Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Is this thread the Austin Landlords Associations official blog? LOL. Buzzwords like taking personal responsibility and what not for taking stock in the random and sometimes erroneous stuff that happens to people's credit scores is so laughable. This is another case where the the owner of something (in the case a landlord going by an outdated measure of worth) is just exercising his "rational self interest" while the detractors are just a bunch of whiny losers who lack accountability.
Is this thread the Austin Landlords Associations official blog? LOL. Buzzwords like taking personal responsibility and what not for taking stock in the random and sometimes erroneous stuff that happens to people's credit scores is so laughable. This is another case where the the owner of something (in the case a landlord going by an outdated measure of worth) is just exercising his "rational self interest" while the detractors are just a bunch of whiny losers who lack accountability.
erroneous things dont trash someones credit
The following things will trash your credit
1) not using any credit at all will drop your score a lot over time
2) not paying bills on time (more than 60 days late)
3) stolen identity (can be fixed with pain and agony)
None of these things make you a bad person, but statistically make you a risk for paying your rent on time.
1) not using any credit at all will drop your score a lot over time
2) not paying bills on time (more than 60 days late)
3) stolen identity (can be fixed with pain and agony)
None of these things make you a bad person, but statistically make you a risk for paying your rent on time.
Quote:
But is the FICO system fair? Can software developed almost 60 years ago accurately determine our ability to our debts? With computers, there is no gray area. Everything is either black or white. There is absolutely no consideration of a person’s character or special circumstances, like a job layoff or an injury that prevents someone from working. A computer simply looks at data and assigns a number.
Even worse, the way the system is set up means people with excellent payment histories can still see their FICO score fall. If you close accounts or a bank lowers your limit, which increases outstanding debt vs. the amount available, your credit score can drop despite your best intentions. And what about the Great Recession, when countless people walked out on their mortgages, defaulted on loans, or failed to repay debts? Given the mass number of people that saw their credit scores fall, and the special circumstances that surrounded it, is it time to reconsider our credit scoring system?
There are many factors as to why someone's score might be lower. By the talk here it seems like you guys are going by a narrative and if there might be some facts that conflict with the notion that the credit report is a good measure to use you guys just resort back to the narrative that it's all about personal accountability. Number three on your list is an example of error. Just cus it can be fixed doesn't make it a valid point for you. That could hurt people's chances through no fault of their own which is what I'm talking about.
There are many factors as to why someone's score might be lower. By the talk here it seems like you guys are going by a narrative and if there might be some facts that conflict with the notion that the credit report is a good measure to use you guys just resort back to the narrative that it's all about personal accountability. Number three on your list is an example of error. Just cus it can be fixed doesn't make it a valid point for you. That could hurt people's chances through no fault of their own which is what I'm talking about.
I don't know who Ryan Wibberley is, but he's apparently an idiot. No one is running "software developed almost 60 years ago".
"when countless people walked out on their mortgages, defaulted on loans, or failed to repay debts? Given the mass number of people that saw their credit scores fall, and the special circumstances that surrounded it, is it time to reconsider our credit scoring system?"
NO. If you walked out on your mortgage, I'm not going to trust you to pay your bills. With good reason.
Many folks were unemployed or underemployed for years following the great recession (myself included), and my credit was smashed because I was broke.
And many folks were unemployed or underemployed for years and didn't have their credit smashed, or else have recovered since then.
Quote:
Buzzwords like taking personal responsibility and what not for taking stock in the random and sometimes erroneous stuff
In other words, 'but it's not my fault!'
Nobody will dispute that bad things can happen that are out of your control. When you are in the same applicant pool as the general public, how you managed those bad things gets distilled down to your credit history by the time it reaches me.
A lot of people buy more cars or go into more debt than their income supports and leave no margin for those bad things that you're describing as inevitable and out of your control. If indeed they are both inevitable and out of your control, it probably would've been a good idea to plan for that inevitability rather than borrowing money you couldn't repay.
At the end of the day, your promise to pay a debt is all that counts. At any one moment in time, it's either a reliable promise or it isn't. If it isn't today, there is plenty you can do so that it will be tomorrow.
Our last tenant had a bankruptcy in 2009 but painstakingly rebuilt her credit after that and her score was quite high.
I don't know who Ryan Wibberley is, but he's apparently an idiot. No one is running "software developed almost 60 years ago".
"when countless people walked out on their mortgages, defaulted on loans, or failed to repay debts? Given the mass number of people that saw their credit scores fall, and the special circumstances that surrounded it, is it time to reconsider our credit scoring system?"
NO. If you walked out on your mortgage, I'm not going to trust you to pay your bills. With good reason.
Plus the whole article is based on a false claim by Bernanke
And many folks were unemployed or underemployed for years and didn't have their credit smashed, or else have recovered since then.
In other words, 'but it's not my fault!'
Nobody will dispute that bad things can happen that are out of your control. When you are in the same applicant pool as the general public, how you managed those bad things gets distilled down to your credit history by the time it reaches me.
A lot of people buy more cars or go into more debt than their income supports and leave no margin for those bad things that you're describing as inevitable and out of your control. If indeed they are both inevitable and out of your control, it probably would've been a good idea to plan for that inevitability rather than borrowing money you couldn't repay.
At the end of the day, your promise to pay a debt is all that counts. At any one moment in time, it's either a reliable promise or it isn't. If it isn't today, there is plenty you can do so that it will be tomorrow.
Our last tenant had a bankruptcy in 2009 but painstakingly rebuilt her credit after that and her score was quite high.
More drivel. It seems as though you presuppose a lot of stuff about people with bad credit. How convenient that when you use the outdated and flawed measure of credit as a way to select a tenant, you're just using executing your rational self interest as a landlord. But everything else a person does is put under the scrutinity of personal accountability. Apparently every person should have a crystal ball to foresee thr results of every decision they ever make. And you guys admit to stuff that are out of people's control but still use the credit score as one of the overall determinative measures? So during that time of repair someone (even for things they you admit might be out of their control) should have to be put under a grinder in order to learn some personal accountability and satisfy some yard stick litmus test. Isn't income enough? Ability to pay. Don't you run the risk with any tenant? Computers don’t care about special circumstances. Everything is either black or white. There isn't a darn bit of consideration of a person’s basic character or allowance for the fact that people can change their lives and their behaviors. A computer looks at data and assigns a number. Negatives stay on your credit report for seven years or longer. Is that how long a person has to rely on this tough love approach to get back on a lenders or a landlords good graces?
All you did was assume that bill here wasn't paid so that means they're risky person lacking accountability. No grey area. "If something happened then they should've been more careful and it's not my responsibility as a landlord to take them in. I don't run a charity. I look at the facts of a black and white report and if there is an error that was out of their control then tough luck that's life, get to the end of the line and crawl your way back."
More drivel. It seems as though you presuppose a lot of stuff about people with bad credit. How convenient that when you use the outdated and flawed measure of credit as a way to select a tenant, you're just using executing your rational self interest as a landlord. But everything else a person does is put under the scrutinity of personal accountability. Apparently every person should have a crystal ball to foresee thr results of every decision they ever make. And you guys admit to stuff that are out of people's control but still use the credit score as one of the overall determinative measures? So during that time of repair someone (even for things they you admit might be out of their control) should have to be put under a grinder in order to learn some personal accountability and satisfy some yard stick litmus test. Isn't income enough? Ability to pay. Don't you run the risk with any tenant? Computers don’t care about special circumstances. Everything is either black or white. There isn't a darn bit of consideration of a person’s basic character or allowance for the fact that people can change their lives and their behaviors. A computer looks at data and assigns a number. Negatives stay on your credit report for seven years or longer. Is that how long a person has to rely on this tough love approach to get back on a lenders or a landlords good graces?
All you did was assume that bill here wasn't paid so that means they're risky person lacking accountability. No grey area. "If something happened then they should've been more careful and it's not my responsibility as a landlord to take them in. I don't run a charity. I look at the facts of a black and white report and if there is an error that was out of their control then tough luck that's life, get to the end of the line and crawl your way back."
What's your credit score? I want to know if you have credibility to be lecturing others about how we run our businesses and evaluate risk.
What's your credit score? I want to know if you have credibility to be lecturing others about how we run our businesses and evaluate risk.
My point is you think you're being rational in how you people evaluate risk even in the light of people questioning the validity of the credit rating system. Instead you guys run more on presumptions about people than anything else. A carefully constructed narrative.
Location: IN>Germany>ND>OH>TX>CA>Currently NoVa and a Vacation Lake House in PA
3,259 posts, read 4,332,943 times
Reputation: 13476
Quote:
Originally Posted by aamor1987
In the meantime I find it unfair to be treated this way. How is it not a "good risk," my landlord references and rental history will show that in spite of my financial struggles, paying my rent has always been my priority... Rent is more important than paying my credit card bills.
Wait until you get a judgement against you and the courts garnish your wages, and then see what your priorities are. Would you rather eat or pay your rent? You're past behavior indicates you're a risk regardless. How is that not fair? People like you are always complaining about "fair". Know what's not fair? Someone like me that has always taken care of their financial matters being treated the same as you.
Face it, you're a risk.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
