should creditors check both agencies?????

thewinkshow

hi again.

i checked my experian credit report and only a few of my items were on it,there was quite alot missing,ive also checked my equifax report and the ones missing were on here,i know it all depends which agency they use.

i was thinking that all creditors by law should have to check both folders,because for example lets say you apply for a loan with a company that uses experian,and they reject u because they think you have no credit history at all,but really you have they are just stored on the equifax report but the creditor wouldnt see/know this,and think you were a bad customer,whereas if they checked both they can get the true picture and no half a story to base their dection on.

what u think?why dont they all use both/all agencies to check you?it would make more sense really.

danjberry

simple reason is it costs more money to check both companies, if the law was that they must check both then they would have to force all companies to check your CAIS data (some companies only check the basic - voters roll, CCJ and bankrupcy/iva and dont worry with credit score, missed payments and defaults so they would be penalised as well)

thewinkshow

but surely it would be better in the long run for both parties,you the customer and them the lender.

at the moment they could lend to someone thinking they are a safe bet,not knowing they had a terrible paying record on their other report,so they give them some money and the company loses out when the person doesnt pay.if they had the full picture this couldnt happen,as they would be aware of there bad paying record and they wouldnt give them credit.

it would also help the other side,us the customer,who may get turned down as they have a couple of missed payments on one credit report,so the lender instantly says no,not knowing that the customer has several other forms of credit on their other report,that are all up to date and payed on time,meaning they are generally a good safe option apart from this minor blip on the other report.

meaning the person who has lots of missed payments mentioned above would get credit as it seems they are o.k,and the person who pays 9/10 of there debts all on time would not get credit as they would seem a unsafe option looking at the other report.

it just seems like common sense to me,i know i wouldnt lend to anybody i didnt know fully or had the full picture of them.the lenders are lending based on half a story

thewinkshow

but surely it would be better in the long run for both parties,you the customer and them the lender.

at the moment they could lend to someone thinking they are a safe bet,not knowing they had a terrible paying record on their other report,so they give them some money and the company loses out when the person doesnt pay.if they had the full picture this couldnt happen,as they would be aware of there bad paying record and they wouldnt give them credit.

it would also help the other side,us the customer,who may get turned down as they have a couple of missed payments on one credit report,so the lender instantly says no,not knowing that the customer has several other forms of credit on their other report,that are all up to date and payed on time,meaning they are generally a good safe option apart from this minor blip on the other report.

meaning the person who has lots of missed payments mentioned above would get credit as it seems they are o.k,and the person who pays 9/10 of there debts all on time would not get credit as they would seem a unsafe option looking at the other report.

it just seems like common sense to me,i know i wouldnt lend to anybody i didnt know fully or had the full picture of them.the lenders are lending based on half a story

thewinkshow

but surely it would be better in the long run for both parties,you the customer and them the lender.

at the moment they could lend to someone thinking they are a safe bet,not knowing they had a terrible paying record on their other report,so they give them some money and the company loses out when the person doesnt pay.if they had the full picture this couldnt happen,as they would be aware of there bad paying record and they wouldnt give them credit.

it would also help the other side,us the customer,who may get turned down as they have a couple of missed payments on one credit report,so the lender instantly says no,not knowing that the customer has several other forms of credit on their other report,that are all up to date and payed on time,meaning they are generally a good safe option apart from this minor blip on the other report.

meaning the person who has lots of missed payments mentioned above would get credit as it seems they are o.k,and the person who pays 9/10 of there debts all on time would not get credit as they would seem a unsafe option looking at the other report.

it just seems like common sense to me,i know i wouldnt lend to anybody i didnt know fully or had the full picture of them.the lenders are lending based on half a story

thewinkshow

bump for replies