I have never authorized, have run my credit without telling me, in order to determine if they want to solicit my business. Why should that still be permitted. It should be against the law. |
|
| Above Posted By:
Ally Nichlas
| Wed, 9 Jan 2008 17:22:43 EST |
| I Don't think the Fico's should have such an impact until the credit bureau's clean up their act. There a collections reported 3 times for the same debt, duplicate accounts all over these credit reports with 1 digit in the account off but the payments and balances are the same. All this counts in the consumers total debt. Someone needs to hold these bureau's liable as their reports can make or break or break a dealand also affects the program and rate for these borrowers. Until this is done Fico's scores are not going to work |
|
| Above Posted By:
sue
| Wed, 9 Jan 2008 14:04:30 EST |
| Amen re: medical. My score dropped 35 points over $20 at a doc in the box. Ridiculous! Hospitals use 3rd party billers and collectors which no one has heard of. They said no error so no correction! |
|
| Above Posted By:
Was over 700
| Tue, 8 Jan 2008 11:57:42 EST |
| I hate the idea of being punished for buying a car for cash instead of financing it. No "mix" of credit for me. |
|
| Above Posted By:
Maria
| Tue, 8 Jan 2008 10:52:27 EST |
| I have to agree there are pros and , cons to the arm loan.
Not everyone is totally educated in pre home buying.
So I know what your thinking its the home buyers fault ,
right yes and no . The real problem is not being able to
refiance to do DTI or other credit conflicts.
The banks put these products out there based on market
needs. Now with over two million foreclosures . The home
owner and the lender both suffer a major loss. |
|
| Above Posted By:
charles
| Tue, 8 Jan 2008 10:28:01 EST |
| Why would anyone add their spouse to a credit facility simply because they are married? Each spouse should create and maintain a separate credit history. |
|
| Above Posted By:
Common Sense
| Tue, 8 Jan 2008 06:40:32 EST |
| Dear Fico,
Please stop taking hard working bill paying borrowers out of the A paper lending market because they may have a medical collection reporting from an unknown agency who doesn't even leave a phone number or address to even clear up the collection itself. Also, I think it's unfair to hit the borrower so hard just for having a couple minor collections when the other credit history is often times perfect. Please review the current policy and consider changes.
Respectfully,
Charles |
|
| Above Posted By:
Charles Perdue
| Tue, 8 Jan 2008 00:01:33 EST |
| more bush adminstration corporate rascism blacks will feel it the most |
|
| Above Posted By:
john
| Mon, 7 Jan 2008 22:57:22 EST |
Please fill out the form below to submit a comment.
