• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Major credit agencies adopt uniform credit score system

W

wyvrn

Lifer
usatoday article

So basically the score variance should only reflect differences in credit files, which will probably lead to one of the 3 companies going bankrupt, imo (the one with the consistently worst level of accuracy). And there are more points allocated, which means a finer grained rating that reflects the ever-increasing importance of this number to the economy.

It will be interesting to see what my new number is. I'm thinking about getting it tattooed on my head, for ease of use in applying for loans 🙂
 
That would be cool.

The sidebar seems to indicate that the new scores go up to 990? Or is it 1000? 1000 would make sense, 990 - not so much.
 
This is basically the big three credit bureaus trying to get a chunk of Fair Isaac's pie. It's not going to replace FICO, it's just competition.

Fair Isaac stock is down like 10% today because of this.

Viper GTS
 
..they need to improve reporting accuracy and personal access. we shouldn't have to pay anything to find out what our personal score is.
 
Originally posted by: IGBT
..they need to improve reporting accuracy and personal access. we shouldn't have to pay anything to find out what our personal score is.
Click to expand...
I wish i was the genius that thought up that racket...charge people to get a score that their whole possiblity of getting money to buy major purchases that can fluctuate throughout their lives and is made up "somehow" and its completely automated. I'd like to know how they justify their costs to lookup your score, but alas so long as credit beurus run the system not much can be done.
 
Originally posted by: Drakkon
Originally posted by: IGBT
..they need to improve reporting accuracy and personal access. we shouldn't have to pay anything to find out what our personal score is.
Click to expand...
I wish i was the genius that thought up that racket...charge people to get a score that their whole possiblity of getting money to buy major purchases that can fluctuate throughout their lives and is made up "somehow" and its completely automated. I'd like to know how they justify their costs to lookup your score, but alas so long as credit beurus run the system not much can be done.
Click to expand...

Well, they are the ones hosting and gathering all this information for everyone from banks to individuals to use. They have to be compensated somehow...
 
Originally posted by: Queasy

Well, they are the ones hosting and gathering all this information for everyone from banks to individuals to use. They have to be compensated somehow...
Click to expand...

Yup they are a business just like any other.

You're entitled to the contents, but I have no problem with them charging for scores.

Viper GTS
 
I still don't know why I need to spend $40 to learn my three credit scores, that seems excessive. I know we're entitled to a free credit report every year but I don't think that includes your credit score.
 
Originally posted by: Dunbar
I still don't know why I need to spend $40 to learn my three credit scores, that seems excessive. I know we're entitled to a free credit report every year but I don't think that includes your credit score.
Click to expand...

See my response above...
 
Originally posted by: FrankyJunior
We just got our credit scores and they weren't all that far off. Ranged from probably 720 to 770 or so...
Click to expand...
Let me verify that for accuracy. What is your social security number?
 
Originally posted by: Drakkon
Originally posted by: IGBT
..they need to improve reporting accuracy and personal access. we shouldn't have to pay anything to find out what our personal score is.
Click to expand...
I wish i was the genius that thought up that racket...charge people to get a score that their whole possiblity of getting money to buy major purchases that can fluctuate throughout their lives and is made up "somehow" and its completely automated. I'd like to know how they justify their costs to lookup your score, but alas so long as credit beurus run the system not much can be done.
Click to expand...

Not only that, but I wish that it wouldn't affect the rating to have it checked.

I can't believe how such a touchy system where seemingly everything affects it can have so much importance to us.
 
Originally posted by: Viper GTS
This is basically the big three credit bureaus trying to get a chunk of Fair Isaac's pie. It's not going to replace FICO, it's just competition.

Fair Isaac stock is down like 10% today because of this.

Viper GTS
Click to expand...

Correct.


A bit of clarification here. The 3 bureaus collect and complile the information from creditors for free, and only charge when the information is requested. Inaccuracies and disparities are usually caused by inaccurate reporting from the creditor(s), and usually not by the bureaus themselves (although occasionally they do mix or double-report some information -- we're talking about some big freakin' databases here). The bureaus actually employ representatives whose sole job is to encourage creditors to report their customers' data to them, as accuracy depends on proper and correct reporting by these creditors.

Lenders almost never get their credit reports directly from the big 3 bureaus themselves, but through a 3rd-party credit reporting agency that acquires, compiles, and scores each report. This move by the bureaus is an attempt to squeeze out those 3rd-party agencies and Fair Isaac. I don't expect it to be successful because it is a bald-faced attempt at collusion and clearly in violation of federal anti-trust laws. I expect the lawsuits to start rolling shorty.
 
Originally posted by: Injury
Originally posted by: Drakkon
Originally posted by: IGBT
..they need to improve reporting accuracy and personal access. we shouldn't have to pay anything to find out what our personal score is.
Click to expand...
I wish i was the genius that thought up that racket...charge people to get a score that their whole possiblity of getting money to buy major purchases that can fluctuate throughout their lives and is made up "somehow" and its completely automated. I'd like to know how they justify their costs to lookup your score, but alas so long as credit beurus run the system not much can be done.
Click to expand...
Not only that, but I wish that it wouldn't affect the rating to have it checked.

I can't believe how such a touchy system where seemingly everything affects it can have so much importance to us.
Click to expand...
Checking your own credit does not affect your score.
 
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Injury
Originally posted by: Drakkon
Originally posted by: IGBT
..they need to improve reporting accuracy and personal access. we shouldn't have to pay anything to find out what our personal score is.
Click to expand...
I wish i was the genius that thought up that racket...charge people to get a score that their whole possiblity of getting money to buy major purchases that can fluctuate throughout their lives and is made up "somehow" and its completely automated. I'd like to know how they justify their costs to lookup your score, but alas so long as credit beurus run the system not much can be done.
Click to expand...
Not only that, but I wish that it wouldn't affect the rating to have it checked.

I can't believe how such a touchy system where seemingly everything affects it can have so much importance to us.
Click to expand...
Checking your own credit does not affect your score.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but I keep hearing that if companies check your credit frequently enough it lowers your score. Is that incorrect?

Not that I need my score checked by companies on a regular basis... but just saying... I hear about all these stupid things that apparently affect if, and they might not be true, but you gotta wonder who thought up some of this stuff.
 
Originally posted by: Injury
Yeah, but I keep hearing that if companies check your credit frequently enough it lowers your score. Is that incorrect?

Not that I need my score checked by companies on a regular basis... but just saying... I hear about all these stupid things that apparently affect if, and they might not be true, but you gotta wonder who thought up some of this stuff.
Click to expand...
http://www.myfico.com/CreditEducation/FactsFallacies.aspx
Fallacy: My score will drop if I apply for new credit.
Fact: If it does, it probably won't drop much. If you apply for several credit cards within a short period of time, multiple requests for your credit report information (called ?inquiries?) will appear on your report. Looking for new credit can equate with higher risk, but most credit scores are not affected by multiple inquiries from auto or mortgage lenders within a short period of time. Typically, these are treated as a single inquiry and will have little impact on the credit score.
Click to expand...

Occasional inquiries on your credit (say one every few months) have virtually no effect on your score. Multiple inquiries within the same industry and in a short period of time (14-30 days) have almost no effect because it shows that you are just shopping around for the best deal. However, multiple inquiries for an extended period time do have a negative effect on your score (to a maximum of 10% of your score). There is a valid reason why this is so. It shows that the borrower is either a credit abuser trying to open multiple accounts from multiple lenders at the same time without the other lenders knowing about it (because of the lag time in reporting), or is being turned down repeatedly for reasons the borrower may be trying to hide and is desperate. My long experience in lending shows this to be true. For example, the customer may have had good credit, but is now desperately shopping for as much new credit as he can get because he lost his job and is facing financial disaster (which is also why balance-to-limit ratios on revolving accounts make up 30% of your score). It all makes sense when you realize that the primary purpose of the FICO score is to determine the applicant's likelihood of declaring bankruptcy and defaulting on their debts in the near future.
 
Originally posted by: Vic
Originally posted by: Injury
Yeah, but I keep hearing that if companies check your credit frequently enough it lowers your score. Is that incorrect?

Not that I need my score checked by companies on a regular basis... but just saying... I hear about all these stupid things that apparently affect if, and they might not be true, but you gotta wonder who thought up some of this stuff.
Click to expand...
http://www.myfico.com/CreditEducation/FactsFallacies.aspx
Fallacy: My score will drop if I apply for new credit.
Fact: If it does, it probably won't drop much. If you apply for several credit cards within a short period of time, multiple requests for your credit report information (called ?inquiries?) will appear on your report. Looking for new credit can equate with higher risk, but most credit scores are not affected by multiple inquiries from auto or mortgage lenders within a short period of time. Typically, these are treated as a single inquiry and will have little impact on the credit score.
Click to expand...

Occasional inquiries on your credit (say one every few months) have virtually no effect on your score. Multiple inquiries within the same industry and in a short period of time (14-30 days) have almost no effect because it shows that you are just shopping around for the best deal. However, multiple inquiries for an extended period time do have a negative effect on your score (to a maximum of 10% of your score). There is a valid reason why this is so. It shows that the borrower is either a credit abuser trying to open multiple accounts from multiple lenders at the same time without the other lenders knowing about it (because of the lag time in reporting), or is being turned down repeatedly for reasons the borrower may be trying to hide and is desperate. My long experience in lending shows this to be true. For example, the customer may have had good credit, but is now desperately shopping for as much new credit as he can get because he lost his job and is facing financial disaster (which is also why balance-to-limit ratios on revolving accounts make up 30% of your score). It all makes sense when you realize that the primary purpose of the FICO score is to determine the applicant's likelihood of declaring bankruptcy and defaulting on their debts in the near future.
Click to expand...

What's the ideal percenatage to carry, assuming it's not zero? Obviously, the lower the better, but what is the "bad ratio" percentage?
 
So is low balance to limit good or bad?
I've been taught "Get credit while you don't need it, because when you need it, noone will give it to you."
So I have about 30K combined limit on my CC's but I never carry a balance.
To me a CC is just a convenience but the only reason I would carry a balance and not pay it off every month is if I could not afford to do so, which hasn't happened yet.
So do banks think it's a sign of an impending financial hardship if you have credit and you aren't using it, or only if you have recently opened a lot of CC accounts? I've had this credit line for a few years now.
 
Originally posted by: blakeatwork
What's the ideal percenatage to carry, assuming it's not zero? Obviously, the lower the better, but what is the "bad ratio" percentage?
Click to expand...
Low balance to limit ratio is good. Ideal is zero, paying off your revolving accounts every month. "Bad" is owing more than 50%. That's when I really start to see a big difference in the scores. Near or over the limit is almost as bad as late payments (in fact, I've seen many people with low 600 scores purely due to high balances and never a late pay).
Banks think it's a sign of financial hardship if you have revolving credit and use it beyond your means to pay it back. In a way, credit can be like a temporary income, and many people avert disaster by burying themselves deep in debt, sometimes even using one card to make payments on another, etc. Lenders are wise to these ways. I know the guys on creditboards try, but you can't trick the lenders. They have far far more experience that you can ever hope to have. I review more loan apps on a slow week than you will ever do in your lifetime.
 
Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: Dunbar
I still don't know why I need to spend $40 to learn my three credit scores, that seems excessive. I know we're entitled to a free credit report every year but I don't think that includes your credit score.
Click to expand...

See my response above...
Click to expand...

Is your comment intended to add to this discussion? I don't disagree they should get something for the service. My opinion is that $15 per credit score is excessive, especially for those of us with good credit who are looking to confirm our score(s). High volume customers (ie., lenders) are paying maybe $2 per score. I'd say $15 for all three scores is a reasonable fee.
 
Originally posted by: Viper GTS
This is basically the big three credit bureaus trying to get a chunk of Fair Isaac's pie. It's not going to replace FICO, it's just competition.

Fair Isaac stock is down like 10% today because of this.

Viper GTS
Click to expand...

Only one of the 3 bureaus was using FICO, right? There was also beacon and another scoring system in use. So while FICO is important, I don't think they have the market power to stop the credit agencies from using their own systems. (Of course I have been wrong before). Seems like whoever markets best is going to win.
 
Originally posted by: Dunbar
Originally posted by: Queasy
Originally posted by: Dunbar
I still don't know why I need to spend $40 to learn my three credit scores, that seems excessive. I know we're entitled to a free credit report every year but I don't think that includes your credit score.
Click to expand...

See my response above...
Click to expand...

Is your comment intended to add to this discussion? I don't disagree they should get something for the service. My opinion is that $15 per credit score is excessive, especially for those of us with good credit who are looking to confirm our score(s). High volume customers (ie., lenders) are paying maybe $2 per score. I'd say $15 for all three scores is a reasonable fee.
Click to expand...

How is high volume lenders paying $2 per score any different than say Dell paying $5 for a CD drive while everyday consumers pay $30? The credit bureaus are charging what the market will bear.

Credit reports are now pretty much a commodity product especially since consumers are given at least one free credit report a year now. They have to make money somewhere and providing credit scores and credit monitoring for consumers are a couple of the ways they do that.
 
There already is a uniform scoring system and fico is it.

Beacon, Empirica, are all just branded names for FICO.



Fico = facial tissue.

Beacon = kleenex.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top