- Part 8

QuinStreet and facts regarding credit scores

From: Greg Fisher
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 2:27 PM
To: Barbara Marquand, staff writer, QuinStreet
Cc: Doug Valenti, chairman, QuinStreet
Subject: Experian, Fox Business, Quinstreet, VantageScore; employers

Experian linked to an article on the Fox Business website in which you wrote, “VantageScores range from 501 to 990, and the breakdown of excellent to bad credit is similar to the scale used to calculate grades in school — 900 to 990 is excellent; 800 to 899 is good; 700 to 799 is fair; 600 to 699 is poor; and under 600 is failing.”

Who designated that tier as failing? And, at what are those in that tier failing?

Also, you wrote, “Even employers sometimes check credit scores to gauge applicants’ sense of personal responsibility.”

What indicates that employers use credit scores?

—
Greg Fisher
The Credit Scoring Site
creditscoring.com
PO Box 342
Dayton, Ohio 45409-0342

Who is the Washington Post’s source?

From: Greg Fisher [mailto:greg@creditscoring.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2012 5:29 AM
To: Donald E. Graham, chairman, Washington Post Company
Cc: Michelle Singletary, columnist, Washington Post; Patrick B. Pexton, ombudsman, Washington Post; Danielle Douglas, reporter, Washington Post; Ylan Q. Mui, reporter, Washington Post; Ylan Q. Mui; Meredith Hooker, managing editor for Internet, The Gazette; Allan Lichtman, professor, Department of History, American University; The Washington Post Company; John Temple, managing editor, Washington Post; Ken Harney
Subject: credit score, employers, Washington Post, 2012-09-25

See this message and your response at https://blog.creditscoring.com/?p=4205, https://blog.creditscoring.com/?tag=trope-even-employers and https://blog.creditscoring.com/?tag=washington-post-company.

You published, “Credit agencies have come under greater scrutiny as consumer advocates question the accuracy of the scores, which affect the ability to get a mortgage, car loan, credit card and sometimes even a job.”

Who is your source regarding credit score use by employers?

—
Greg Fisher
The Credit Scoring Site
creditscoring.com
PO Box 342
Dayton, Ohio 45409-0342

Name one

Employers do not use credit scores. But, imagine what would happen if an employer actually did use a credit score to deny employment to someone.

There would be an inquiry to the consumer’s file with the consumer reporting agency. Using that datum, the agency could determine who obtained the score. Then, of course, the consumer could complain, publicly, and, finally, this nonsense would be over. We would have an actual name of an employer who used a credit score for employment purposes!

But, that’s not going to happen. They said it happened at Harvard, but it did not. The big question in this debacle: How could the employer have obtained a score when they are not even included in employment reports?

From: Greg Fisher [mailto:greg@creditscoring.com]
Sent: Monday, September 10, 2012 12:10 PM
To: Michael Denning, publisher, Main Street Business Journal
Cc: Michael Patrick O’Brien, lawyer, Jones Waldo; Allen Smith, manager of workplace law content, Society for Human Resource Management; Marc A. Taylor, attorney, founding member, Taylor English Duma LLP; Bruce S. Richards
Subject: Name one

See this message and your response at https://blog.creditscoring.com/?p=4193.

Regarding the Fair Credit Reporting Act, you published, “The new provision states that anyone who uses a third party provided consumer report including a credit score to deny employment must disclose: (1) that a credit score was used; (2) the score; (3) up to four key adverse factors in the score and the agency that provided it so the applicant can correct any errors.”

Employers do not use credit scores. What evidence indicates that employers use credit scores? What is the name of an employer who uses credit scores?

—
Greg Fisher
The Credit Scoring Site
creditscoring.com
PO Box 342
Dayton, Ohio 45409-0342

credit score, employers, Athens Patch, AOL

From: Greg Fisher [mailto:greg@creditscoring.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 3:14 PM
To: Tim Armstong, chairman and CEO, AOL (via Maureen Sullivan)
Cc: Rebecca McCarthy, editor, Athens Patch, AOL; Jon Brod, CEO and co-founder, Patch, AOL
Subject: credit score, employers, Athens Patch, AOL

See this message and your response at https://blog.creditscoring.com/?p=4132 and https://blog.creditscoring.com/?tag=aol.

You published, “Your credit score can actually persuade a company to hire or not hire you if you are seeking employment.”

Employers do not use credit score because they cannot even get them.

Who is your source regarding credit score use by employers?

—
Greg Fisher
The Credit Scoring Site
creditscoring.com
PO Box 342
Dayton, Ohio 45409-0342

[RESPONSE FROM A PATCH EDITOR]

credit score, number of accounts, America Now, Raycom Media, Leeza

From: Greg Fisher [mailto:greg@creditscoring.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2012 10:19 AM
To: Leeza Gibbons, famous person
Cc: Paul McTear, president, CEO, Raycom Media; Ryan Houston, reporter, WALB TV, Albany, GA, Raycom Media; Rebecca Bryan, vice president, corporate counsel, Raycom Media
Subject: credit score, number of accounts, America Now, Raycom Media

You introduced a report whose associated document states:

You know all those ways you’ve heard for improving your credit score? Some of them may be bad advice.

So we’re out to bust those credit myths and put you on the right track to building better spending practices…

Having more or fewer accounts will improve credit? False.

There’s a happy medium for the amount of credit you have. Too many accounts makes you top heavy. That creates more risk. Your credit will reflect that.

In addition to the obvious contradiction, one of the factors of a credit score is “Number of established accounts.”

What is your correction policy?

—
Greg Fisher
The Credit Scoring Site
creditscoring.com
PO Box 342
Dayton, Ohio 45409-0342

Canada Day: Reuters falls for math myth, moth-to-flame

In this bicentennial year, with apologies to a gracious nation of people of warm hospitality, here is the belated Canada Day update. Try the wines of Niagara-on-the-Lake, and the mussels and ice cream found there, originating at P.E.I.

And, now, on with the show. It’s a doozy.

On his little Reuters website, a real media baron published this quote from a Fair Isaac spokesman, “‘Credit utilization (amounts owed as a percentage of available credit) counts for 30 percent of a person’s credit score.'”

It must have been given in writing (unless the dude can inflect parentheses).

The Fair Isaac statement is false because it is mathematically impossible. Here’s the doozy part– a mind-blower: The credit score company’s spokesman in the Reuters item even replied, “I understand well that ‘amounts owed’ is driven by half a dozen factors not just utilization.”

Yikes.

Credit score expert John Ulzheimer calls this nonsense a myth.

Win column:

Losers column:

— and more.

But, consider the source– not the one in the journalistic sense, but the source of the reach of the repeated rumor: Reuters. For another eyeful, see Canada Day, 2011: Reuters on employers and credit scores.

This monkey business about the so-called “credit utilization” is all Dr. Veghead‘s fault. A Kat Malone he is not.

A message to the really wrong Reuters rumor repeating rookie writer: Let me know when you have completed Poynter’s Math for Journalists: Help With Numbers.

Evidence that Rupert Murdoch is unfit

So, the problem is this: Mass media have repeated this myth so long and so loud that it will never go away. In statehouses, there has even been legislation passed and signed into law by the snookered to outlaw the notion behind the myth– even though the notion is not true. Meanwhile, even as it tries to own up to its errors, the (mis)information machine just keeps on churning, out of control.

The myth is that employers use c—-t s—-s (you almost even don’t want to say the words for fear of fueling the fire).

Employers do not do it. They can’t. They cannot. They can’t even GET c—-t s—-s.

Take the case of Rupert Murdoch, a man who, certainly, has taken his lumps, recently. British legislators even went as far as to declare him “not a fit person to exercise the stewardship of a major international company.” And, as you can see here, when it comes to the issue about s—-s, he can’t get it right. Its like he’s arguing with himself.

For example, first, one of Murdoch’s anchors–who (NSFW) is a lawyer–does does a whole bit with some guy with the title of Doctor. For some real fun, see Murdoch’s copy change after creditscoring.com’s email: the word s—-s changed to reports (but not before at least one sucker copied it (why the myth will not die)). Got the picture? A doctor and a lawyer (indeed, she reminds us of that right in the video).

Then, just days later, a host on another Murdoch network has credit report and c—-t s—-e expert John Ulzheimer on her show. These two (mere laymen) know the truth and go over the thing again for the umpteenth time: employers do not use [you know what].

How do you get in touch with this guy Murdoch–or Oprah, or the head of NBC? Or, are they just unreachable, out of touch and unfit?