Comment by mistrial9
3 years ago
> you (largely) can't run a credit check on me without my permission
that is LOL incorrect. I know a car sales department lead, a licensed real estate broker who is also a rental apartment owner, and multiple small business owners that I suspect can all snoop on my US credit record pretty much at will. The second part of that is that each and every one of those people do lie on signed documents routinely, which apparently is normal.
Notwithstanding bad actors, the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) requires[1], among other things:
1. Only business entities with a specific, legitimate purpose can request / access a credit report.
2. Consent must be provided depending on use case.
"Soft pulls" (e.g., pre-screened CC offers) can be done without your consent. (You can opt out of these.)
A dealership finance office or lease broker would absolutely run your credit, and typically there are explicit forms you sign authorizing such a check as part of that business transaction authorized by you. "At will" checks outside of such transactions would appear to be in violation of FCRA.
Conversely, credit agencies are required to provide you a list of all inquiries upon demand, so you can see if those parties you mention actually are running your credit without your permission.
[1] https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/pdf-0096-fair-credit-r...
> Notwithstanding bad actors
Isn't this a huge point developing here now? that in consumer finance, those who run the show routinely are shown cheating overall. What is the gain/pain ratio on cheating in consumer finance? The list of legal requirements and safeguards seem to get longer at the same time as cheating on them gets more common.
I am not at all convinced that the consumer is protected here. Multiple avenues -- some offshore using agents who operate blatantly outside the law, and secondly accountants and admins who get numb to daily cheating, and do more of it. I will go full YOLO and add that I think the waves of pain killer abuse and common alcohol culture, directly contribute to norms of low-level cheating over money like this, especially where it is "just data" and not actual money moving around.
100%. Lots of gray area here in "shouldn't", "illegal", "can't", etc.
That's why, in my experience, I think TheWorkNumber has a pretty good and individual-centric approach. I have to explicitly grant access to that data on a per-request basis with some form of one-time key that I provide to the requestor.
Compare that to a credit check, where ("if you're lucky") you sign something saying you're aware of and approve the request, but without any sort of real technical control.