
John Oliver on the ugly state of credit reporting and background checks - chirau
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRrDsbUdY_k
======
encoderer
Until ~2015 the databases holding your credit file at EQ and TU were so shoddy
that you could easily remove "hard" inquiries on your credit report (those
that other people see for 2 years, and which affect your fico score for 1
year). The "trick" was to sign up for several services that let you pull your
own credit every day. Pulling your own credit, a "soft" inquiry, does not
affect on your score. Their databases could hold only the last 100 or so
inquiries, so you just pull your credit a few times every day and you overflow
the field. They had a monthly batching process to consolidate these soft
inquiries, so it did take a bit of persistence, but it's an alarming look at
the tech underlying this critical piece of our credit economy.

~~~
whatok
Wow, this is incredible. How has it changed since 2015?

~~~
x0x0
yup, they figured this out and stopped it mid 2015 iirc.

The above process occasionally lead to split credit reports as well, which
could be a nightmare to resolve.

~~~
artursapek
Was this technical detail made public? I'd be surprised to see them admit to
something like that.

~~~
x0x0
Of course the CRAs didn't tell people about this, but it was very widely known
amongst people trying to optimize their credit score, particularly for
churning or MSing. Google eg bumpage or B* and you'll find lengthy
discussions...

~~~
artursapek
Wow, that's amazing.

------
Someone1234
People like to claim that background checks are used when someone is placed
into a trusted position. However in my experience lower end jobs (where you're
often trusted less) are often much MORE likely to have a background check.

To give a specific example: Work in a fast food place handling small amounts
of cash and they'll background check you. Work in a company handling SSNs,
Credit Cards, and medical records and they didn't even ask me if I had a
criminal record (I don't).

So I cannot help but wonder if ex-convicts are going to suffer more while
getting a low end job than they would if they were applying for high end
positions. I guess the assumption is if you have a degree that you are somehow
above crime...

I guess that's why so called "white collar crime" often goes undetected for
longer and is often more successful overall.

~~~
lettergram
That may be your experience, but having worked for a large medical billing and
large bank, both do heavy background checks. I've even been finger printed,
and had my Facebook searched.

~~~
richardthered
You've had your Facebook searched? What was that process like?

I've gone through tons of background checks / drug screens for federal and
state governments, and financial companies. But I've never had a Facebook
search...

Is that even legal?

~~~
matwood
They have probably looked at your public facebook.

~~~
matwood
FYI [http://m.nextgov.com/cio-briefing/2016/04/opm-seeking-
social...](http://m.nextgov.com/cio-briefing/2016/04/opm-seeking-social-media-
tracking-background-checks/127380/)

------
jedberg
Why hasn't there been a class action suit against the credit agencies? Seems
like you'd have a pretty good libel case.

I have no contract with any of these agencies, yet they say bad things about
me to other people that are inaccurate.

In fact, I've been monetarily harmed. I tried to refinance my mortgage, which
would have saved me over $1000 a month, but was denied due to bad credit. When
I looked, it was all inaccuracies. That was two years ago, so I can say for a
fact that they caused me $24,000 of direct harm so far. I finally just got all
the inaccuracies cleared up.

I suspect that I've signed contracts with creditors that allow them to _send_
info to these people, but I know that isn't necessary, because I can file a
derogatory mark about anyone I want to as long as I have their SSN.

So, what stops a class action suit against these guys?

~~~
Domenic_S
It's a shady and powerful system.

The logic goes something like this: the credit reporting agencies simply
provided facts (reported to them by others) to the mortgage company, who made
their own decision about your creditworthiness.

Who is at fault in your situation? The mortgage company? No, they took your
report at face value and then made their own decision. The reporting agencies?
No, they just barf back data fed to them by individual creditors and run it
through their arbitrary algorithm. The individual creditors? Perhaps, or maybe
they sent an accurate report but somewhere along the line two numbers in an
SS# got flipped (innocent mistake) and now you're carrying someone else's bad
credit.

Scores of companies each have these tiny slices of responsibility, making it
really hard to pin one actor with all of it (ie, to name a defendant).

The incentives are perverse. The worse your score the more expensive to
borrow. Best case for a lender is to have a customer who _should_ have a high
credit score but doesn't because of mistakes like these -- you get the credit
risk of a AAA borrower, but can charge subprime rates. Best of both worlds.

~~~
toomuchtodo
> Who is at fault in your situation?

The credit agency. If they're reporting inaccurate information, that they
haven't verified, that's libel.

This is something the CFPB [+] needs to clamp down on hard.

[+] [http://www.consumerfinance.gov/](http://www.consumerfinance.gov/)

~~~
Domenic_S
I'm no lawyer, but I have a hard time imagining a successful libel suit here.
I would guess the reporting agencies have some set of terms & conditions that
say something to the effect of "You (the reporter) certify that this report is
true and correct to the best of your knowledge".

I mean, come on -- they're aggregators. They can't go investigate every single
report they get; they have to depend on reporters to tell the truth.

Importantly, the reporting agencies _do not make claims of creditworthiness
about you_. They present your "credit history" (accurate or not) and the
lenders themselves make their own determination. It's an awful catch-22.

~~~
jedberg
> agencies do not make claims of creditworthiness about you.

Which is a load of crap. They present a number and even say "above 750 is
excellent". It's in their own marketing materials. How is that not making a
claim of creditworthiness?

~~~
Domenic_S
Ok, you may be technically correct. Experian, for example, says "Higher scores
represent a greater likelihood that you'll pay back your debts so you are
viewed as being a lower credit risk to lenders."

Even so, lenders still decide what to do with that information. Some credit
cards may approve you at a 500 score. Others may not. Many lenders will tier
your rate based on score. Ultimately the decision of whether or not to extend
credit and what rate you get is up to the lender.

~~~
toomuchtodo
> Even so, lenders still decide what to do with that information. Some credit
> cards may approve you at a 500 score. Others may not. Many lenders will tier
> your rate based on score. Ultimately the decision of whether or not to
> extend credit and what rate you get is up to the lender.

If you're providing factually incorrect information on a person, that someone
is then going to make a financial decision around, you should be held liable
if your business _is to provide factual information on someone regarding the
credit worthiness_.

Unless we're just going to say that credit agencies have no requirement to
verify the data they collect. In that case, let's just rule them illegal
through legislation and allow them to dissolve (most of the first world does
not have credit agencies for consumers).

~~~
jedberg
> most of the first world does not have credit agencies for consumers

Interesting, I didn't realize that. How does credit work where they don't have
the agencies? Like if I want to buy a house in Germany or get a credit card in
France, does the bank just do all their own research?

~~~
toomuchtodo
I don't want to generalize too much, but yes, the lender does the majority of
the legwork in other countries.

~~~
germanier
I don't know about most other countries but both France and Germany do have
credit scoring agencies. The difference is that it mostly deals with negative
entries, i.e. you don't build credit by repaying loans but rather by never
falling behind on your payment schedule (the German system uses a few
additional factors). Banks usually don't care if you ever successfully repaid
a loan nor do they ask that question.

I don't know what US banks do apart from getting a credit score if somebody
applies for a loan but I don't assume it's much less than banks do here:
Assessing your income stability and looking at your large fixed expenses.

I also don't think there are any, say, OECD countries without such credit
scoring agencies.

------
bitsoda
On the topic of credit checks, it would be oh so nice to have two-step
verification whenever a hard inquiry is made. As a recent credit fraud victim,
it's been a nightmare spending hours on the phone with the credit bureaus.
Some let you dispute inquiries online, while others require a phone call. I
ended up just freezing my accounts (for a fee of course, and another fee to
unfreeze), and am gonna wait it out until two years pass.

All of this could have been easily prevented if I were required to reply via a
text message sent from the credit bureaus when an inquiry was made.

Credit cards already have two-step, why not apply it to potentially life-
ruining inquiries? Is there too much money in mafia-like companies who will
keep the bad guys away if you just pay them a monthly fee like LifeLock?

The credit system infuriates me to no end.

~~~
ikeboy
If you're a victim of identity fraud, you're supposed to be able to freeze the
accounts for free.

Edit: see [https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0497-credit-freeze-
faq...](https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0497-credit-freeze-faqs) and
[https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0279-extended-fraud-
al...](https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0279-extended-fraud-alerts-and-
credit-freezes)

It's not free in all states:

>The cost to place and lift a freeze, and how long the freeze lasts, depend on
state law: In many states, identity theft victims can place a freeze for free,
but in others, victims must pay a fee, which is usually about $10.

Although an alert is free, and lasts for 7 years.

~~~
joncrocks
I think the problem is that this is a retrospective step. If you don't know
you've been the victim of identity theft, then the first time you might find
out about it is when you're trying to make a large/important decision, which
may well be the most inconvenient time for it to occur).

Then you've got to sort it all out, and _then_ do the thing you first thought
of.

~~~
pc86
To be fair, the tools exist for anyone regardless of income to monitor their
credit on at least a yearly basis at no cost to them. Going 5+ years without
checking your own credit just because you're not in the market for a house or
a new car is pretty high on the list of things most responsible adults don't
do.

~~~
matwood
And both my credit cards show real time credit score numbers from the one of
the services. It's not perfect, but if the number radically changes that
should be a red flag.

------
travelton
My credit was in the dumps a year ago. I had a few negative marks, debt to
credit ratio was off, too many inquiries, etc... I didn't find any mistakes.
But, I was able to clean up my credit and raise my score by 120 points by
doing the following (YMMV).

1\. Set up an account at Credit Karma.

2\. Review your Credit Card Utilization. If it's under 30%, you should be
doing ok. If not, pay off those balances.

3\. Look for derogatory marks. If you see any that are older than 7 years,
file a dispute to have them removed (you can do this through CK directly).

Generally, I found that, if an account is closed and older than 5 years, if
you file a dispute, the creditor won't care and will either ignore the request
(resolving in your favor) or mark it as resolved in your favor.

If you have outstanding balances open in collections, call the collection
agency. Here's how that went for me... "Hi, I'm interested in discussing an
open collection on my credit. I see you are the owner of the debt." After they
pull up the information, ask them "How much are you willing to accept to purge
this from my credit?" (They are going to tell you they can't do that. But,
they most certainly can!)

If you receive an offer for 20% less (with removal from your credit), take it.
Use a credit card (responsibly!) if you don't have the funds immediately
available.

If not, make sure they have your phone number on file, hang up and wait. Come
the end of the month, I guarantee you they will call with an offer. :)

Tip: Use a Google Voice number, so you can field their phone calls, if they go
rogue. When you're negotiating, make sure you write down names, case numbers,
account numbers, etc.

4\. If you have old accounts on your credit report, don't close them! Closing
your accounts hurts your score. Instead, keep them open. If you have a credit
card that you never use, set up Netflix to bill to that card, then set up
recurring bill pay to pay off the balance every month. This will keep the
creditor from closing the account due to inactivity. That credit history will
keep your "Age of Credit History" up.

Lastly, if Credit Card Utilization is constantly hurting your score. Contact
your existing credit card companies and request a credit line increase (don't
open a new card!). A credit line increase will not hurt your Age of Credit
History, but a new card will.

~~~
Spooky23
Never, ever, ever call, respond to, acknowledge or otherwise interact with a
collection agency unless you know what you're doing, especially with old
debts.

With an old debt, the bottom feeder collections agencies pay like $0.05 on the
dollar. Once you make contact, you reanimate the debt for 7 years, and the
collector can sell it for $0.40-50 on the dollar.

~~~
snuxoll
When you contact a collector you reset the statue of limitations, but
derogatory marks can only ever remain on your credit report for 7 years from
the date of first delinquency.

------
rlucas
Credit is, at its core, trust. Trust, well-placed, makes everything about
humanity better. Seen that way it feels warm and fuzzy.

But, "credit," meaning the business of telling you whom you can trust (like a
bureau), is very very weird indeed.

Without pre-aggregated or nearly-instantly-compiled predictions about trust,
it can only spread out in a personal way. But impersonal relations are crucial
to trade, to fairness, to the open society (that is, you shouldn't be
constrained to trade only with your family/tribe/neighbors).

Hence, a credit bureau, in the ideal, is a trust-promoting mechanism --
something meant to facilitate the best in mankind. And it rewards faithfulness
to promises.

Furthermore, in most commerce we can use a default assumption of "trust." Most
people will return the rental car, will repay the loan, will queue up to pay
for the groceries, etc.

Here's the rub: with the assumption of trust, then the target outcome to model
(the labels you're looking for in ML terms) are the defaults or "don't trust"
outcomes.

Which means that the best credit bureaus will hungrily look for all labels of,
and all features which can be predictive of, defaults. And it must do so
opaquely so as to avoid being gamed by adversaries.

So now the institution which is meant to facilitate trust and reward
cooperation ... is a secretive digger for dirty laundry.

Just a reflection. It's weird.

(Background: I spent the last five years starting a fairly successful
alternative lender, and a less successful alternative credit bureau.)

------
tim333
Oliver was saying it was silly to ask for a credit check for firework selling
but looking on Criagslist they advance you the tent and stock and then rely on
you returning the unsold stuff and a percent of the sales. There'd probably be
a higher chance of someone with bad credit running off with the stock.

~~~
jackmaney
> There'd probably be a higher chance of someone with bad credit running off
> with the stock.

Do you have anything resembling evidence to back up that assertion?

~~~
MichaelBurge
Being advanced stock is literally being given a loan of that stock, and the
primary motivation of credit scoring is to be able to judge whether someone
will default on their loan.

Admittedly, that only defers the question to, "Does credit scoring accomplish
its primary motivation?" But you could become a loanshark millionaire if it
turned out that people with low credit score were equal or better borrowers
than people with high credit score, since the existing financial industry
isn't serving them as well.

~~~
maxdemarzi
This is exactly what Avant in Chicago is doing.

------
cableshaft
My main problem is it's difficult and time consuming to get back on top of
things if you have a string of badly timed emergencies that leave you unable
to pay for awhile. That can leave you in a place where you have to let one
bill slip to catch up on another, and then next month let the other bill slip
to catch up on two others, and then the next month let something slip and...oh
crap, another emergency, now you've slipped a little further down the hole!...
and its just a vicious cycle.

Even if you start making good money again it can take a long time to right
that boat. And the whole time your credit score is swirling the drain, making
it even more difficult to get the funds you need to balance everything or
weather future emergencies, and you're too afraid to move, because you don't
know how you'll pass the credit check, even though you haven't ever missed a
rent payment (it's the highest priority bill).

I really wish there was a little more flexibility in payments. Even just a
"you can miss a payment if you double pay to catch up next month without us
reporting it" would have helped quite a bit.

I also think there needs to be a more universal, centralized place where you
can set up online bill pay without it _automatically_ paying (I tell it to pay
a particular company a particular amount). I've been locked out of being able
to pay my bill on their online sites and it's a nightmare calling or jumping
through the hoops to get your account unlocked to be able to pay online again.

------
adrenalinelol
When I took a job on Wall St, I was not vetted at all by any type of third
party agency (credit, background, etc...). It was only 6 or so years ago I had
a minimum wage job ringing up products at a convenience store, I had a drug
test every 6 months, a credit check (had never owned a CC at that point), and
a criminal background check.

~~~
swozey
Candidates on Wall Street are easily filtered by education. Don't want to hire
him? Say you're only looking to hire candidates from McCombs. Have people that
for whatever reason you want the ability to not hire, but can't base it on
experience/educational requirements (low skill, retail, etc jobs)? Well, FICO,
drug testing and background checks will give you all the reasons you need so
your state Workforce Commission doesn't consider it an issue.

------
mixmastamyk
There's another problem with credit that can be as difficult as bad credit,
and that is no credit. I have plenty of money so no real need for credit,
especially credit cards. My car is over ten years old but in great condition
since I maintain it well. Former car purchases have fallen off my credit
report, they "expire" after a decade I guess. Last year we almost lost out on
our current apartment when moving, it was scary.

I'm not even sure what to do to fix the situation, since I'm not interested in
credit cards or a new car right away. Any tips?

~~~
tryitnow
You need to understand that you don't have to "need" a credit card in order
for it to make sense to use one, so the fact that you have plenty of money is
irrelevant.

In fact there's an older banker's maxim that says "never lend money to someone
who needs it."

My recommendation: As long as you are disciplined then start using a credit
card for your purchases. Google around and find one from a mainstream
providers that provides lots of points and no annual fee. At least 1% back on
all your purchases. My Citibank card gets me about 2% back on everything I
purchase. So basically I get a little discount on all my purchases for having
good credit.

Start using it immediately to build up credit. Like it or not, you're only
going to encounter more situations like you did with the apartment. And the
older you get, the more suspicious it looks.

If you don't feel you can be disciplined enough to pay it off every month,
then just use it for handful of recurring purchases and nothing else, then at
least you'll start building a credit history.

~~~
mixmastamyk
I did look for one last year but couldn't find any without stupid fees of one
kind or another.

~~~
pc86
With no credit, you are not going to get approved for any card where you don't
end up paying for the privilege of having it in one way or another. Most like
a $40-60 yearly fee. A year or two in with on-time payments you can either
convert the card to one without a fee or get a new one without a fee and close
that one.

~~~
mixmastamyk
Ok, but I thought they made a lot of money through transaction fees.

~~~
pc86
What does that have to do with anything?

------
bayonetz
Recent fraud victim myself. To initiate a long term fraud alert on report you
have to get a police report and send it along with copies of identification,
etc. via mail seperately to each credit bureau company. That makes it so
fraudsters can still try getting credit in your name but the business is
supposed to call you to confirm it's you applying. If the fraud poster has an
accomplice, say at the shady cell phone kiosk at the mall, they just ignore
the warning. Best case is the detected fraudulent hard inquiry stays on your
report for up to 4 weeks lowering your score in the meantime. All a big
hassle. Guess what you can do instead? Instantly and online pay to have a
credit freeze enabled. Then you pay again and again to lift it when you need
credit. In some states you are allowed a free credit freeze BUT you need to
have gone through fraud, hassled with the police report, and the kicker is,
snail mail your requests in both for initial freeze and subsequent temporary
suspensions. Obviously I took the instant paid route. What a racket! I should
either start a class action lawsuit or perhaps just buy some stock in these
jokers.

------
pdkl95
Inaccurate claims that damage your reputation enough to harm your ability to
e.g. get a job are why we have slander and libel laws. Anybody harmed by an
inaccurate credit report should be suing the reporting agency for libel.

Unfortunately, the agencies have specific immunity from libel laws. It's
probably going to take another trip to the SCOTUS to fix that example of
institutional corruption.

~~~
rlucas
Except that Congress specifically created a regulatory regime for these
businesses, and included a wide array of strictures on their practices _and_ a
very specific set of remedies for those who are harmed.

That system (FCRA, FDCPA etc.) is of course the product of major lobbying and
regulatory capture -- "don't throw me in that briar patch, bre'r fox." But it
also does have at least the fig leaf of support by consumer-focused NGOs and
populist legislative rhetoricians.

So, no, if you went to the courts you wouldn't even make it to an appeal, much
less to SCOTUS.

------
learc83
Most employers don't use IQ tests because without proof that an IQ test
correlates with job performance they are considered discriminatory. Why are
employers so quick to use credit scores?

Many protected classes have lower average credit scores, so I'm not really
seeing the difference here between IQ tests and credit checks in this
situation.

~~~
quicklyfrozen
Well, you do have more influence on your credit score then your IQ -- it is
more reflective of your behavior and level of responsibility. Obviously some
end up with bad credit through little fault of their own, but employers
(mostly) aren't SJWs so they don't mind false negatives as long as there are
more candidates.

Personally I don't think anyone who isn't extending you credit should have
access to your report, but that will probably require a legislative change.

~~~
learc83
> Obviously some end up with bad credit through little fault of their own, but
> employers (mostly) aren't SJWs so they don't mind false negatives as long as
> there are more candidates.

That's true but the reason Employers don't use IQ tests doesn't have anything
to do with false negatives or them caring about fairness. They don't IQ tests
because several protected classes score lower on average on IQ tests, so
employers have to prove that an IQ test correlates positively with job
performance in order to use them. Most employers don't want to deal with this,
so they don't use IQ tests.

Several protected classes also have lower average credit scores. It doesn't
matter why, just that they do. Therefore it is likely also discriminatory, and
and employer should have to support the assertion that a credit score is an
indicator of job performance.

My guess is that there haven't been enough lawsuits to scare employers out of
using them yet.

------
joshuaheard
The problem here is that there is no effective identifier for people. We
currently use Social Security numbers, which were not designed for that
purpose. We need to have a new national identification system. I think a good
idea would be to have two numbers: one public and one private. The public
number would be used to identify you in public. The other would remain private
and would be used as a confidential identification when matched to the public
number, a major PIN, if you will.

~~~
spacehome
This doesn't solve the primary issue which is that in order for me to verify
my identity I have to give the other party sufficient information to spoof my
identity. The solution is obvious: asymmetric cryptography, where I can prove
I know a secret without revealing the secret.

~~~
joshuaheard
Can you elaborate?

~~~
spacehome
I'll try.

There are a lot of ways to flesh out the details of such a system. The essence
of all of them, though, is that each person has a public key which is known to
everyone and simultaneously serves as a unique identifier to that person and a
private key that is known only to the individual. Additionally, either the
public key is derivable from the private key or both keys are derivable
simultaneously via some process, but importantly, the private key is not
derivable from the public key. And, depending on the system, messages can be
encrypted with the private key and only decrypted with the public key, or
vice-versa, messages can be encrypted with the public key and decrypted with
the private key. The name for this broad category of cryptographic systems
that have these properties is called "asymmetric cryptography".

To give a specific example of how it could work, each person creates a public-
private RSA keypair, and publishes the public key. If I want to apply for a
credit line with my bank, my bank can read the publicly available public key
and use it to encrypt a nonce (secret token) and send me the encrypted nonce.
I decrypt it using my private key and send the original nonce back to my bank,
proving that I am the person in control of the private key, without ever
revealing what that key is. Thus, if a malicious employee at my bank wanted to
impersonate me to some other company, he wouldn't be able to (which is a
_huge_ flaw with the current system of handing over secrets to prove
identity).

To tie public-private keypairs to real humans, you'd go to the DMV and give
the government all the proof of identification that is required to receive a
driver's license along with your public key, and the government could then
publish that you're really the person associated with your public key, and all
this still without the government having the knowledge required to impersonate
you.

~~~
joshuaheard
This is what I had in mind, but you explained it much better. Now, how do we
get it implemented?!

~~~
spacehome
Probably something involving smart cards, each with a display so you can
confirm on the card itself every time you sign something. I would also add
another layer of signing, so that you have a master key that you keep locked
up in a secure location at home (wherever you keep your Social Security card
today), and use that key very infrequently to sign and endorse another key you
keep in your wallet. If you lose your wallet, then it's a simple matter to
take your master key out of storage and revoke the previous wallet key and
sign a new one. If you lose your master key, it's a more complicated process
of going down to the DMV and proving your identity again to create a new
master key.

But it's not going to happen because the costs of fraud in the current system
are less than the costs of rejigging the whole whole thing.

------
forrestthewoods
Credit is mildly dumb, but honestly it doesn't bother me. It's a game. It's a
weird game. Arguably an illogical game.

But you know what? It's not a difficult game to play. It's an arbitrary
benchmark of responsibility. If you're loaning money to someone or entering a
contract you'd want to do so with someone who is dependable and responsible.
Someone you can trust to hold up their end of the bargain. If they can't
successfully play the credit score game then that's a pretty clear warning
flag.

I kinda view high school/college the same way. They're another dumb game. But
everyone knows credit scores and degrees make a difference. So if someone can
identify and successfully navigate the game that's a very good indicator. Not
the only indicator. And certainly not the end all to be all. But a good, solid
one.

#UnpopularOpinionBear

~~~
Carrok
> But everyone knows credit scores and degrees make a difference.

I agree with the rest of your comment, but how exactly do degrees make a
difference?

~~~
chrisan
> I agree with the rest of your comment, but how exactly do degrees make a
> difference?

The same line of logic from employers that credit = job-worthiness can be
applied to degree = job-worthiness. Perhaps less so in the tech industry, but
I have friends who are at the ceiling of where they work (non-tech) because
they do not have degrees.

------
MichaelBurge
The bit about selling Orca steaks makes me wonder if you can get a pass from
the EPA to raise endangered species for their meat, as long as you create more
than you kill.

------
empressplay
I moved to another country for ten years and my credit report is now _empty_.
I'm not saying if it was previously good or bad, but I'm moving back now and
either way starting from a clean slate is sort-of cool (even if I have to
start off with a $200 wal-mart credit card...)

------
Kinnard
Are the algorithms employed by theses agencies to produce these "scores"
public?

~~~
awqrre
If you use [http://creditkarma.com/](http://creditkarma.com/) to check your
credit report , it gives you quit a bit of information as to how the score is
calculated.

------
snissn
I'm actually surprised about this.. a lot of those craigslist job posts that
he's talking about are just referral marketing scams to send job applicants
for a fake job to complete a credit check from an affiliate link.

------
CiPHPerCoder
I'm currently dealing with my own nightmare with the three credit bureaus.
After a month of no response, I got an "updated" credit report where
_literally nothing_ was changed.

