
New Service, Same Old Equifax: Credit Locking App Freezes Up - mhb
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/31/your-money/new-service-same-old-equifax-credit-locking-app-freezes-up.html
======
moonka
I didn't know what the difference between a freeze or a lock is, but the
article mentions it about halfway down.

>Equifax’s new app offers a lock instead of a freeze. Locks works similarly to
freezes — both restrict access to your credit file — but it should be easier
to unlock your credit file since you can do it from your phone with a swipe,
and doesn’t require a 10-digit pin or a fee.

>What is not clear, however, is what disadvantages may come with locks. Many
state laws exist that govern freezes, offering consumers protection. By
creating locks, the companies avoid them.

Looks like it's a nice end run around existing laws. I don't understand why
they are allowed to do things like this without any consequences.

~~~
sparky_z
I hate the credit agencies as much as anyone (and the poor quality of the app
is shameful), but the "skirting the law" angle smells like an unfair criticism
to me. Surely the heavy amount of regulation around credit freezes _prevents_
an app like that from being created in the first place. The simplicity and
ease of switching it on and off probably conflicts with some regulation or
another. (Anybody in the know want to fact check me on that?)

And it's not like they did away with freezes. They just added a alternative
alongside. I've never frozen my credit because I didn't want the pain of
having to unfreeze it at an inopportune moment. The concept (if not the
implementation) of having locks as an alternative might convince me to
actually use them. I hope it catches on.

~~~
moonka
I think it's fair to view anything they do with suspicion after their
mishandling of the leaks. They haven't shown me any reason to give them the
benefit of the doubt, and ample reason not to do so.

~~~
sparky_z
Okay, fair enough. If there's the slightest whiff of anctual wrongdoing
related to the creation of credit locks, by all means, rake them over the
coals.

But, really, what should they have done instead? Do you think they shouldn't
have implemented credit locks at all? Because I'm sure then you would get
articles about how they weren't doing enough to help consumers secure their
credit, just the same old inconvenient credit freezes (and I would agree).

I think that, for a person's criticism to carry any weight, there has to be a
course of action that that person wouldn't criticize.

~~~
rectang
> But, really, what should they have done instead?

Let me opt out, dammit. Permanently delete my data.

It's not like I'm alone in that thought:

[https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/06/your-money/credit-
scores/...](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/06/your-money/credit-
scores/equifax-hack.html)

"And though the words differ (and some are unprintable in this space), the
messages all end with the same demand: I want out."

Even better, require opt-in, thus driving the credit raters out of business.
These enablers of identity theft cause more misery than they provide value,
it's just inconvenient to sue them. They should not exist.

~~~
derekp7
Let play through some scenarios. If you opt out, then there is not credit for
you, so there would be no chance of a loan. Which is probably ok for people
that decide against credit, but not for those that don't have enough savings
stashed away where they need credit (car loan, home mortgage, etc).

Now if it is opt in, well then you have the issue of free speech. If someone
takes out a loan and doesn't pay it back, why wouldn't the institution lending
the money have a right to tell others about that (through a third party)?

If this isn't the case, where we have opt in by default, and it destroys the
credit industry, that may also not necessarily be a bad thing. Because a lot
of necessary items (housing, car ownership [for certain geographical regions],
college) would fall in price to be more affordable if people couldn't get
loans for them.

Of course, the real issue that most people have with credit reporting agencies
is the fairness of a credit score or credit report, in that it may not
actually reflect the risk of a given loan. This is an area where I feel they
can and should do better. After all, if a lender is turning away customers
that they shouldn't, then they are leaving quite a lot of business untapped.
What would be better is if credit items were categorized based on credit type
and circumstances.

For example, if you fall behind on sudden medical bills, but keep up on your
mortgage and car payment, well that shouldn't affect your ability to buy a
house or car on credit. In fact, if I was a car dealer I'd be happy to extend
someone credit that treated their car payment as more important.

Or, if credit cards fell behind during an unemployment stretch. In that case
if your credit report shows that payments pick up again as soon as you are
back on your feet, then if I was a credit card issuer, I would lower interest
rates during unemployment and only bring them back up a month or two after you
got a job. And as long as the record shows that someone is employable (was
only out of work during times of a down economy, but otherwise could hold down
a job and make regular payments while working), I would think that they would
be a good credit risk.

Another situation -- lets say you are a cosigner on a loan, and the person you
cosigned for fell behind on payments, and you refused to pick up the payments.
Well, that should only affect your ability to cosign in the future, but not
anything else (assuming all other lines of credit are showing good).

So this is where I think that the market is ripe for disruption, in using
extended information to bring in credit customers that are otherwise left
behind by the current situation. But this requires much more tracking details

~~~
basilgohar
Or better yet, people learn how to once again learn to live within their means
and not spend money they don't have for things they don't need.

~~~
pavel_lishin
I'm glad you can afford to buy a house with what's in your checking account,
but some of us can't.

~~~
astura
Or buy a house or go to college.

~~~
metaobject
Or even a car. What percentage of car purchases are financed as opposed to
bought in cash?

------
partycoder
Software can be shipped at any level of completion.

Initially, software could only be distributed over physical media like disks.
And because of this, it had to be stable enough.

Today, software is distributed over the internet, and you can amend mistakes.

This has enabled the release broken of software, that over time becomes
better.

This doctrine is seen as efficient, but is not good faith and not the best
interest of the user in some cases (e.g: Equifax).

~~~
anonacct37
> This has enabled the release broken of software,

Yes.

> that over time becomes better.

Debatable.

------
username223
You can't opt out of being stalked by these evil clowns, but there are ways to
hurt them. Your employer probably uses something called "Work Number," which
basically involves sending Equifax your pay stubs. When presented with
repeated proof of Equifax's staggering incompetence, your company may
discontinue the service. See [https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/26/your-
money/equifax-breach...](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/26/your-
money/equifax-breach.html) .

~~~
jstarfish
The Work Number is just a particular product within their Workforce Solutions
employee-intelligence business unit.

Pay stubs aside, if your employer uses it then they likely also have your
direct deposit account, all your personal PII, and your W2s among other
things. It's a goldmine for fraud.

~~~
username223
Exactly. The Work Number is a goldmine for fraud, and Equifax's guards on that
mine are about as effective as a couple of guys sleeping off a hangover in the
corner. Your employer should not trust them.

------
patcheudor
Freezing and locking up would be preferable to what their last mobile
application did:

[https://www.fastcompany.com/40468811/heres-why-equifax-
yanke...](https://www.fastcompany.com/40468811/heres-why-equifax-yanked-its-
apps-from-apple-and-google-last-week)

------
pasbesoin
Somebody put them down, already.

And, if the U.S. presidential election had gone the other way (however you
feel about that), we might currently have an _effective_ CFPB that was on its
way to forcing these companies to perform freezes for free and to place
control of access (for credit assessment) into the hands of those to whom the
records pertain.

I don't care whether you're Democratic or Republican or Librariantarian (yeah,
not real, but it should be!). This would be a good, cost effective means of at
least partially mitigating a lot of current problems with related data theft
and fraud / identity theft.

And to the extent it added a bit of cost, that would probably impact the
current uses that are least beneficial. E.g. less hits to ratings for
"excessive" credit checks, when a company can't perform them without first
soliciting access from the target.

~~~
djrogers
>if the U.S. presidential election had gone the other way (however you feel
about that), we might currently have an effective CFPB that was on its way to
forcing these companies to perform freezes

What on earth gives you the impression that either party cares about personal
data privacy or free credit freezes? They’re both happy as long as the debt-
driven economy continues to roll...

~~~
flaque
The CFPB (consumer financial protection bureau) was the brainchild of
Elizabeth Warren and implemented under Obama.

It was and still is heavily disliked by numerous Republican members and is
being stripped of a lot if it’s powers by the current administration.

Claiming “both parties are the same” is just false in this case.

------
exabrial
Credit locking app freezes up... the irony.

~~~
hashkb
I think on the roadmap is a credit freezing app that locks up, as well.

------
paulie_a
Why would anyone install their app?

