FAO: James Jones, Experian Rep

JohalaReewi

I don't think it is the score that matters to Experian, more the money.

meer53

nomoneytoday wrote: »

IMHO the score only matters to the user and Experian. Lenders use their own lending criteria.

Spot on !

ThomTomato

James, can you advise whether the scores referred above are either DNB, DCM or a different score entirely?
I ask as I understood 999 to be a default (i.e. person not scored or matched) score, rather than a valid score.

sharpy2010

I think this is going to be the new "reclaim bank charges". Its clear that people have been sold totally meaningless information under the guise that it somehow represents a snapshot of their credit worthyness, and it clearly doesnt.

lisyloo

Just playing devols advocate here in a rather one-sided debate, but this IS a snapshot of your credit worthiness calculated with rules made by an organisation with extensive experience in the field.
No-one has ever said it reflects how any lender will rate you and therefore I cannot see how it can be mis-sold.
I would not buy it and don't think it's value for money, but I think they have sold what they claim to sell i.e. a number which represents your creditworhiness as calcualted by a company with extensive experience in the field but not representing any particualr lender.
If people want to pay for that then more fool them, but it's not mis-sold.

sharpy2010

I don't agree... I've got no experience with car mechanics, but I could make up the price that a garage might charge for a cambelt change, for example. It likely wouldn't be correct though, would it?! And I think Experian/Equifax are doing exactly the same when they sell their made up credit-worthyness number.

lisyloo

It likely wouldn't be correct though, would it?

But they aren't selling it as an accurate and correct refelction of ANY lenders score though.
Legally and technically I can't think this is mis-sold, but if you disagree then you are probably better off putting in an official complaint.

I've got no experience with car mechanics, but I could make up the price that a garage might charge for a cambelt change

Big difference. They do have experience in the firld and supposedly their numbers are based on their long history of expeirence in the field.
If you know otherwise then I challenge you to provide the evidence, both on here for our curiousity but more usefully to the appropriate body who can take action.
If you really do have evidence of wrong doing then I would fully support you putting things right.

Experian_company_representative

On a general point, the score we provide to consumers is limited to your credit report data. Lenders' scores factor in other data too, so they are not directly comparable.

While a 999 Experian Credit Score (a scorecard that we have built especially for CreditExpert customers) indicates that your credit history is in great shape, it is not a guarantee you'll get credit because of the other factors lenders look at and because, as others explain above, each lender calibrates their scoring to reflect their policies at any point in time.

We explain what our score is quite clearly and there is no misrepresentation. Importantly, the Experian Credit Score is built to mirror how most of the lenders we work with score credit reports, so it provides a very useful insight.

On the two examples provided above, I don't think the scores are very surprising at all. While the first reflects someone who's been in difficulties in the past but is now managing credit very well now with low debt / credit utilisation, the second shows someone with a so far unblemished repayment history but with higher current utilisation and some recent credit searches.

Most lenders focus on your most recent credit history and your current borrowing situation. Adverse information (defaults and public record data like court judgments) really does have a diminishing impact as it ages, particularly once paid.

Credit scoring is basically a very long mathematical equation based on sound statistical analysis of past customer behaviour. Sometimes, the results aren't always what you'd expect when appraising the data by eye, but the score will accurately represent the overall risk of someone not repaying money they borrow.

James Jones

hoffage123

Hi James,

Thanks for this ... in terms of my situation I have applied for Capital One which I got rejected for and have just applied for Vanquis (am awaiting response) ... my credit score when I first checked it was 909 ... its gone down to 863 .... I'm a discharged bankrupt since May 2008 ... my debt that was included in bankruptcy was a relatively small figure compared to others (under 20,000, half of which was a career development loan) - all this shows as satisfied. My info looks to be correct and my discharge shows correctly under my original name and my changed name.

I've been running my finances quite well now, but with no access to credit ... what do you think are my chances of getting accepted for Vanquis? I've been in same job for six years now, and in the same property for a year and a half.

danthemoneysavingman

Just a quick note to point out, many banks (lenders) will use policy rules such as "ever bankrupt Y/N" or "ever CAIS 8/9" = charged-off debt and decline on these facts without ever getting to the score.
The score itself, as pointed out by James, is often a component of a lender's score but much more info is used in tandem with this, and much more info beyond what factors contribute to the score is made available by Experian and their competitors to subscribing lenders.
Make of that what you will. I've 15+ years experience building and working with retail credit risk scorecards if that makes any difference.
HTH