Forum
|
|
Forum
|
     | Thursday, June 22, 2000 - 05:29 pm  What is the situation with slamming. Lets say you go to a dealer and give him permission to run your credit. But you had no idea they would slam you with 10 inqueries resulting in quite a score drop. Can any action be taken? How is this practive viewed by the credit bureaus? (besides too bad so sad sucker) btw, the finance guy at the dealership where I traded my car in told me that each inquery on something like equifax would be 1-2 points each. I'm not sure how accurate that it is. Also from comparing my incorrect experian to my equifax score, equifax is about 20 points higher due to not having that false bad dept on there which i took care of.
|
| | Friday, June 23, 2000 - 07:02 am The party line is that all inquiries related to auto or mortgage, that occur within a certain time period (I believe it is now a 14 day window) are lumped as one inquiry. In practice it is pretty much a bunch of crap. For whatever reason, it seems that the majority of auto inquiries are posted to the CRA's as "unspecified purpose", thus makeing it impossible for the FICO algorhythms to categorize them correctly. This doesn't just happen with finance companies, as Ford Motor Credit and American Honda Finance posted "unspecified" on me. I've read many missives from others who claim the same of the other big car company finance arms such as Chrysler, Toyota, etc. Interestingly enough, I don't recall ever having seen GMAC as one of the transgressors.
|
| | Friday, June 23, 2000 - 07:07 am PS -the guy who told you that each inquiry is 1-2 points is talking out his a$$. The ambiguity surrounding how many points an inquiry (one or many) generates is legend. It is perhaps one of the more "black-box-ish" conundrums of credit scoring. My conclusion, gleaned, from many posts concerning many situations is that it is generally in the 6-15 point range. BUT, when you factor in the scorecard model you're "in", when the inquiries occured, how many in a certain period of time, etc. NO ONE can really give a definitive answer. Thus, to reiterate, the finace guy was full of...well, you know.
|
| | Friday, June 23, 2000 - 10:35 am Thanks Lynn, you're 100% right. Unfortunately I haven't heard of anyone taking any action other than trying to have the bureaus recode the inquiries. And I can't remember the results. Senator was just told by TU that they don't consolidate auto inquiries at all. I've been trying to get clarification from Fair Isaac, will update when/if I'll find out.
|
| | Friday, June 23, 2000 - 11:51 am I went 'round and 'round with Experian over re-coding inquiries from Ford Motor Credit and American Honda...to no avail. The "stupid-visor" I spoke to said it has to be corrected by the inquiror (tried that - no cigar). When I asked her just WHAT did she think Ford Motor Credit financed, she just droned on in her non-commital bureaucratic hemming and hawing about how it could be anything, blah-blah-blah. Just one more example of the mental midgets at the CRA's. The frightening thing is that these people can vote!! I'm serious....these people could proabably not get a job at McDonald's.
|
| | Friday, June 23, 2000 - 01:27 pm I wonder if one could sue the creditor, i.e. Ford Motor Credit, for improperly coding the inquiries. I really wished I had more money and a lawyer!
|
| | Monday, June 26, 2000 - 06:20 am I spoke with someone from Fair Isaac that said that they can usually pick up auto-related inquiries from the subscriber number. For example GMAC might have a subscriber code of 52001 and Chase Auto Finance might have a subscriber code of 52002. The ones most likely not to get deduped are the credit union inquiries which might be for any purpose at all. Without seeing the raw data of the report (and having Fair Isaac's input) there's really no way of saying whether those inquiries are being counted as just 1, 2, 4 or 10. As a side note I've reviewed the Fair Isaac's "Demystifying FICO" section and they say that "credit seeking" makes up approximately 10% of a person's score. If we assume that FICO Scores are from 300-900 (a 600 point range) we can guestimate the total amount that could be gained in this section as 60 points. So what does this mean? Well first of all if your score is less than 600 then forget about your inquiries. Even assuming you could gain 60 points by disputing and having deleted all your inquiries you're still going to be under 660 score. I seem to recall reading here that 660 was the score mortgage underwriters wanted you to have. Secondly I've heard people throw around the '10 points an inquiry' number as much as everyone else has. If that's true then that would mean 6 inquiries = lowest possible score for 'credit seeking.' Having ten inquiries would be no worse than having 9, 8, 7 or 6. Thirdly even assuming that you scored as low as humanly possible in this section you could still get an 840 score if the rest of your credit profile was perfect: No delinquencies, low debt, a 'good mix' of credit and a long history of responsible credit management.
|
| | Monday, June 26, 2000 - 12:10 pm Leaving the assumptions and going back to reality, AT LEAST 50% of the Scores I see are between 650 and 720. That means MOST people are just a few inquiries away from a decline. I'd rank inquiries as THE single most important item for people who want to get a mortgage. It also happens to be the item we "supposedly" can control, it is AFFORDABLE and impact on the Score is immediate. I insist that lenders code the inquiries so that *I* know what they're for.
|
| | Thursday, July 13, 2000 - 10:58 am I have now received all three CRA reports and the only one that is currently identifying credit inquiries--auto, unspecified, etc is not TU or Experian. It is Equifax (CSC). Now when I applied for a car to replace the "bankruptcy special"at 24%, there were 5 inquiries placed on TU despite the assurances from the dealer that he only needed to run one. (Trust and car dealerships--a true oxymoron. I got financed through Arcadia which hopefully is a better mark than what I had before.
|
| | Thursday, July 13, 2000 - 01:54 pm When I talked to Fair Isaac a few weeks ago, I was assured that they never have problems with properly identifying auto inquiries because of the subscriber codes. Of course, we have no way of verifying that.
|
| | Thursday, July 13, 2000 - 05:12 pm "When I talked to Fair Isaac a few weeks ago, I was assured that they never have problems with properly identifying auto inquiries because of the subscriber codes." I probably would have choked while laughing at that one. *IF* that were the case, we wouldn't be getting reports from the CRA's that show 'unspecified purpose' on every inquiry except for one. and the beat goes on... I guess it begs the next question as to what kind of luck I will have fighting that battle in Round Three (or maybe Four or Five, I've lost count) with the big three. I have, however, found that I have better luck in getting responses when I send my challenges in on office letterhead (small law office that does no credit-related work) as opposed to personal letterhead.
|
| | Thursday, July 13, 2000 - 09:29 pm I agree, it's odd that supposedly Fair Isaac's software has no problem identifying those inquiries, yet the CRAs can NOT. Or maybe they can, but they are not willing to clue us in? I also don't understand why subscriber codes would properly identify the auto inquiries, most banks/finance companies do a lot more than just auto loans. The whole secrecy is just one more way to make us waste our time so that we don't get to think about anything important at all. Please let us know if the change in letterhead makes a difference.
|
| | Wednesday, August 23, 2000 - 01:36 am I recently had a friend who is leaving his credit access position run my reports to see how my scores are going. I am puzzled. the experian has totally fallen off the cliff--it went from 540 to 490. the only thing that changed is that I purchased the new car and inquiries were run. I am waiting to get the report to discover what if anything has occurred but this is a bummer. The TU has gone up by 54 points from the lawyer's work and the CSC has gone down by 39 points (5 inquiries--generally due to the auto dealers classifying incorrectly their inquiries. TU stands a shade under 600 and CSC stands a shade above. I've put the plans on purchasing a home on hold and now plan to wait another year. Reorganization is taking hold at the job and right now they are getting rid of "deadwood", which having been through the process twice means that if you haven't kissed the right butt, you will be out the door. Three new people have been hired in my turf, all got new titles but me and they have no experience doing what I do--corporate Amerika, don't you love it?--I now report to one of them. I was told that, in my situation since I am an existing employee, titles only get changed in January--how about "unemployed" being the title? I think they believe that I must have been born in Boscobel. Handwriting is on the wall. Probably have six months before I get tossed out. Fico challenges--I wonder if there is any money in that????
|
| | Wednesday, August 23, 2000 - 03:55 am Of course your score dropped -- you bought a new car. This is one of the things I hate where those auto dealers advertise that you can 'improve your credit' by buying a new car and re-establishing yourself. Not only is this the most expensive way to do it (paying 18% on a large vehicle loan) but it also takes the longest! Getting a car is like getting a credit card for $10,000 and immediately maxing it out and making only the minimum payment for years at a time.
|
| | Wednesday, August 23, 2000 - 12:57 pm To the best of my knowledge, installment loans do NOT count towards your available credit/revolving balance. An installment loan has NOTHING to do with revolving loans and "maxing out" the account. The fact that Senator now owes x amount of dollars should only impact on the mortgage income/debt underwriting. If anything changed in Scoring, I'd like to know about it. Not having seen Senator's reports, I can only guess that the inquiries did him in. I can't understand why I have never heard of a single law suit against Fair Isaac. Not one! Denise's victory makes me hopeful that other consumers will follow her lead and FIGHT BACK!
|
| | Wednesday, August 23, 2000 - 03:01 pm A little bit off subject but... I remember reading Denise's story a few months ago and would like to review it. The link to consumeraid.org is down and I was wondering where I might find an accurate review of her tragedy. Thanks, Steve
|
| | Wednesday, August 23, 2000 - 03:25 pm There you go, I posted it: http://www.bayhouse.com/discus/messages/123/355.html?967076325#POST4649
|
| | Wednesday, August 23, 2000 - 04:06 pm I await the receipt of Experian to find out what happened and will post any differences in the prior to May2000 report and the Aug/Sept2000 report. I have had enough of this stuff to just throw in the towel but, hey, that's life. Let's rumble.
|
| | Wednesday, August 23, 2000 - 04:43 pm I quote from Fair Isaac's website: http://www.fairisaac.com/servlet/SiteDriver/Content/1528/#2 "How much is too much?" "...owing a great deal of money on many accounts can indicate that a person is overextended, and is more likely to make some payments late or not at all. Part of the science of scoring is determining how much is too much for a given credit profile." "In addition to the overall amount you owe, the score considers the amount you owe on specific types of accounts, such as credit cards and installment loans." "How much of installment loan accounts is still owed, compared with the original loan amounts. For example, if you borrowed $10,000 to buy a car and you have paid back $2,000, you owe (with interest) more than 80% of the original loan. Paying down installment loans is a good sign that you are able and willing to manage and repay debt." I now quote from: http://www.advantagecredit.com/creditreporting/adverse_reason_codes.htm See adverse code (33) "Proportion of loan balances to loan amounts is too high." While "too high" is a measure only understood by the credit scoring algorithm and/or designers I think we can conclude that a person who has an installment loan that's only a few months old probably has loan amounts that are too high. See also: http://www.fairisaac.com/servlet/SiteDriver/Content/912 "Proportion of installment loan amounts still owing (proportion of balance to original loan amount on certain types of installment loans)." ***** Senator's experience of a lowered score following a vehicle loan is not uncommon. These loans very often HURT your credit for at least the first 12 months.
|
| | Wednesday, August 23, 2000 - 04:56 pm I had no idea that ONE car loan could lower your credit score that much. Senator wasn't born yesterday, he had other loans previously. And as far as I know, he only took out ONE loan, not MANY. I have brokered quite a few mortgages and of course had clients with new leases and car loans. NEVER noticed a drop in Scores. Looking forward to see what changed on Senator's report since the last Score.
|
| | Thursday, August 24, 2000 - 04:02 am wouldn't they calculate my income as listed and verified by the car dealer? believe me, i was extremely tightfisted buying this car if you look at total gross, total net and outlay for car. It's infinitely smaller than any previous ratios. But we shall wait and see what occurred.
|
| | Thursday, August 24, 2000 - 11:26 am Credit Scoring ignores income entirely. All they look at when they decided that you have too much credit or debt is your previous credit history as reported. You can triple your income, but Fair Isaac won't know it and couldn't care less.
|
| | Friday, August 25, 2000 - 06:50 pm Have to agree 100% with Skylock on this one. Have seen this happen many time in dealing with loans. The same thing also happens when people refinance mortgages that they have paid down. If they go from an original loan of 100K to a paid down balance of 50k and then refinance the 50k loan I've had scores drop. It doesn't make sense, but what about the CRA's does. By the way, 620 is generally considered the cutoff for traditional underwriting although I've done many below that number.
|
Credit Forum CreditCourt Forum 2003 Credit Suit CreditFactors Order Credit Reports |