Rejected will they tell me why?

pmanthony

I applied for a Santandare (abbey) 15 month 0% credit card and they have rejected my application.

I have never had an application rejected before, I have checked my credit rating (859) and I can see no obvious reason why, I have had a Virgin card and I know that Abbey were MBNA but not any more.

Is it worth asking them for an exact reason why?

Also will this affect an application for another card if I apply now?

nickmack

pmanthony wrote: »

I applied for a Santandare (abbey) 15 month 0% credit card and they have rejected my application.

I have never had an application rejected before, I have checked my credit rating (859) and I can see no obvious reason why, I have had a Virgin card and I know that Abbey were MBNA but not any more.

Is it worth asking them for an exact reason why?

Also will this affect an application for another card if I apply now?

If you've checked your credit reports and there's nothing adverse, then I assume you don't meet their profile for this card.

You could ask them, but usually you get directed to Experian/Equifax.

If they registered the search with the CRA's this may be taken into account when other lenders check your report. If it's your only one in the last few months, it shouldn't be a problem.

never-in-doubt

pmanthony wrote: »

I applied for a Santandare (abbey) 15 month 0% credit card and they have rejected my application.

I have never had an application rejected before, I have checked my credit rating (859) and I can see no obvious reason why, I have had a Virgin card and I know that Abbey were MBNA but not any more.

Is it worth asking them for an exact reason why?

Also will this affect an application for another card if I apply now?

They do not have to give a reason but they do have to give an underlying basis, usually it will be

1. Failed Credit Score
2. Adverse Data
3. Dont meet their lending requirements

However, the score you mention on Experian means nothing - you have to stop relying on this. I could pick a random number and it'd be more accurate that the number generator Experian uses.

As I was discussing yesterday, Experian cannot grant credit and so they do not actually know the criteria at which each lender scores their applications - if their score was accurate then the permutations of formulae for the scorecards would need like 100 server racks just to cope with the data before actually regressing any of it.

Point is - forget the score, look at the entries you have on the file - but each lender is different and maybe just maybe you didn't meet their criteria.

Move on and try a proper card, it aint called shabby for nothing you know :eek:

nickmack

never-in-doubt wrote: »

maybe just maybe you didn't meet their criteria.

Just to expand on this for the OP, even if you've never had any payment problems in the past, they may not want you as a customer.

One reason may be that from the credit search, if they can see you currently pay off your cards in full each month, they may determine they can't make any money from you, so therefore decide to give the exposure to a customer who will incur interest.

Cash_Flow

never-in-doubt wrote: »

They do not have to give a reason but they do have to give an underlying basis, usually it will be

1. Failed Credit Score
2. Adverse Data
3. Dont meet their lending requirements

However, the score you mention on Experian means nothing - you have to stop relying on this. I could pick a random number and it'd be more accurate that the number generator Experian uses.

As I was discussing yesterday, Experian cannot grant credit and so they do not actually know the criteria at which each lender scores their applications - if their score was accurate then the permutations of formulae for the scorecards would need like 100 server racks just to cope with the data before actually regressing any of it.

Point is - forget the score, look at the entries you have on the file - but each lender is different and maybe just maybe you didn't meet their criteria.

Move on and try a proper card, it aint called shabby for nothing you know :eek:

You say always say this but where is your proof?

Experian use the Vantage Score Model

http://www.vantagescore.com/about/vantagescore_model

Equifax use the FICO Score Model in the US not sure about the uk

http://www.fico.com/en/Products/Scoring/Pages/FICO-score.aspx

Most Lenders are using the above scoring models they maybe tweaked slightly but it is still the same scoring model.

never-in-doubt

Cash_Flow wrote: »

You say always say this but where is your proof?

Most Lenders are using the above scoring models they maybe tweaked slightly but it is still the same scoring model.

It was declared by Experian on Watchdog. They said it was impossible for them to replicate score-cards and their scores would be a 'fair reflection'. We take the p!ss and say it means nothing because a 'fair reflection' could be anything from decline to accept and so isn't really very accurate!

In a nutshell what i'm saying is that Tesco don't take into account income, expenditure or employment type. Therefore, you know for a fact their acceptance level is higher (easier) than say for instance an MBNA card where they stipulate a minimum income and ask for expenditure. The key difference being how could Experian come to a medium with two totally different score-cards.

Bear in mind i've assumed this example using two score-cards, imagine it with all available credit products - it's simply impossible for Experian to accurately determine whether you'll be accepted and therefore their score means little so may as well be a random number.

I hope that makes some sense - i'm not just being stubborn, there is logic to what i'm suggesting and going from general technology it would be almost impossible for Experian to perform an accurate score. The only thing they 'could possibly do' would be to suggest likely acceptance to a card that they know from acceptance levels and report readings, is likely to be accepted but that's as far as it could go and the chances of two identical cases is very slim.

Mate Vantagescore & fico are both related to the US arm. Not the UK.

:beer:

RobertoMoir

Cash_Flow wrote: »

You say always say this but where is your proof?

I'd say right here in this thread there's evidence that your score from a credit rating company has very little to do with whether or not a lender will do business with you.

People seem to think that a good score from their credit rating agency means that a lender almost "has" to give them the loan / credit card / mortgage they want and that clearly isn't the case. As such, the score from the agency means very little - I only use my score as a number relative to itself... if it changes I take a very close look at the credit agency records to figure out why... but I don't use that score while planning my finances.