FAO: James Jones, Experian Rep

hoffage123

danthemoneysavingman wrote: »

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

This is depressing, but I guess it makes sense from their point of view. Once my BR falls off my record I guess they could still use that policy to not offer me credit?

izools

Experian_company_representative wrote: »

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

Thank you james. But please address the most glaring point:

The presence of a bankruptcy order is not flagged as a negative factor and the "Public record information" section of my credit report does not have an exclamation mark beside it

Name one creditor who doesn't consider the presence of a bankruptcy order negative.

On this point and this point alone it is clear that the scorecard is not even remotely representative of how any creditor on god's green earth would view me and is therefore misrepresentative.

............

I completely understand and acknowledge what you're saying about the fact my mother's credit profile shows a higher percentage credit utilization and one more recent search.

But are you saying owing 40% of your limits instead of 23% and having made three applications instead of two, is more negative than having been subject to six default notices and bankruptcy? Of course it isn't!

Name one creditor who thinks it is.

Your "Lower My Bills" tool also states that my best suited card is the "Barclaycard Gold", despite the fact that Barclaycard don't accept discharged bankrupts. Again, severely broken system.

..........

As a test, I ran my details through this search:

http://www.moneysupermarket.com/credit-cards/smart-search

These were the results: (no prime cards were available, only the sub-prime lot)



I then ran mother's details (with her consent) through the same search, these were the results:




Clearly, the score card Call Credit and / or Money Supermarket use is more in tune with reality, I really think you need to look at your score card and sort this out.

danthemoneysavingman

sajadhoffmanhussain123 wrote: »

This is depressing, but I guess it makes sense from their point of view. Once my BR falls off my record I guess they could still use that policy to not offer me credit?

After 6 years they have no knowledge of it, I believe. Happy to be corrected of course!

danthemoneysavingman

I would like to add I don't see any benefit in anyone paying to see this score, but an article on this site implies as much. Save your money is my suggestion!

brenda50

James, can you tell me please what my chances are of having my credit score increased after having a default and debt collecting from a dormant cedit card which was used inadvertently a year ago instead of a debit card and the transaction unknown about until just recently. I will settle the amount and am asking for my card to be reinstated. Previous to this, an excellent credit history.

meer53

I don't get it. Why are people hung up on their credit scores ? If people are fully aware of what they've been up to in the past, either with late payments or bankruptcy or whatever, then surely they have a good idea of whether they'd be offered credit or not ? I can see the point if you are declined credit and you have absolutley no idea why, as mistakes are made.

izools

meer53 wrote: »

I don't get it. Why are people hung up on their credit scores ? If people are fully aware of what they've been up to in the past, either with late payments or bankruptcy or whatever, then surely they have a good idea of whether they'd be offered credit or not ? I can see the point if you are declined credit and you have absolutley no idea why, as mistakes are made.

I completely agree.

I don't go by the scores available, it just happens to come free with my monthly subscription to Credit Expert - which I've had to keep due to numerious errors with balances reported or lack of updates from Zopa and Creation - with whom I have a complaint open expecting a rebate of the fees.

The point I'm trying to make with this thread is to James Jones at Experian as he seems to believe that what they are marketing is actually a useful product.

I feel it right I demonstrate to both him and the masses that it is in fact incredibly inaccurate and misleading.


TL: DR - Yep, agreed. Just making a point

lisyloo

I don't get it. Why are people hung up on their credit scores ? If people are fully aware of what they've been up to in the past, either with late payments or bankruptcy or whatever, then surely they have a good idea of whether they'd be offered credit or not ?

I don't agree.
I don't think most people have any idea how their information will be interpreted by lenders.
However I don't think the scores tell them this and I don't think they are good value for money either.
But when each individual lender can have different scoring AND different target markets then I think there is NO way you can know whether you are going to be offered credit or not.
These forums are all the evidence you need to see the confusion.
Experian (and the other CRAs) are capitalising on that.
It's no different to a lot of businesses that capitalise on fear and confusion.
If you're savvy you don't need it but it doesn't make what they are doing illegal or mis-selling.
But if people do think it's wrong, I'd support them 100% in providing the evidence to the authorities.

meer53

lisyloo wrote: »

I don't agree.
I don't think most people have any idea how their information will be interpreted by lenders.
However I don't think the scores tell them this and I don't think they are good value for money either.
But when each individual lender can have different scoring AND different target markets then I think there is NO way you can know whether you are going to be offered credit or not.
These forums are all the evidence you need to see the confusion.
Experian (and the other CRAs) are capitalising on that.
It's no different to a lot of businesses that capitalise on fear and confusion.
If you're savvy you don't need it but it doesn't make what they are doing illegal or mis-selling.
But if people do think it's wrong, I'd support them 100% in providing the evidence to the authorities.

But thats exactly my point ! Some people have no idea, lenders use different criteria, the scores don't actually mean anything to the man in the street, people are confused, so WHY do people obsess about their scores ?
All people need to know are the basics as to why you might be declined, then use a bit of common sense.

udydudy

lisyloo wrote: »

......No-one has ever said it reflects how any lender will rate you and therefore I cannot see how it can be mis-sold..............
.................. but it's not mis-sold.

I disagree(I normally agree with your posts) with Lisyloo that it is not a mis-sell, frankly the initial poster having a bankruptcy order and not a discharged bankrupt in itself should, I would think , make for a lower score than her mother, irrespective of outstanding credit. I personally know friends who get very good rates on loans and cards even though they have credit limits which are 1.5 times their annual income and with credit utilization of over 90%(tarting)!! Infact one bank told my mate that because he has a high credit utilization and still has never missed a payment, they find him more credit worthy than his OH.

The CRAs by giving scores that do not reflect any semblance to the credit worthiness of the person would be a mis-selling. AS the CRAs say they have a long standing experience, my opinion would be that though their score would not necessarily mean a lender would lend to the person but it should show how probable it is.

I do not think any person with a bankruptcy order would get credit from a prime lender and this should reflect in the credit score.

I think the CRA representative(not sure it is James) who has put in a long reply to this post is all hogwash. I work for a credit broker and have experienced that the moment one has a CCJ most(though not necessarily all) prime lenders run away, let alone a bankruptcy order.

Frankly if enough people would care to complaint then irrespective of the CRAs wording in their t & C's this would be a case for mis-selling. And if I may add, a lot similar to the PPI mis-selling wherein they had in their T&C's a lot of conditions which if a person read through would not have taken the PPI.

The fact that the CRAs are meant to have an understanding of the industry the scores should reflect reality.

For example as one poster took the example of cambelt costs, Imagine going to a person with vast experience in automobile repair and licensed to advice (though not a mechanic - just like a CRA -- not a lender but with vast financial industry experience) and he was to tell you your car is roadworthy and then the mechanic tells you it is not. Would you ever listen to such a person?? especially if he is charging you for it?? and is licensed to give you that advice?? that person should lose his licence.

SImilarly if CRAs cannot give proper representative scores then they should either not be allowed to give such a score or should refund the money taken for credit scores till date, as IMHO it is a mis-sell.

Sorry for the long rant...:):):):):)... gets my goat when financial organisations take the customers for suckers and do what they want and the regulatory bodies turn a blind eye.;);)