Is 6 years too harsh?

ferry

Just thinking out loud really,any reason why it's the last 6 years potential creditors look at when deciding to lend?
My credit record is less than perfect if you go back over the full 6 years,but is perfect over the last 4 years and could now easily manage any credit I now have or need.

Wondering why an odd late or missed payment say 5 years ago may have such an impact on credit decisions now?
Is 6 years too harsh..?

ferry.

Stephen_Leak

I suspect that it is just that 6 years is the period specified under the Limitations Act 1980 for financial matters, including the retention of records.

There is no standard method of interpreting this data though. Each potential lender does it their own way. One would hope that your most recent 4 good years would outweigh the previous 2 bad ones. OTOH, if the lender has met their quota for the product, they will refuse you, even if you have a perfect repayment record for 60 years.

PBA

Just because the credit reference agencies store 6 years worth of data doesn't mean any bank has to use it. Anything over a year or 2 old is likely to be ignored, as long as it's not bankruptcy or a serious write off. Arguably a credit file showing you made some mistakes in the past but learned from them is actually a positive thing.

keeperbear

ferry wrote: »

Wondering why an odd late or missed payment say 5 years ago may have such an impact on credit decisions now?
Is 6 years too harsh..?

Let's twist this around slightly. If I have got a perfect credit rating over 6 years, I want a bank to look at my whole record not just the most recent four years.