Forum
|
|
Forum
|
     | Monday, March 12, 2001 - 11:12 pm  continuing where we left off- computer vs. person talk with my legal people today was very helpful- maybe we can be of benefit here--  * fannie mae's website claims that FICO scoring was always intended to act as guideline, not ultimate wisdom, in making lending decisions. buying into it, they may or may not have believed the is how it would be used once implemented throughout the industry. [fannie/freddie investing bigtime {tax-payer's} bucks in a big mistake could be a factor here]. my personal situation is unusual, both because of the way i manage my assets and credit, and rather unconventional properties i own. self-employment is something the quackware particularly despises. in concert, these elements generate my unusually low credit scores, even with the flawless history i have spoken of ad infinitum ad puke-ium--  ** the properties i buy tend to be a bit out of the ordinary as well. 2-family, 4-family, or block of apartments, who gives a flying duck where i live--hours i keep might disturb tenants, so i pack the ceilings and walls with fiberglass and acoustical sounboard several inches thick-- rated at 140 db, nobody hears anything. what a good reason not to refuse trombonists who want to rent from me-- *. FICO scoring claims to accurately represent the percentage of mortgage applicants who should be statistically expected to default on their home loans, and categorize them in numerically based risk groups. herein lies the first splatt on its face- an error on one's credit report affects the score, and proving oneself worthy of credit is no longer quite so simple as contacting an offending creditor, asking for a fax/email letter of sorry, we screwed up, to the lender; such an action must circumnavigate the entire credit system before it is reflected in the numerical credit score. this means removal of the entry from three independent credit reporting agencies. only the creditor can modify or remove an entry from the CRA's to whom they subscribe, and most make reports there only monthly, or bi-monthly. an immediate response to the creditor or potential lender cannot be useful in changing a computer-generated numerical score that is based upon information available only to the computer model making evaluation at any given point in time; in order for such scores to change in the applicant's favor, all three CRA's whose data is used to calculate the score must be up to date and fully accurate. if it is not, a borrower is forced to wait until the scoring model used to determine their viability is brought up to date. so goes objection #1. my attorney told me to suppose that the defendant i am challenging might be right, and proving them definitively wrong is a most effective way to win my case. here's where we went with it: approaching FICO first, what is it, and how do we prove it is subjecting me [applicant] to any bias that was not already prevelant in this industry prior to its widespread application? answer: assuming that computer models reflect an accurate relative percentage of applicants who default on their loans, i am categorically unacceptable. for the moment, assume that 30% will default, and 70% will not. while globally unacceptable, applicants rejected by the computer model can be reviewed by expert banking and underwriting professionals, or interviewed individually. bear in mind that human burden is far lighter, as a vast majority receive instantaneous approval by machine. my situation is as follows, and forms the basis for my case-- i am self employed, requiring no-income verification loans (discrimination) i am an owner/occupant of a 4-family dwelling; my numerical credit scores, formulated by [UN] Fair, isaac, comprise the SINGULAR basis for inability to refiniance my home. there is no provision for any conventional lender to approve my application once the FICO scoring model has categorized it as an unacceptable risk. wy wife and i have no history of delinquencies of any kind on our CRA bureaus. with due diligence, we have cleared all errors on the credit reports. loan amounts requested on real estate owned have never exceeded 80% LTV extensive documentation and character witnesses will show that procurment of mortgage financing has never been denied at any time, with express exception the of numerical credit scores. FICO scoring has been the ABSOLUTE AND FINAL word in rejecting my applications for home loans. the decisions to deny my requests were made without human eyes ever looking at my credit profiles as the three CRA'a report them. that's most of it as i remember, now here are the possible remedies. all would involve legal action of one kind or another-- lawsuit-- this is the most logical approach, and as i have been advised, the least effective. who do i sue?- is the first question asked. good lawyers play an effective devil's advocate to keep us from making big mistakes and burying our butts in deeper than they already are. this one is particularly nasty. UNfair isaac formulated this poison, fannie mae & freddie mac were both sold on it, three reporting agencies are obliged to prescribe it, and lenders nationwide have to spoon it out as the government mandates. 19th century banking remedies most foul if i declare so myself, in our 21st century world where computers are taking a step back there, and Ph.D in forensics means you carry four magnifying glasses, talcum powder, and know how to silence a sneeze. gesundheit! proving damages is easy-- as ultimate fuckEE, i'm not up to $300 an hour in federal court for a big merry-go-finger-your-neighbor-catch-ye-fuckER all around the musical courtroom party. class action, i'll contribute. private concert, nothanks if it's all on me-- ** defamation-- federal law provides for lawsuits to be filed against creditors or credit bureaus when they don't clean mistakes off consumers' reports, and PRONTO! means 30 days. i stay on top of them, and remind them of the law. those CRA's know what to do and how to do it if you light a fire under their fatt butts. never have i had to resort to extreme measures, and mistakes do abound. here's how to get rid of most of them-- call a creditor posting anything bad. ask for it in writing from anybody making promises; get a name/ employee ID from any phone contacts. fax is best-- pin them down-- inform them that a lawsuit for three times original debt is headed their way if they sit around scratching their nuts. out of state?-- engage a small claims lawyer, either on contingency or for a small fee plus filing costs--most law firms send a student or trainee. amounts under $5000 total conform to small claims in most states-- if it's a bit over, sue for the max and let the difference go. i am facing defamation based not upon errors on my credit report, but upon the presence of the FICO score itself appearing there. nothing else can form the basis for my rejection to refinance my primary residence, and i have letters in hand from several lenders offering concurrence. in the past, paying off consumer debt with proceeds from a home loan have been required, and whenever the amount of consumer debt outstanding has been in question, i have offered to eliminate it. FICO scoring makes this no longer possible. injunctive relief would be great, whether or not coupled with legal action seeking demonstrable or punitive damages-- this could prohibit CRA's from putting numerical credit scores on any consumer's profile, and/or eliminate this practise entirely. in a best case scenario, the real estate and consumer industries alike could bid one jubilant adieux to dumbottZQ modelling once and forever. if it warn't broke before, why dont no one try'n fix it?-- *? ask isack, i tink he kno. next approach--- direct appeal to fannie mae and freddie mac. i tried this on several occasions, and it appears that consumer correspondence is ignored. on one occasion, i got what looked like a formbot letter reply-- "we'll consider it, sorry we were delayed getting back to you, both operators are busy, sit on hold, sometime in the future, what i call now is the future, they say explorations to mars are in the future, we'll get back to you." best approach i could get-- congressional barrage congress ultimately makes the laws of the land, and it is under their beguiled auspices that FICO has been given the power it holds, over industry professionals, and even the constitution, i dread to say at this point. the robot proclaimed to be eliminating jim-crow bigotry is now sitting one single black man at the back of the bus, croaking out, "negro go back or bus no go." something must be wrong with the robot. i no go back, and bus no go. sitting in my rightful place, i say, "driver, drive your bus." robot recroaky. i stuff another buck up his big left nostril, bus no go. some of the other folks wanna go where they wanna go, try to talk to no go jim crow, still it's no go. cops drive by, no go some mo'. do we put a person into the driver's seat now, or should we all wait for robot no go. now that skin pigmentation, homosexuality, religion, history of lineage, shoe size, eye color, allergies, incest, or getting mugged make no real difference between human beings, who still wants to hold up this bus because somebody's dumbott is still singing negro go back or bus no go??? let's walk--
|
| | Sunday, March 18, 2001 - 10:26 am I don't understand what's wrong with lawyers. At FICO is Fraud you already have proof. You need more proof? Just look at your own scores! Are they the same every time? Probably not. Obviously, if you have a 660 one day and a 680 the next, ONE of the scores must be wrong. Bingo.
|
| | Monday, March 19, 2001 - 03:41 am The same argument could be used by pulling three credit reports. Let's say you get a 630 from Experian, 650 from Trans Union and 670 from Equifax. Which one of the scores is the "right" score? All of the scores are right. That they're different doesn't make one, two or any number of them wrong.
|
| | Monday, March 19, 2001 - 09:37 am They could ALL be right because EACH score is based on the underlying data, which varies greatly. When a report does NOT change and the score drops 24 points from one day to the next, at least ONE score is incorrect.
|
| | Monday, March 19, 2001 - 10:24 pm BINGO! doesn't necessarily make you a winner. UNfair issac calls the shots as they please, and the credit industry must follow suit. numerical credit scoring is like a polymorphic virus, whether of biological or software origin. surprisingly enough, computer viruses bear marked resemblences to their stuffy head, runny nose, so you miss a day or a week of life counterparts. it is for this reasons that the programs written by assholes who have nothing else better to do than cause problems for other people who use computers share the definition of the word, "virus," in all aspects, the analogy is precise. my knowledge of computer programming languages is near nil-- with biology, i can talk intelligently, and then draw reference to software, as the concepts are nearly identical; one physical, the other, abstract. here's an analogy; time frame 1917, europe-- think of a car manufacturing plant, with assembly lines [courtesy of henry ford's industial genius] producing cars. all of the workers do as they are told by the foreman's office, each putting a part into its proper place as instructed. $10 a day is top pay, and the only skill needed is knowing how to follow simple instructions-- * an armoured personnel carrier silently enters the factory through a seldom-used back gate. soldiers disguised as employees or routine meal staff walk to the control room, going totally unnoticed over the cacophonous din of heavy machinery falling on overworked ears and one clockwatcher too many. after knocking, the invaders show mercy to none-- everybody in attendance is ordered {at gunpoint} to modify normal assembly instructions to workers on the line. a new model has been announced, and its production must remain secret. while offering no resistance and complying fully with demands of the mysterious enemy, all present are put swiftly to death. vehicle assembly goes on as before. workers come, workers eat lunch, shit in the crapper, smoke too much, get paid, and go home. announcements of new models require concentration upon menial activity before being passed on to muscle memory, leaving the human spirit free to explore the comsos. unbeknownst [sic] to all who continue to do their duty in good faith, that which appears as routine changes in instructions can often mean that their efforts, instead of making fine cars, contribute to an assemblage of even more virulent forms of violence and attrition to humanity. of course, no individual worker within the plant is ever aware of this fact; overhearing such secrets, or worse, figuring it out and speaking truth, has long been a crime far more serious than murder or sedition. doing enough good for this world prescribes death by violence, as those who live by lies choose to perish by truth, rather than admit their mistakes and ask for forgiveness. once secured, armoured personel carriers roll off the automobile assembly line. all resources from within have been assimiliated-- workers are paid as usual. those raising questions are expelled-- any raising adimant objections, or stumbling upon the truth by accident, are summarily executed. worldwide manufacturers of despair now thrive on hate and despair. they suck childrens' blood, and sell their flesh for pennies a pound when they're through. so much for social justice. as world's policeman, the USA is up to its ass many miles under before calling order to any kind of court, though i do blow my nose in a clean kleenex for trying-- * let's all take pride in blowing our noses into clean klennexes in these united states--** that means most of the shit on our shoes dates to the 18th and 19th centuries as the native indian tribes were exterminated. diseases imported from europe [e.g. smallpox, syphilis, menengitis] took the largest toll-- dare we excuse the leaders of genocidal raids upon unarmed villages, in direct violation of treaty, prior to commencement of the civil war, and 18 MILLION+ native americans going out the sad way between 1825 and 1860??? how do we justify this to a people who lived in harmony with nature for centuries before western violence and greed forbade them from living off a buffalo herd that ran for days across the plains, almost 40,000,000 animals? senseless violence drove this vast resource to near extinction. in 1902, fewer than 2,000 survived. so much for the USA- * my knowledge of commputer languages can't provide much in reference. one semester of programming in pascal at harvard left a very bitter taste in my mouth- ommission of ";" caused multiple errors to run throughout a homework assignment, fold up the keyboard and jam it into the f***in' display, and TF comes along and points out my mistake-- sorry, you left out a ";" somewhere. i went to class and passed it in explaining, i couldn't get past the first problem because ";" was missing. a word to the wise who go to harvard-- don't expect special consideration for extenuating circumstances-- you won't get any. history of art- in hospital with hepatitis B when the proff announced the final exam would B coming early, so i sent my liver in an ice bucket. most material on the exam was from the class i missed. lecture hall at the divinity school was kept at a constant 40@ centigrade-- proff was finest on the planet, see if you can say awake. i passed with a c- on my paper writing, and lament missing all he had to say. what i did hear was pure genius-- * everything else at harvard was A-OK=-- *** my gpa was 2.96-- 0.04 short of cum laude isn't all that bad-- ** instead of going on about UN(fair) isaac labeling me as unacceptable risk, let's take a look at who it considers ideal based upon numerical scores-- applicant is/has: 21 years old $26,000 job-- 18 months 5 credit accounts; 3 major, 2 store cards-- owes $6,600 on a total limit of $15,000 available- no delinquency bought a used nissan 1 year ago; current on $266 monthly car payment paying $500 monthly rent without incident-- the questions i ask are not unusual:-- how do you propose to pay the rent?, where have you lived in the past, and how did you pay your rent there? do you have a credit history, and if so, how did you handle it? a decision whether or not to accept any applicant rests with the property owner. i have known many and far between. some accept anybody holding cash in hand-- others want genotypes, passports, and a lineage of european royalty somewhere before the time of st.thomas aquainus, and prepare ye all to document it at court or go to hell if you can't- when in doubt, whack-ye an opposing pawn with thy powerful biccup, and call checkisk-thou-king in a very loud voice unto thine enemy's royaltie. even when thy moves model stupendous blunders, live ye prosperously in romantic idiocy such action cries loudy to disbure most DISgracefully. in other words, if you want to live in luxury, go apply for a mortgage. FICO makes owning somebody else's property easier than renting, and when you get through, let the taxpayers eat it. FICO models me as a filer of bankruptcy-- it says i WILL default, and blows up debt service as the computer predicts-- seeking to force me into what i consider disgrace. 2 years ago, i could afford to buy anything i wanted-- now most of that money is paying interest. BINGO! is black and white, and the legal approach has been sabotaged completely. i am powerless to fight this alone, and my $7 Billion employer will go no further than they already have-- why should they? powerful and equally powerless-- i'm one big pawn on a chessboard not much different from the one i played in high school. here's hoping and praying the place i occupy is a good one, and can benefit when i'm called upon by the master to move again- i can say more, but have to sleep-- bonne nuit--
|
| | Tuesday, March 20, 2001 - 07:46 am Re. three different scores coming from the three different bureaus -- Also, remember that the models at the three bureaus are somewhat different. A 700 at Equifax means something slightly different than a 700 at TU or a 700 at Experian. I suspect that this is done because of some of the differences in data appearing at the bureaus, because of subtle differences in how credit data is stored at each of the bureaus, and because of some legalese buried in the contracts Fico has with each of the bureaus.
|
| | Tuesday, March 20, 2001 - 11:09 pm i weeded the mistakes off my credit reports long ago. nevertheless, my numerical scores differ by as much as 70 points from one bureau to the next; expriFUC lives up to its name, more so by putting low FUCo scores on mortgage applicants than doing away with erroneous subscriber input. today i was interviewed by a local newspaper-- an applicant went through our routine screening, had perfect credit and glowing references, and didn't occupy the property they rented. nothing was left open to question until the police got involved-- it appears the israeli nationals decided to turn the place into a massage parlor, if you know what i mean. reviewing the file with my superiors on a point by point basis, we could find no anomolies that might arouse suspicion-- two credit reports i graded A, employment references, verfication of income, and correspondently impeccable history of lawful and responsible conduct since emmigrating to this country four years ago. as this transaction took place through my company and not me personally, the $35 monthly tithe made by everyone throughout our organization buys full legal support, without limitation. while saying a respectful "no" to my requests to challenge FICO, my employer will never refuse to support those of us who run into trouble in the normal performance of our duties. one of my colleagues owns more real estate than i do. he charges broker fees to incoming tenants; i don't. if somebody else in my department leases a unit i own, i leave it up to them do decide. they usually do charge the normal fee, given a present vacancy rate well under 1%; nor can i expect any fellow member to work for nothing-- at effective pay averaging $200 an hour, we're not complaining or fighting over lunch money. epilepsy limits my capacity; paychecks well over $10,000 a week are not uncommon throughout the height of the season, summer months. my best week, july, 1997, grossed $17,000+. i have seen payroll checks surpassing $30,000/week in my department. this past week was unusually good for me at this time of year; $3400 for doing the best i can, laid up at home most of the weekend with seizures and pills. sadfaces- * top performers in my company earn $1,000,000 and more each year. why am i sharing this? it goes to show my $7 BILLION employer is powerless against it-- how helpless and vulnerable FICO strips me of all rights and dignity as the finest generals serving their fatherland were marched away to gas chambers by countrymen programmed into killabotry by a mindless master of hate. while not condoning germany's activities during WWI, a relative moral evalutaion between kaiser and fuhrer beg question between patriot and murderer-- hitler answered it with a bullet to the head. violence can silence a mouth that speaks-- once applied, such voices are amplified into megatruth-- * so much for the lecture. remember dime mortgage?, writing negative equity loans back in the 80's? a local developer built glorious hi-rises, next to route 16 running along the putrific mystic valley parkway, in medford. 2br, 2 marble baths, lots of garage parking, central heat & a/c, skyline views of the city. most units were sold preconstruction by the developer, who took back 10%, allowing the transactions to fund. everything went as planned, and the builder broke no law and defrauded nobody as the units were sold. problem: when the project was finished, dozens of the condos remained, with no takers. buyers having nothing at stake walked away en masse. the developer was making a healthy profit selling units off at 20% under fair market value. nauseating stench from the open sewer less than 30 yards away, combined with traffic and one endlesss gridlock of route 16 below, turned these units into what i define as problem real estate. when in doubt, exchange poorly defended realms on the board, and focus thine approach unto weakness of opposing majesty. call check to the king gains a free step toward victory, providing it isn't in haste or foolhardy. don't give gifts to the enemy as i do-- play chess with me and you'll see. true intelligence isn't knowing everything; it's being able to call upon that knowledge when you need it most. true wisdom isn't rebuttal of an accuser on the way to execution; it's disgracing a liar with truth when you're the one on trial for his life-- goodnight== * half genius, half imbicile-- douglas pratt
|
Credit Forum CreditCourt Forum 2003 Credit Suit CreditFactors Order Credit Reports |