We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
what a joke experian and apple finance are.
Options
Comments
-
I could see where you are coming from. But for people with Bankruptcy, it is also a complete exaggeration to get a score of 964/1000.
It is a fact that almost all lenders (if not all) will not touch people with bankruptcy with a barge pole.
The score is not about probability of getting credit (and should not be marketed as such). It is about account conduct.
So someone may be bankrupt yet in the more immediate past have behaved well financially.
So in this case the score is not really useful, but is not random. There is meaning to it.0 -
The score is not about probability of getting credit (and should not be marketed as such). It is about account conduct.
So someone may be bankrupt yet in the more immediate past have behaved well financially.
So in this case the score is not really useful, but is not random. There is meaning to it.
Not really, stuff is on your credit report for 6 years, a score of 999 with bad credit on your record is random as it implies you are a perfect customer whereas lenders won't touch you based on their own internal scoring.
A 999 should only ever be given to someone with a perfect rating i.e. well managed cards, normal utilisation, paid off every month, no defaults/late payments/PDL probably no loans, only 1-2 cards not having more credit than take home pay etc etcSam Vimes' Boots Theory of Socioeconomic Unfairness:
People are rich because they spend less money. A poor man buys $10 boots that last a season or two before he's walking in wet shoes and has to buy another pair. A rich man buys $50 boots that are made better and give him 10 years of dry feet. The poor man has spent $100 over those 10 years and still has wet feet.
0 -
The score is not about probability of getting credit (and should not be marketed as such). It is about account conduct.
So someone may be bankrupt yet in the more immediate past have behaved well financially.
So in this case the score is not really useful, but is not random. There is meaning to it.
While I agree with you that it's not random - there is a method in its generation, I think that is a completely moot point. What matters, for something people pay 15 pounds a month for. (£180 a year) is that it should be useful.
As has been clearly stated already an excellent rating 964/1000 would indicate that almost anyone would be willing to lend to you. In reality a bankruptcy and 2 defaults mean the complete opposite. Almost no one will touch you.
CRA scores are worthless. Your account conduct, your debt/available credit vs income, length in job and stability and standard of residential status are all that matter.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 350.9K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.5K Spending & Discounts
- 243.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.9K Life & Family
- 257.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards