More on the UltraFICO- Not Good for Consumers

Posted on May 14, 2019May 14, 2019 by Dawn Kennedy

I had the amazing privilege to attend the Consumer Assembly last week in Washington DC, and there was a panel discussion on credit scoring. The panel was actually a discussion on a group of American consumers that are dubbed by the industry the, “Credit Invisibles.” These are people who cannot get a “good” credit score in the typical way, by having open lines of credit that are at least six months old. The industry that scores credit, including the Fair Isaac Corporation (FICO), the developers of the FICO credit scoring models, and Vantage Score Solutions, LLC, the developers of the Vantage credit scoring models, feel that “credit invisibles” are disadvantaged in receiving access to credit products. And they are, but this new model by FICO to address the credit invisibles and those with marginal credit is not good for consumers.

I first blogged on the new “UltraFICO” score back in October in a two-part article series. The first was an introduction to the scoring model and the second was on some unspoken dangers related to judgments and bank account attachment when the credit reporting agencies have you bank account information, which you must consent to disclose under this model.

During last week’s panel discussion I learned more about the purpose of the model, and some facts that have me re-thinking my original posts about how this score may be “OK” for a mortgage product. And I was wrong in my previous posts. The model is not “OK” for any credit. None.

Before I move on to the specifics, I have to take a moment and point out that the panelists, including the VP from FICO from whom I received the information directly, entered into the lion’s den of an audience of consumer advocates, and spoke openly and answered questions about their products. That was a very nice thing to do, and I am appreciative of their honesty. I also know that in their “heart of hearts” they believe that they are helping consumers. It is at that point, I cannot disagree more. Remember, the credit scoring businesses are in the business to help people get and stay in debt. Any model that they can create to help consumers access credit is good for them, not necessarily for you. They sell these models. You are denied under one, they offer a second. Here are five “Fun Facts” about the UltraFICO:

1. The “UltraFICO” will be marketed, and is intended, for all types of credit not just secured, collateralized mortgages. In my original post, I speculated that the releasing of banking information to show the history of cash transactions might be “ok” or even great for mortgage lending, the only good use I could envision for this model. Well, when you apply for a mortgage, the banks take your last months of bank statements anyway. So, for that credit product, this appears to be moot. The UltraFICO will be available to all creditors who wish to purchase it.

2. The UltraFICO is intended to be a “second chance” credit scoring model. This little piece of information was new to me, and this is the first indication that it is not good for consumers. I originally believed that borrowers could just “opt-in” to this model by consenting to include their banking info. Actually, this is intended to be an option for people who would be denied credit in the original model. The credit denial becomes a “maybe” and the borrower has the option to “consent” to include their banking info in the hopes that their credit score will go up and they can be approved.

3. The Premise of the UltraFICO by Fair Isaac is faulty. One telling thing about this model is the statement by the panelist that the checking account information would be reliable because, “Consumer’s are in control of those accounts.” I disagree. I had a debit card number stolen and used in a fish market in Mexico. Filed the report, got the money back, but in this day and age of data breaches, I would never make the statement that consumers are always in control. FICO assured us that their model would be able to determine these little situations and not count them, but the scoring models are not transparent. All types of situations can arise where a consumer, for a period of time, may not be in complete control of every transaction in their account.

4. The UltraFICO model needs two to three years of banking information. Ah, another tidbit of info I was previously lacking. To use this model, consumers must 1. not have bounced a check in the last twelve months 2. Have at least two to three years of checking account information available for the model and 3. Have an average balance of $400.00. Good to know. 78% of consumers live paycheck to paycheck. There are many consumers that cannot maintain an average $400.00 balance after bills are paid and groceries are purchased. The VP assured us that in the beta-testing, using Experian as the Credit Reporting Agency (CRA), most consumers had their score increase under this model. But this now provides the information that a consumer may know they do not have, and “opt-out” of the model, rather than be denied AND have a score decrease.

5. Your banking info will be out there to the CRA, including “new” Finicity, who will become a CRA to comply with the Fair Credit Reporting Act. A fourth CRA will enter into the picture, Finicity who will be the CRA for these UltraFICO banking information providers to FICO for scoring. Because FICO never sees anything but the “raw data” they have zero, none, no liability for what happens to your info. Under this model, FICO assures us that it will be a “single use” calculation of the borrowers banking info. Okay, what happens then? The CRA and the creditors are responsible for protecting the data and are subject to the FCRA, so, it’s good. Or is it?

Data breaches have recently revealed sensitive info that an identity thief can use to create an account, such as social security number and date of birth. But now, a breach can put your banking info at risk, no need to create a fake account when they can raid yours, or use the UltraFICO themselves. How many additional hours will consumers add to the identity theft cleanup mess when the bank must investigate everything, and to close that account could subject the consumer to bounced checks and whatever else. But, you can file a dispute with the Credit Reporting Agency online. Eyeroll.

If you are purchasing a house, find a bank who will perform manual underwriting, and do not use the UltraFICO to provide your banking account information. Please. Your info will be out on the internet for who knows how long. Even if the CRAs pinky swear to delete it. For other types of credit, if you are going to be denied without this info- you are going to be denied. The interest rate is likely higher than you would expect anyway once the UltraFICO model is used. And for the car dealers and others who will “deny” people initially to access their banking information for approval, we know, we know. If you give a mouse a cookie, he will want a glass of milk. Protect your banking from the UltraFICO.

Tis the Season! Tips for Safer Online Shopping

Posted on November 13, 2018February 8, 2019 by Dawn Kennedy

It’s close enough to Black Friday, Small Business Saturday, and Cyber Monday to talk a bit about online shopping. Some very scary statistics from 2017 showed a marked increase in online shopping fraud, using stolen credit and debit card numbers. This is not necessarily surprising because consumers are starting to trust online ordering, and the total number of “eCommerce” transactions were up by 19% over 2016 numbers. Sadly, the number of fraudulent transactions during the 2017 holiday season also increased, to 22% over 2016. And a staggering 1 in 85 transactions online was an attempted fraud. GAH!

Online retailers are taking steps to prevent fraud such as collecting IP addresses and requiring the “CVV” or verification code on the back of the card used for a purchase. But, while they do their part to protect their businesses from fraud (yes, they sustain incredible losses from fraud, it isn’t only the consumer), there are easy steps you can take to minimize the risk of being a victim of credit or debit card fraud:

1. Use Unique Usernames and Passwords for Each Merchant

Never reuse usernames and passwords for multiple merchants. If the retailer is compromised, and your login is stolen, thieves can log in to other sites using your information and make unauthorized purchases. This time of year, shipping and billing addresses often differ, so that delivery address discrepancy may not trigger a “potential fraud” flag on the merchant side. Yes, it can be a pain, but so can losing all of your holiday money temporarily until the bank refunds your fraudulent losses.

2. Check the HTTP (S)

The “s” at the end of the hypertext transfer protocol (you bet I had to look that one up) means, https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/281633 “secure.” The security includes data encryption. When you are on a site with only, “http” the data sent to the site can be intercepted by a third party.

3. Use the Code on the Back of the Card

The three or four digit verification number on your credit or debit card is requested to prove that you have the physical card in your possession when making a purchase. In addition to a billing address and card number match, the code can help reduce fraud by requiring a third data point for a purchase.

4. Limit the Potential Financial Loss

This is particularly important for debit card users who shop online this holiday season. Have a second (free) checking account with a debit card for online purchases, and only put enough in the account to cover your shopping budget. This limits the potential loss if the card used online is compromised. And always use the same card, tied to the dedicated account, when shopping online, or traveling.

5. Keep Copies of Everything and Watch Your Accounts and Statements

Print out copies of invoices and receipts. This way you have confirmation of what you ordered, and the total amount paid. If your card is compromised, you will be able to flag unauthorized purchases, while confirming the ones you actually made. And watch your statements and account carefully. Some financial institutions have a feature where you can receive an alert (we get a text) if there is a purchase made over a specific threshold. One word of caution, however, my husband was alerted to his holiday gift by this feature. The bank let him know when I purchased his gift.

There is a real emotional toll on consumers who have lost money and had to file fraud reports over the holidays. Nobody needs that stress and frustration while trying to buy gifts or make travel arrangements. There is one other layer of protection available you should consider: make sure you take advantage of the FREE credit freeze to limit access to your personal information, reducing the risk of a fraudster opening a new account using your identity.

flickr.com

The Unspoken Danger of the UltraFICO- Creditor Judgments

Posted on October 30, 2018February 8, 2019 by Dawn Kennedy

In my last article on the “UltraFICO” I touched on the motivation for Fair Issacs Co. to change their scoring criteria to include consumers banking information, of course, only when the consumer provides this information. I also spoke to some of my particular issues of concern, including cybersecurity and creditors deciding to only use the UltraFICO calculation in future lending decisions because they know the consumer supplies banking information. But I have another concern, and it has nothing to do with FICO score or creditworthiness. I want to know what happens when a creditor receives a judgment against a debtor.

I have never met anyone who takes out credit without any intention of paying it back. But I know many people who lost a job, had an accident, had a medical issue, or other personal crisis that forced them to choose between their mortgage and Visa. And that is never a fun decision. But when it happens, sometimes Visa will sue. And Visa can get a court to order a judgment against the debtor. And that judgment has specific procedural rules but can be enforced through garnishment.

Each state has its own rules regarding creditor judgments. Which assets can be garnished, what percentage of a paycheck, whether a bank account can be raided, etc. But read that last statement again. Whether a bank account can be raided. It recently happened in Georgia. A law firm working for a creditor paid a private investigator to find the bank accounts of Connie James, and not only did the PI find the bank accounts, but the balances down to the penny. And they judgement was quickly settled, via a garnishment order, filed by the law firm against one of her bank accounts. Yup, with a court order, the law firm went in and just took the amount of the judgement. The firm recovered $2,624.00 in one fell swoop. And Mrs. James didn’t even know how the raid on her account occurred until she filed a complaint with the Georgia State Bar, which subsequently found that the law firm did not violate ethics rules. So be it.

The Federal Law which is supposed to keep your banking information private, the 1999 Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, forbids anyone from attaining your bank accounts by “pre-texting” meaning, “under false pretenses.” Where there is a court order to find assets? Hmmm. It appears to be a gray area because the law office that garnished Mrs. James said it was, “common practice” to hire a PI to get the info.

Wow, scary story, but how is this relevant to credit bureau scores, right? Well, why would a creditor or creditor’s attorney with a judgment hire a private investigator if Experian already has your banking info? A court ordered judgment and subpoena straight to Experian cuts out the middle man. Based on judgment enforcement today, each state would need to pass legislation limiting access to account information- but how can you restrict that information AFTER the consumer gives consent to use the information to apply for credit? As I mentioned in my last post- Experian will likely keep the consumer banking information used to calculate scores. And, remember, the summary of bank accounts was already sent to the lender for consideration in the UltraFICO calculation.

Imagine emerging from personal circumstances that caused a financial hardship, only to learn (as you go to pay your bills), that Visa enforced their judgment against you- by emptying your account. They waited on the judgment until you started a new job, received a tax return, or an inheritance, or whatever, then boom. This is the unspoken danger of giving Experian banking information for the calculation of the UltraFICO, one that has, as of yet, been mitigated by legislation to protect consumers

Credit: nlipw.com

Your New “UltraFICO” Score! A Good Thing?

Posted on October 23, 2018February 8, 2019 by Dawn Kennedy

The Fair Issacs Corporation, the creators of the mysteriously calculated FICO Credit Score, are changing the scoring method using new criteria, again. In early 2019, a new scoring method will allow consumers to contribute their banking information to a third party, Finicity, which, “allows Americans to benefit from positive financial behaviors.” The idea is that if you are newer to credit, or have a lower score, the credit bureau can have a look at your checking, savings, and money market accounts to check your credit worthiness. One argument in support of this new approach is that consumers do not currently have any input into their credit scores, because the FICO is calculated only on debt account data submitted by creditors and lenders.

Fair enough. What could possibly go wrong?

From my lowly perch, a lot. First of all, while the consumer will have a choice of accounts to include, they will not have any control over how it is collected, and whether the information is kept by the credit bureau. The process, as published in the Wall Street Journal, is as follows,“Experian will compile consumers’ banking information with help from financial-technology firm Finicity and will distribute the new score to lenders.” Yeah, read that again, Experian will send a summary of consumer bank accounts to lenders. FICO won’t keep any of that information after the score is calculated, but the credit bureau will have your banking Information.

Anyone hear about the hack on Equifax? Anyone? Of course, you have. Well, have you heard about the Experian hack? 15 Million T-Mobile customers personal data was hacked via Experian, including social security and passport numbers. Lovely. Since I don’t use T-Mobile, I am already standing in line to provide my banking info. Eyeroll. It’s already happened once, and they will not be less of a target if they are the bureau with your bank accounts.

Cybersecurity aside, who here believes that when the UltraFICO is available, creditors will accept the FICO? Lenders know the consumer can opt in banking information, so why not rely on the UltraFICO for lending decisions? This is the plot from the classic children’s book by Laura Joffe Numeroff, If You Give a Mouse a Cookie. The lesson? If you give a mouse a cookie, he will want a glass of milk, then a straw, then a napkin, and on and on.

So, why the change? Benevolent Credit Bureaus? Hardly. Since the housing melt down, the pool of traditionally “highly qualified” borrowers shrunk. The change is due to lenders requesting, “credit-reporting firms and FICO to figure out a way to help them boost lending without taking on significantly more risk.” Oh.

As a consumer law advocate, I see danger ahead. Who would be “at fault” if banking information is compromised? Any hack could mean consumer’s accounts are cleaned out until the necessary fraud investigations are completed, and the money is returned by the bank. Missed or late mortgage, car payments, or utility bills can have consequences and mean financial insecurity for the most basic needs of a family. Will your mortgage company waive the late fee if it isn’t your fault? Will the electric company leave the lights on? If not, late fees on every bill owed by the American family could add up to hundreds of dollars. And over 75% of families already live paycheck to paycheck. In my humble opinion, a “free” 12-month credit monitoring product is not going to repair that mess. Or, maybe I am just a cynic and Fair Isaacs is looking out for consumers.

photo:credit.org