Showing posts with label Consumer Credit Report. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Consumer Credit Report. Show all posts

Monday, May 16, 2011

Credit Error? It Pays to Be on V.I.P. List

May 14, 2011
Credit Error? It Pays to Be on V.I.P. List
By

 
The credit rating bureaus, whose reports influence everything from credit cards to mortgages to job offers, have a two-tiered system for resolving errors — one for the rich, the well-connected, the well-known and the powerful, and the other for everyone else.

The three major agencies, Equifax, Experian and TransUnion, keep a V.I.P. list of sorts, according to consumer lawyers and legal documents, consisting of celebrities, politicians, judges and other influential people. Those on the list — and they may not even realize they are on it — get special help from workers in the United States in fixing mistakes on their credit reports. Any errors are usually corrected immediately, one lawyer said.

For everyone else, disputes are herded into a largely automated system. Their complaints are often electronically ferried to a subcontractor overseas, where a worker spends, on average, about two minutes figuring out the gist of the matter, boiling it down to a one-to-three-digit computer code that signifies the problem — “account not his/hers,” for example — and sending a dispute form to the creditor to investigate. Many times, consumer advocates say, the investigation translates to a perfunctory check of its records.

“The legal responsibility of the credit reporting agencies and of the creditors is well established,” said Leonard Bennett, a consumer lawyer in Newport News, Va. “There is a requirement that they do meaningful research and analysis, and it is almost never done.”

Consumers who have trouble fixing errors through the dispute process can quickly find themselves trapped in a Kafkaesque no man’s land, where the only escape is through the court system.

“You are guilty before you are proven innocent in a situation like this,” said Catherine Taylor, 45, of Benton, Ark., who said she had been denied employment and credit because her filing was mixed up with a felon who had the same name and birthday.

Judy Johnson of Bossier City, La., was confused with a less creditworthy Judith Johnson, with a similar address and Social Security number. For nearly seven years, Judy Johnson, a 63-year-old credit manager for a building supply company, said she tried to remove the black marks from her credit report. But when she was denied a credit card, she knew the problem had returned — a third time. “This time, I was livid,” she said.

She ultimately brought a suit against one of the bureaus, and recently settled for an amount she cannot disclose. But the problems still linger. A deputy sheriff recently came to her door to serve her papers for a debt she says she does not owe.

The credit rating bureaus, private-sector companies that each attempt to track all American consumers’ credit use, have grown much more powerful over the last couple of decades as credit has become a crucial cog in the nation’s financial system. Their reports are used to formulate the all-powerful credit score, which lenders use to determine creditworthiness.

But as the bureaus’ work has become more important, consumer advocates say, regulation has not kept up, in large part because their overseer, the Federal Trade Commission, lacks broad authority. That could change once responsibility for the credit bureaus shifts to the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which will be able to write rules and examine the credit agencies’ policies.

The bureaus, meanwhile, do not have an economic incentive to improve the system, consumer advocates say, because their main customers are the creditors, not consumers.

“There is no neutrality in the credit reporting agencies,” said John Ulzheimer, who has been an expert witness in more than 80 credit-related cases and is president of consumer education at SmartCredit.com. “They work for the lenders who buy credit reports from them, and anyone who suggests otherwise is not being intellectually honest.”

When asked about the V.I.P. category, TransUnion said all consumers “have the ability to speak to a live representative.” Equifax said consumers who received a free copy of their credit report were provided with a number for customer service.

Experian denied that it had V.I.P. lists. But a spokeswoman did say that prominent people deemed high risk — like politicians in an election year — might have their credit files taken offline so that creditors or other companies making inquiries could not get access without the bureau’s permission. Experian said those people did not receive any other special handling.

David Szwak, a consumer lawyer in Shreveport, La., who has handled dozens of credit cases, said that the V.I.P. designation and preferential treatment did exist at Experian, and he provided sworn testimony from former Experian employees that the category existed.

Estimates of credit reports with serious errors vary widely, anywhere from 3 to 25 percent. A recent study, paid for by the Consumer Data Industry Association, the trade group for the bureaus, found potential errors in 19.2 percent of reports, but said that less than 1 percent of them had disputes that, when settled, resulted in a meaningful increase in scores. Even 1 percent translates into millions of consumers, since there are at least 200 million files at each of the bureaus.

The F.T.C. is expected to deliver a nationwide study on credit report accuracy next year that could provide more clarity. It could also include recommendations for legislative action.

The volume of disputes has been rising as consumers borrow more and gain greater access to credit reports. The automated system was a response to that. A spokesman for the trade group said most consumers received an answer within 14 days.

Experian is the only bureau that still processes disputes in the United States, experts said, though most complaints wind their way through the same online system — unless the dispute involves a V.I.P.

“They get a lot more high-end treatment,” said Mr. Szwak, the lawyer, who has read the bureaus’ internal procedure manuals and deposed or cross-examined employees. The biggest difference at TransUnion and Equifax, lawyers said, is that V.I.P.’s disputes are specially handled domestically. Regular consumers’ files, meanwhile, may get priority treatment if they involve a time-sensitive issue, like a mortgage pending, or if the consumer is represented by a lawyer or dealing with fraud.

Last year, new rules went into effect to strengthen existing regulations on the accuracy of reports. The rules also allow consumers to dispute errors directly with the creditor. But critics say the rule lacks any teeth because consumers don’t have the right to sue the companies. (Individuals can, however, sue the bureaus and creditors after lodging a dispute through their system.)

But the problem, advocates say, is that consumers cannot vote with their feet. “They cannot remove their information from the bureaus,” said Chi Chi Wu, a staff lawyer at the National Consumer Law Center, who wrote a report on the automated dispute process in 2009, “or take their business elsewhere.”

Sunday, March 13, 2011

The Fed's Credit Report

No Light in the Tunnel
By MIKE WHITNEY

On Monday, the Federal Reserve released its Consumer Credit Report which showed that consumer credit increased at an annual rate of 2.5% in January. That might sound like good news, but there's more here than meets the eye. Non-revolving credit increased at a rate of 7% per anum, while revolving credit decreased at an annual rate of 6.5%. So, people are taking out more loans, but using their credit cards less.

What's disturbing about the report is that the two main areas of improvement are auto loans and student loans. Both sectors are built on foundations of sand. After all, the reason that auto sales are booming this year is because the big car dealers are giving away the farm to people with poor credit. As Autonation's President Michael Maroone said last week on the Nightly Business Report:
"The big driver of the recovery in 2010 was the restoration of credit. The change in 2011 is we`re now seeing an improving environment for sub-prime. So last year prime and near prime were more normal and this year we`re starting to see the sub- prime segment come along and that`s very important for our industry." (The Nightly Business Report)
So, we're back to "Square 1", right? GM is offering "72 months zero percent financing" to people with dodgy credit. And then the dodgy loans are being chopped up, glued together, and sold to as bonds to "yield seeking" institutional investors around the world. That's the way the new financial system works, and that's why the system broke down when investors tried to ditch these crappy bonds in the autumn of '08. It triggered a run on the shadow banking system that led to worst financial crisis in 70 years. Now car dealers are back for a double-dip reviving subprime loans to inflate another bubble.

The uptick in auto sales has nothing to do with "organic demand" for autos. That's baloney. It's about getting anyone who can fog a mirror to sign on the dotted line so the contract can be sold to gullible investors looking for higher yield.

Even so, sales did increase on the month, so, technically speaking, there was a boost in credit. The question is whether subprime auto lending is a sign of recovery or not? The answer is "No".

The other area of nonrevolving credit that improved was student loans, which basically represented all of the increase in non-revolving credit aside from auto sales. Think about that for a minute. In other words, the commercial banks, finance companies, credit unions, savings institutions, nonfinancial business and pools of securitized debts all barely squeaked-by or lost ground in January. That's amazing. Virtually every area of non-revolving credit is still flat on its back a full 30 months after Lehman Bros collapsed except for student loans. And the media tries to spin this as good news?

The credit issued via student loans soared from $317 billion to $342 billion from December to January, a $25 billion windfall in just one month. But, as we pointed out in an interview with Professor Alan Nasser, the student loan business is the biggest swindle of all. Bigger than subprime by many orders of magnitude. Here's an excerpt from the interview:

MW--Is it fair to say that the student loan industry is a scam that targets borrowers who will never be able to repay their debts?

Professor Alan Nasser--"It's as fair as fair can be....How many of these students are subprime borrowers? That is, how closely do student loans resemble junk mortgages? The answer hinges on three factors: how these loans are rated, how likely the borrower is to repay, and the default rate on student loans.

Repeat: A default rate of 51%. This is predatory lending writ large.

So, when we talk about student loans, we're not talking about something that strengthens economic recovery. We're talking about a scam that targets vulnerable young people who want to play by the rules so they can make a positive contribution to society. These kids are getting fleeced by shyster banksters and loan sharks whose only interest is lining their own pockets. Most of these students will be in debt until the day they die. (Students are not afforded any of the consumer protections of other borrowers. They cannot shed their debts through bankruptcy.)

So, apart from these dubious "improvements" in non-revolving credit, the Fed's credit report is really pretty grim, much as one would expect when households are still deleveraging from a gigantic financial meltdown that cost them $11.4 trillion in personal wealth and home equity.

So, why does it matter? What difference does it make if people are borrowing or not?

It matters a lot. Economists watch credit expansion very closely to see how the economy is doing. You see, when wages stagnate--as they have for the last 30 years---the only way that working people can increase their spending is by borrowing. And since consumer spending is roughly 70% of GDP, if consumers don't borrow, then the economy doesn't grow.

So, the credit report is really bad news on many levels. First, it shows that the only thing that has kept the economy on life-support has been the government deficits which have made up for the loss in private spending. Second, it shows that consumers are only slightly better off than they were in 2008. (and less inclined to take on more debt) And, finally, it shows that the Fed's QE2 (bond buying program) has had NO measurable effect of consumer spending/credit at all. While it's been a god-send for the equities markets, it's been a total bust for consumers.

Don't believe the "Happy Day's Are Here Again" blabber. Two and a half years into the so-called recovery and the country is still in the throes of a severe multi-year depression. The Fed's Credit Report proves it.