Experian score jumped up 397 points

Ebe_Scrooge

phillw wrote: »

I agree it doesn't guarantee anything, I disagree that it's completely meaningless.

Black and white thinking that it means everything or nothing is unhelpful.

Anecdotally, a high score indicates stability - though this has nothing to do with credit worthiness. Hence why you can get the situation where someone who has been bankrupt for a while has a "perfect" score, due mainly to the fact that their credit situation has not changed in recent months. Conversely, if you are accepted for a new credit card, open a new bank account, win the lottery and pay off your mortgage - your score tends to drop.

Nasqueron

phillw wrote: »

I agree it doesn't guarantee anything, I disagree that it's completely meaningless.

Black and white thinking that it means everything or nothing is unhelpful.

And the score is calculated on all of that except your income. I accept that having a high score and a certainty that you can afford to pay back a debt is no guarantee that a lender will feel the same way.

Credit scores are more like an aid to improving your chances of getting credit, like a nicotine patch helps you give up cigarettes.

It IS completely meaningless, bankrupts have a 999 rating, they won't get prime credit. People on this board with nearly perfect 900+ scores have been refused basic mobile contracts, people with poor ratings have got loans. The CRA system is a designed to appeal to human nature - you have a number, you can get the number higher if you pay the CRA.


The score is not an aid as you cannot guarantee that a high score = get credit and low score = won't get credit. A nicotine patch is a nonsense analogy as that has a demonstrable use, the credit score is a novelty

potatoefeet66

That’s not entirely accurate lenders:money: do see your credit score, but have internal policy rules which they use to check before customers apply for credit. It’s these constantly changing internal policy rules which will either accept or decline your application, it all depends on whether or not it’s in lenders interest.

I know this as my mortgage provider issued data under a SAR containing my credit score and ref from Experian stating “good score normal case” however the application to simultaneously make a lump sum reduction to existing mortgage upon porting of 0.84% tracker was declined as it was no longer of commercial benefit to lender.
Life Skill number one honesty.

[Deleted User]

That's a different score. It's one provided to the lender based on their criteria, not the one size fits all score that the customer sees.

[Deleted User]

That’s their own internal score from their systems.

You could draft something up in Excel with some formulas to generate a score of you want to.

It’s not the same score the CRA’s use since they are not the ones lending you money and therefore cannot rate you

potatoefeet66

It forms part of the control document for an application that lender now refuses to confirm was carried out and the score number is under Experian with an Experian reference number.

I know lenders do not issue cra figures but this is the score so in fact lender had no reason to accept an amendment to an existing loan in this case. :money:

[Deleted User]

Do you mean the search is with Experian with a reference?

phillw

Ebe_Scrooge wrote: »

Anecdotally, a high score indicates stability - though this has nothing to do with credit worthiness. Hence why you can get the situation where someone who has been bankrupt for a while has a "perfect" score,

That sounds like an imperfect scoring algorithm, do the CRAs do that on purpose? I'd expect there to be a weight applied if your bankruptcy is relevant.

Nasqueron wrote: »

The CRA system is a designed to appeal to human nature - you have a number, you can get the number higher if you pay the CRA.

It hasn't worked on me, I've never paid a CRA. If you want the number higher then you stop taking out credit and missing payments, they are essentially rewarding financial stability with a higher score. That would seem to be a good thing.

Nasqueron wrote: »

The score is not an aid as you cannot guarantee that a high score = get credit and low score = won't get credit. A nicotine patch is a nonsense analogy as that has a demonstrable use, the credit score is a novelty

It's a perfect analogy, you just don't like it. A nicotine patch still has you addicted to nicotine, it breaks the ritual side of smoking. Improving your credit score breaks the ritual side of poor financial management.

Nasqueron

phillw wrote: »

That sounds like an imperfect scoring algorithm, do the CRAs do that on purpose? I'd expect there to be a weight applied if your bankruptcy is relevant.



It hasn't worked on me, I've never paid a CRA. If you want the number higher then you stop taking out credit and missing payments, they are essentially rewarding financial stability with a higher score. That would seem to be a good thing.



It's a perfect analogy, you just don't like it. A nicotine patch still has you addicted to nicotine, it breaks the ritual side of smoking. Improving your credit score breaks the ritual side of poor financial management.

Don't worry mate, you aren't something special or bringing some new idea to the board, there are literally hundreds of posts on here from people saying "my score is xyz, why was I refused credit". Your nicotine patch analogy is laughably awful - nicotine patches help people quit smoking, the credit rating is a made up number intended to encourage people to sign up for pointless improvement services run by, and aggressively advertised by, the CRAs themselves who of course control the score so can ensure your money appears to be well spent. Credit scores are more like vaping, just moving the problem to a slightly less bad one.

You'll learn how pointless the scores are and how a comparison to something useful is utterly flawed if you have a quick hunt through the history of posts on this board and then you can come back and be the bigger man and admit you were wrong.


Or post some more silliness that a hundred people before you have tried as well, each of them convinced that they have the argument that will finally convince people who understand the system that there is some point to the credit scores, up to you, but you'll still be wrong

phillw

Nasqueron wrote: »

Your nicotine patch analogy is laughably awful - nicotine patches help people quit smoking, the credit rating is a made up number intended to encourage people to sign up for pointless improvement services run by, and aggressively advertised by, the CRAs themselves who of course control the score so can ensure your money appears to be well spent. Credit scores are more like vaping, just moving the problem to a slightly less bad one.

I agree that paying the CRA to improve your credit score is a poor choice, but you don't have to do that. Like you don't have to vape.

I guess I have to look forward to more ridiculous posts by black/white thinking people about credit scores being meaningless/novelty/jokes/etc. At least it's an easy way to spot types of people.