I don't know how we got off track and started to accept the fact that companies can share information about consumers with other companies and potential employers. This should all clearly be a violation of any kind of privacy law.

Company A should have no right to tell company B about my history with company A. For some reason, what seems like a no-brainer has become widely accepted norm. I know there are laws that prevent sharing consumer information but somehow we turn a blind eye when it comes to credit reporting.

If I don't pay company A what I owe them then they can take legal action and I am legally obligated to pay them. If I don't pay them, they can file a judgement and that is public record. Nothing else should leave company A's records.

We have let this spiral into everything we do being shared with every other institution. If I run up a credit card bill and continue to abide by the contract paying on time, this affects my credit score and can keep me from getting a job or purchasing services from another company. That is so unconstitutional and unamerican.

There should be no credit reports or credit scores. Only public record of legal action taken against delinquent borrowers.

#anotherneocapitalismcomplaint

1/29/2012 3:39:43 PM

I agree with you. But good luck changing this.

1/29/2012 3:57:29 PM

I agree 100% that it is a violation of privacy. But this is merely one pixel of the bigger picture. The government is allowed to wiretap anyone's phone. Put gps tracking devices on your car. They record all of your phone calls. They track all of your spending habits. They monitor your bank accounts. They monitor the internet. Google, Facebook, and pretty much all websites track what website you go to and display banners based on what you recently view.


If you're crying about privacy, you of all people should know that privacy doesn't exist in America anymore. To target credit reports being a violation of privacy is old news and an old battle that was lost YEARS ago.

1/29/2012 3:58:49 PM

as an individual that has worked in lending and looked at thousands of credit reports, i don't think there is anything wrong with the current system.

credit reports do not show what you owe the money for, just to whom and how much. Anything pertaining to medical expenses is X'ed out so the only details you have are an amount.

When you sign agreements with lenders, phone companies, etc, you are agreeing to allow them to share information with credit bureaus. if you do not like this, don't sign and look elsewhere. good luck with that.

furthermore, it's not as if anyone can view your credit information - only by institutions that need to see it to make a decision, and even then with your explicit permission.

Given the fact that bad loans started this whole economic crisis in the first place, i see no reason for giving lenders LESS information to work with when decisioning applications.

1/29/2012 4:04:32 PM

Quote :

"When you sign agreements with lenders, phone companies, etc, you are agreeing to allow them to share information with credit bureaus. if you do not like this, don't sign and look elsewhere. good luck with that."

The last sentence here just invalidated your argument.

You can't argue that something is totally voluntary when you acknowledge that it's practically a requirement to live in modern society. It's like forcing people to sign a contract to be able to breathe, then say "hey you shouldn't have signed it if you don't agree with all of it"

1/29/2012 4:13:17 PM

Quote :

"If you're crying about privacy, you of all people should know that privacy doesn't exist in America anymore. To target credit reports being a violation of privacy is old news and an old battle that was lost YEARS ago."

I agree with this, privacy in the modern age does not exist. Its really sad, but true.

1/29/2012 4:20:21 PM

^^wrong. to compare it to breathing is asinine. you don't sign a contract to buy a hamburger. or even a car, if you have enough money.

the only times you sign these types of contracts is when someone is extending credit in some fashion.

are you pretty much strong-armed into doing that? yes, but it's for the better of all parties involved that loans are only granted to deserving individuals. Otherwise, the entire system collapses when loans aren't repaid.

Besides, take a step back and look at the big picture. of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but how big of a breach of privacy is it for verizon to tell other lenders that this person entered a contract with them, and refused to pay the company the amount they were rightfully owed? This is something that only those extending credit can see, and something they legitimately need to know.




[Edited on January 29, 2012 at 4:28 PM. Reason : .]

1/29/2012 4:26:50 PM

Quote :

"Given the fact that bad loans started this whole economic crisis in the first place, i see no reason for giving lenders LESS information to work with when decisioning applications."

Now there is a can of worms.

Whatever did we do before the days of credit cards? It's almost as if you had to know your local banker and he had to know you or some shit.

1/29/2012 5:33:28 PM

Quote :

"The government is allowed to...Put gps tracking devices on your car."

only with a warrant: http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/americas/united-states/120123/supreme-court-rules-unanimously-gps-tracking-cas

1/29/2012 5:41:49 PM

Quote :

"Company A should have no right to tell company B about my history with company A"

People have a right to contract how they see fit. They do not have a right to force others to act or not act against their will.

I myself do not mind companies sharing information about me. In some instances, I actually like it. The vast majority of consumers just don't care. As such, companies make sharing a condition of doing business with them and it doesn't cost them enough customers to warrant changing policies. Yes, this has deprived you of the ability to avoid such agreements without imposing costs upon yourself. We cannot all live in a world of our own choosing.

So, how do we resolve this conflict? I want them to share, you want them not to share, and they themselves want to share. Who are you that your preferences should outweigh those of other people?

Quote :

"You can't argue that something is totally voluntary when you acknowledge that it's practically a requirement to live in modern society."

You yourself know this is bullshit, hence why you used the word practically. It is not that difficult to avoid having your information put into the credit agencies, just don't borrowing money. Even the power company, a government monopoly, will skip the credit check for a $500 deposit.

Quote :

"We have let this spiral into everything we do being shared with every other institution...That is so unconstitutional and unamerican. "

The First Amendment is not a new invention. People have always been free to discuss their dealings with each other, unless they signed a contract promising otherwise, for much of recorded history. To suggest an employer or lender should not be free to ask around about you would be unconstitutional and unamerican.

What next. Should car buyers not be allowed to check the vehicles mechanical history through carfax? Should restaurant customers be barred from posting or checking reviews online? Should customers also be barred from checking with the better business bureau or other institution to see if their auto repair shop or accountant might be a crook?

[Edited on January 29, 2012 at 6:46 PM. Reason : .,.]

1/29/2012 6:37:36 PM

1/29/2012 6:45:41 PM

Quote :

"When you sign agreements with lenders, phone companies, etc, you are agreeing to allow them to share information with credit bureaus. if you do not like this, don't sign and look elsewhere. good luck with that. "

That's the problem.

They have the de facto power of a governing body, except there is no real accountability to anyone.

1/29/2012 6:47:03 PM

[Edited on January 29, 2012 at 6:55 PM. Reason : Usury is a sin.]

1/29/2012 6:53:22 PM

^^who are you referring to accountability-wise? the three major credit bureaus are all in competition, so it behooves them to report the correct information...or else all of their carriers will switch.

in my experience in looking at CR's, i can count the number of innacurate reports on one hand, based on the applicant's claims. every one of them was removed after settling it through the bureau.


[Edited on January 29, 2012 at 6:55 PM. Reason : .]

1/29/2012 6:53:37 PM

As information becomes becomes easier to proliferate, this is a natural consequence. As a matter of basic systems dynamics, this will happen.

The problem is that as information has become more free, the order in which different parties get access to this information happened in a starkly non-egalitarian manner. The government and the powerful have overwhelmingly been getting huge amounts of information about citizens/consumers, while the workings of our economy as a whole as remained surprisingly opaque.

To whatever extent we lose privacy of something in our individual life, that should be balanced by a corporation or the government having its secrets exposed. But government, for one, has become viciously secretive, in fact, over-responding to the information threat that they correctly perceived.

Keeping a stronger lock on your information protects you from individuals and small profiteer organizations, but it makes you weaker and more dependent on our societal institutions.

1/29/2012 10:18:58 PM

Hey dipshit that's why you're supposed to actually read the fine print, it almost invariably includes a waver regarding your personal information.

Quote :

"I don't know how we got off track and started to accept the fact that companies can share information about consumers with other companies and potential employers. This should all clearly be a violation of any kind of privacy law."

I'm not really sure what privacy law you're even talking about? Somebody wants big gubmint to beef up the rule book...

[Edited on January 30, 2012 at 12:37 PM. Reason : .]

1/30/2012 12:34:51 PM

They shouldn't be able to share such information with potential employers, I agree with that.

1/30/2012 6:03:06 PM

If you aren't doing anything wrong you have nothing to worry about...

1/30/2012 6:39:29 PM

^^ Should you not be able to share information about your employer to potential future employees?

^ I disagree with that. People make mistakes all the time. It could be needlessly damaging if a credit agency makes a mistake and your employer acts upon false information. But other human beings have a right to freedom of speech. That free speech can sometimes cause harm is the price we pay to live in a free country.

1/30/2012 7:03:10 PM

I don't mind credit reporting in the realm of actually extending credit. However, I was recently turned down for a 5-month sublease based on the fact that my student loans had been charged off. I had never had any problems renting anywhere I'd lived in the prior 4 years. And I had paid the collection agency about $4000 over the past 8 months and offered to pay half of the total cost of the lease up front and that STILL wasn't enough to get approved.

So while I can see that credit reporting can be an incredibly useful tool in lending, I think the system requires MAJOR overhauls. It should used exclusively as an informative tool for extending credit. It should not prevent you from obtaining housing or obtaining employment. Also, much more education needs to be taught to young people about the credit system. You can seriously fuck your life up for several years just because you don't know how powerful this institution really is.We shouldn't let people dig their own credit graves so deep that they spend half of their life trying to get back out. That might as well be called slavery.

1/30/2012 8:08:30 PM

Quote :

"They have the de facto power of a governing body, except there is no real accountability to anyone."

They have no such thing. You can go about your life just fine without ever having a credit card or any credit history at all.

Wait, so you're saying you welched on a debt and you can't understand why someone would not want to do business with you?



[Edited on January 30, 2012 at 8:21 PM. Reason : .]

1/30/2012 8:17:47 PM

You don't have a right to privacy, at least not in the way you're describing it. If I make a deal with John, renege on the deal, go to do business with Sally, and she's not interested because John told her how our interaction went, that's life. You have a reputation, and it can be ruined or tarnished. This principle doesn't change when "people" becomes "companies".

Quote :

"We have let this spiral into everything we do being shared with every other institution. If I run up a credit card bill and continue to abide by the contract paying on time, this affects my credit score and can keep me from getting a job or purchasing services from another company. That is so unconstitutional and unamerican. "

This would improve your credit score. I don't think it's a particularly good policy for employers to look at credit score, but I don't see why they shouldn't be able to.

Credit is important, but so is default and bankruptcy. There needs to be a way for debt to clear out and for creditors to be able to figure out what kind of risk they're taking. Interest rates should be determined based on that risk. Once you start trying to make laws that prevent credit agencies from sharing information, you're adding even more information asymmetry into a system that is already convoluted as fuck.

I'm not shilling for the credit agencies and banks here, by the way. They're fucked up in all kinds of ways. I happen to think that, in our society, credit is far too available. We've got too much debt, a lot of which isn't allowed to be discharged. In a market that wasn't getting pumped full of cheap cash, credit would be tighter and interest rates would be higher. Just look at the student loan market as an example of what happens when interest rates aren't allowed to float based on risk.

[Edited on January 30, 2012 at 9:00 PM. Reason : ]

1/30/2012 8:56:03 PM

Same people that say lenders shouldn't be able to share credit information have made or will make a thread at some point saying that minorities or those that don't have a reason to use credit can't get a home loan because either no one will lend or the rates are much higher.

1/30/2012 9:05:39 PM

This is silly, as many people have noted you give them permission to view your credit when you apply for credit.

Because I have good credit I like that they have access to it. If they couldn't access my credit I would pay a much higher rate on my home and car. This thread premise is off base

1/30/2012 9:52:21 PM

Quote :

"^^ Should you not be able to share information about your employer to potential future employees?"

I do think it would be nice if the privacy of institutions would be violated before the privacy of individuals. As I said, it's only a matter of time before privacy is violated in general. But the opposite has happened, institutions have remained relatively secure in the ability to control information while individuals not so much so.

The working class has been too good to our institutions.

1/30/2012 10:14:21 PM

Quote :

"It should not prevent you from obtaining housing or obtaining employment."

So, because your potential landlord was being a dick, we should start throwing all landlords in prison if they insist on digging into the backgrounds of potential tenants?

Why does everything in your life that goes wrong always end up with you demanding society throw other people into prison? Can we at least be fair and make it a crime for you to ask around before renting from a landlord?

[Edited on January 30, 2012 at 11:32 PM. Reason : .,.]

1/30/2012 11:30:16 PM

Risk is much more complicated than paying your credit card bills on time. Someone who pays their rent and neglects smaller payments could actually be less of a risk for a home loan than someone who makes sure they pay all of their little bills and refuses to pile up a credit card balance. The credit score oversimplifies it and then turns people who are on the brink and puts more financial pressure on them by charging them more for something in their past or something NOT in their past. Why should I pay more than you if i have never had a credit card and you have had 5? Everyone should pay the same price.

1/30/2012 11:39:19 PM

Quote :

"Why should I pay more than you if i have never had a credit card and you have had 5? Everyone should pay the same price."

And if they refuse to lend to you at the same price, they should go to jail?

People have a right to refuse business at a price they feel is too low. Who are you to dictate the prices others will be allowed to charge? Will you really be better off when credit becomes unavailable to you at any price?

1/31/2012 12:24:40 AM

Quote :

"So, because your potential landlord was being a dick, we should start throwing all landlords in prison if they insist on digging into the backgrounds of potential tenants? Why does everything in your life that goes wrong always end up with you demanding society throw other people into prison? Can we at least be fair and make it a crime for you to ask around before renting from a landlord?"

What the fuck are you talking about? Where did I say anything about throwing landlords in prison?

1/31/2012 1:30:20 AM

Quote :

"Why should I pay more than you if i have never had a credit card and you have had 5? Everyone should pay the same price. "

uh, no. creditworthiness may be a little more complicated than a credit score, but there are definitely different levels of it.

you're saying everyone should be charged the same rate, based on an application that doesn't even include complete information on past lenders/merchants that you've screwed over? get out of here with that dumb shit.

Quote :

"The credit score oversimplifies it and then turns people who are on the brink and puts more financial pressure on them by charging them more for something in their past or something NOT in their past "

if you're already on the brink, then WHY ARE YOU APPLYING FOR A NEW FUCKING LOAN?

[Edited on January 31, 2012 at 7:16 AM. Reason : .]

1/31/2012 7:13:30 AM

Quote :

"What the fuck are you talking about? Where did I say anything about throwing landlords in prison?"

Any time you want to get the government involved, fines, jail, or death are ultimately the result of noncompliance.

1/31/2012 10:18:02 AM

So the government has never created a law to help citizens fight back against predatory business practices that an individual could not fight on his/her own. Thanks! I didn't know that before.

1/31/2012 10:27:22 AM

Quote :

"And if they refuse to lend to you at the same price, they should go to jail? People have a right to refuse business at a price they feel is too low. Who are you to dictate the prices others will be allowed to charge? Will you really be better off when credit becomes unavailable to you at any price?"

I'm not quite sure if they would go to jail but what would happen if you went into walmart and they charged different people different prices based on the products they bought at other stores? The same price should be charged to every customer. The price can't be too low for one person then ok for the next.

Quote :

"uh, no. creditworthiness may be a little more complicated than a credit score, but there are definitely different levels of it."

things like default and debt:income ratio are fair game but most of the things that go into credit score are garbage.

Quote :

"you're saying everyone should be charged the same rate, based on an application that doesn't even include complete information on past lenders/merchants that you've screwed over? get out of here with that dumb shit."

never said that but you don't need a credit report to find out who has defaulted on a debt.

1/31/2012 10:41:03 PM

Quote :

"what would happen if you went into walmart and they charged different people different prices based on the products they bought at other stores?"

Nothing. Coupons often come in the packaging to get a discount on other products. Would you like to ban discount coupons too?

1/31/2012 11:03:40 PM

Anybody can use any coupon. Don't use that copout and don't talk about loyalty points because shopping at kroger doesn't get me royalty points at harris teeter whole foods and food lion.

1/31/2012 11:14:55 PM

Can you buy a single item at Harris Teeter without a VIC card or a phone number?

1/31/2012 11:47:19 PM

^^ What is your point? I have been issued coupons to a different store that only I could use, they had my name on them. There is no law against such a thing and I don't see why anyone would think there should. Store owners are free to price differentiate among their customers as they see fit. It is a free country. Just as you are free to start haggling for a lower price, they are free to quote you a higher price.

[Edited on February 1, 2012 at 12:52 AM. Reason : .,.]

2/1/2012 12:46:11 AM

I'm going to start charging my gay customers more.

2/1/2012 1:32:09 AM

2/1/2012 2:56:23 AM

I dont understand why some casinos offer me free rooms and others want $399 a night.

Grow up dude seriously.

Get your credit in check, having bad credit is one of the worst decisions you can make in life for several reasons:

A) The pure embarrassment of having bad credit

B) The tens of thousands of dollars you will save over your life by having "white" credit

C) Being a respectful human

D) All the things i missed in points A-C

2/1/2012 4:41:26 AM

Quote :

"C) Being a respectful human"

playing the game is being a respectful human to you? you are a sheep man.

My credit is good but will never approach 800 because I was "irresponsible" enough to

A. Close a credit card account with citi for shitty customer service

B. Inactivity on my credit cards

C. Never had a car loan

Its pretty crappy to base ones ability to pay on something other than their ability to pay. If someone has the income and no debt then they have the ability to pay.

2/1/2012 11:17:16 PM

Quote :

"If someone has the income and no debt then they have the ability to pay."

Even in this economy, if you have verifiable income to cover the payment and no debt, I seriously doubt you'd be turned down for a loan.

2/1/2012 11:26:35 PM

Thats not the issue. Anybody who can pay should be able to pay the same price not ambiguous prices based on their spending habits.

2/1/2012 11:42:35 PM

In your opinion. Luckily it is not up to you. I disagree with you, and so do the people making such determinations.

2/1/2012 11:47:41 PM

Quote :

"ts pretty crappy to base ones ability to pay on something other than their ability to pay."

Credit reports have nothing to do with the ability to pay.

They show past willingness to pay debt and reasonable usage of credit. There are plenty of people who have 100k+ jobs with shitty credit because they are lazy/forgetful/overextended/whatever.

2/1/2012 11:53:35 PM

ExamPle of this... I bought a tv in fall of 2010. I thought this would be a good time to try to build a little bit of credit. Well I got denied for the credit so I just bought it straight cash instead. How does that make any sense at all?

2/2/2012 10:15:01 AM

Why were you denied the credit? Store cards are usually some of the easiest accounts to get.

Quote :

"Thats not the issue. Anybody who can pay should be able to pay the same price not ambiguous prices based on their spending habits."

So you're saying that the guy who defaults on every loan he takes out and the guy who's never missed a payment in 40 years should both pay the same interest rate on a loan?

2/2/2012 12:03:50 PM

Quote :

"They show past willingness to pay debt and reasonable usage of credit. There are plenty of people who have 100k+ jobs with shitty credit because they are lazy/forgetful/overextended/whatever."

Oh look, someone rebutted your argument 4 F-ing posts ago.

Quote :

"I was "irresponsible" enough to A. Close a credit card account with citi for shitty customer service B. Inactivity on my credit cards C. Never had a car loan Its pretty crappy to base ones ability to pay on something other than their ability to pay."

Really, go to hell sheeple. You don't understand the algorithm that credit score is based on, nor the statistical basis it is built on. This is no more reasonable than using a vanilla correlation of genes with disease to deny someone health coverage. Such genes possibly have nothing to do with the disease in the first place, not to mention other ethical problems.

2/2/2012 12:21:17 PM

You surely realize that there's a difference between a credit report and a credit score, right?

2/2/2012 12:29:21 PM

Quote :

"Well I got denied for the credit so I just bought it straight cash instead. How does that make any sense at all?"

I don't know the details, but it isn't my business either. Whether someone gives you a loan is between you and them. Why do you think we should have forced them to give you a loan against their will with threats of fines and arrest?

If your only point is that they are being irrational, so be it, move this discussion to Chit Chat. To be a soap box issue you must be suggesting we deprive either you or them of free agency, but I think most here are against violation of their human rights.

2/3/2012 12:06:21 AM