Searches - What's the problem?

shortcrust

a4a wrote: »

Many don't seem to want to agree though, I feel as if everyone is arguing with me when I'm simply pointing out another crippling penalty imposed by lenders and CRA's.

This is just one area where CRA's are not helping the consumer or the economy and hold far too much power.

It really is time for change and with the number of people on here as part of this community, why can't something be done to change it?

I'm sure people have tried to lobby before, but MSE is a pretty big group now and has a pretty big mouth with TV & Radio, (not to mention moneysupermarket.com) I don't understand why something can't be done to change the way CRAs and ultimately lenders operate.

Because it seems that most of us on here can see the sense in CRAs using data in the way they do. I really can't see how lenders having less information on which to base decisions will help the consumer and the economy.

a4a

shortcrust wrote: »

Because it seems that most of us on here can see the sense in CRAs using data in the way they do. I really can't see how lenders having less information on which to base decisions will help the consumer and the economy.

I agree, I don't think they should see less. I think they (and we) should see accurate information.

At the moment, the information is late and out of date and slow in updating and it should be in realtime so as to provide more accurate information.

adindas

a4a wrote: »

Hello,

I was just wondering why searches are such a problem and cause your credit score to go down? Surely if you are a responsible borrower it makes sense to shop around. Who goes shopping and only visits one shop?

They say too many searches makes you look desperate, or something similar. Surely, that is ridiculous, especially when it can be as few as one or two searches over say 6 months, which can have a negative impact.

It seems to me to be an unfair penalty on your credit file and makes it difficult for you to get the best deal.

Any thoughts?

I fully agree with you. This has to be stopped or at least if this was doomed to be necessary, there should be any compensation to compensate the people due to the fact that the people can not get the best deal. Alternatively this search should not be recorded on people credit file.

I am aware you agree to do this as you sign it when you apply for their product which allow them to do this. But you have no other option but to sign it, do not you...

The problem here lay to the fact that the lender has nothing to loose as it does not have impact on them. They know it will have impact on the borrower, but who care, not me.

In the meanwhile the CRAs have a huge incentive to maintain the search on the record as this is the source of income and where the power to justify their existence is coming from.

I got rejected once for a Credit Card application I intended to use for stoozing. I believe four searches prior to my application contribute to this. At almost period of time I get approval for two new bank account with on offer of quite generous overdraft. As this is seen by the lender then the search must have impact. How great the impact is, it will depend on the people who assesses the application or the underwriters. The less experience , the lazy one will look it as a risk the experience one will scrutinize further and draw a more sensible conclusion that these people are trying to look for a deal instead of desperation.

These searches have driven me mad ....

a4a

adindas wrote: »

I fully agree with you. This has to be stopped or at least if this was doomed to be necessary, there should be any compensation to compensate the people due to the fact that the people can not get the best deal. Alternatively this search should not be recorded on people credit file.

I am aware you agree for the to do this as you sign it when you apply for their product that you allow them to do this. But you have no option, have not you...

The problem here lay he the fact that the lender has nothing to loose as it does not have impact on them. They know it will impact to the borrower, but who care not me.

In the meanwhile the CRAs have a huge incentive to maintain the search on the record as this is the source of income and where the power to justify their existence is coming from.

I got rejected once for a Credit Card application I intended to use for stoozing. I believe four searches prior to my application contribute to this. At almost period of time I get approval for two new bank account with on offer of overdraft. As this is seen by the lender then the search must have impact. How great the impact is, it will depend on the people who assesses the application or the underwriters. The less experience , the lazy one will look it as a risk the experience one will scrutinize further and draw a more sensible conclusion that these people are trying to look for a deal instead of desperation.

These searches have driven me mad ....

Yep, I believe there are a number of people who are desperate and there are a number of people trying to get a better deal, but the lenders have decided that we all fall into only one bracket......which is the desperate one. Therefore people being sensible are penalised.

crosslegs

Accepting that the 'credit scores' issued to the public are inaccurate and may not be used by finance suppliers and card issuers, are there some other scoring systems tailor made to their clients requirements ?
Otherwise, they would have to spend considerable time analysing all the entries in each applicants credit history rather than having a quick overall ranking ?

a4a

crosslegs wrote: »

Accepting that the 'credit scores' issued to the public are inaccurate and may not be used by finance suppliers and card issuers, are there some other scoring systems tailor made to their clients requirements ?
Otherwise, they would have to spend considerable time analysing all the entries in each applicants credit history rather than having a quick overall ranking ?

CRA's 'credit' scores are inaccurate some of the time. However, I believe they ARE used by lenders for the very reason you suggest i.e they are a quick way of analysing an overall ranking without having to look at a full application.

Unfortunately though, I don't believe there are any other scoring systems.

BillJones

a4a wrote: »

What I don't get and what my post is all about, is the fact that EVERYONE seems to have been converted to the fact that excess credit searches implies a sign of desperation.

You do seem desperate, though, desperate for CRAs not to correctly report activity.

Why do you have such a problem with people knowing the truth about your activity? If it is not activity that should worry a lender, then presumably the lenders you approach won't worry about it.

Many don't seem to want to agree though, I feel as if everyone is arguing with me when I'm simply pointing out another crippling penalty imposed by lenders and CRA's.

Strange, what's "crippling" about a refusal if you are not struggling with debt, as you seem to want to imply?

It is starting to look a little as though lenders may be right to want to be cautious about you. Anyone who will find inability to get a new card ""crippling" is already in trouble.

a4a

BillJones wrote: »

You do seem desperate, though, desperate for CRAs not to correctly report activity.

Why do you have such a problem with people knowing the truth about your activity? If it is not activity that should worry a lender, then presumably the lenders you approach won't worry about it.



Strange, what's "crippling" about a refusal if you are not struggling with debt, as you seem to want to imply?

It is starting to look a little as though lenders may be right to want to be cautious about you. Anyone who will find inability to get a new card ""crippling" is already in trouble.

If you read my posts, you will see that I'm arguing that reporting should be more accurate and up to date. I have no problem whatsoever with lenders looking at my activity, but what I want them to look at, must be accurate and up to date therefore in realtime.

I didnt say anything was 'crippling', what I've said is, its 'wrong' to be refused because of searches, when you are looking to move to another lender or supplier for lower repayments.

BillJones

a4a wrote: »

I'm simply pointing out another crippling penalty.

I didnt say anything was 'crippling',

Yes you did say that, using exactly that word.

It was even in the post that I quoted. You do understand, don't you, that you are discussing this with people who can read what you've previously written?

a4a

Yes I do understand but when I used the word 'crippling' I was not using it in the context you state. You state that "Anyone who will find inability to get a new card ""crippling" is already in trouble".

I said it was a crippling penalty and it is. It has prevented me in the past from trying to change suppliers and lenders when I am trying to reduce my payments, NOT to increase my indebtedness.