Stikke,
I noticed another poster mentioned something about the good credit score disappearing after a short period of time. Is this correct? How long can one expect to maintain the “bought” score?
Thanks
I should try that 
(the marketing that is).
GWEST…you can expect the seasoned tradelines to remain on your credit for about 6 months. Sometimes longer depending on how quick the bureaus take to remove it. But the average time is about 6 months. After 6 months our account sellers take you off. But sometimes it lingers!
Yes…I myself get roughly an average of 200 calls per day. I do not advertise. Well…every now and then I throw and ad on craigslist…but that’s it. My business comes primarily from Loan officers who need to quickly boost a prospects score. I get faxed credit reports all day long to review. This program has spread through word of mouth. The best people to advertise for me are the people who have had their scores increase. They tell all their friends all their family and have the proof to show them. Plus it does not hurt that I pay a $100 referral fee to anyone who referrs customers to me. Some people are making $1000 a month extra just by sending people to ASR.
Sounds like BS to me. Even if you were working 10 hrs a day with no break you would need to take a call every 3 mins. Sounds to me it would be hard to explain this program and sign someone up in just 3 mins of time. And then when would you have time to respond to the mountain of faxes you cliam to get “all day long?” Yeah, I’m throwing the yellow BS flag on this play.
Shouldn’t take long to explain since people who are looking for it, already know what they’re looking for.
I actually used ASR and no problems for me.
I lost my job in 2002 so some of my accounts I had to let get charged off. Took me all this time just to get back over 600 and be told over and over it’s still not good enough.
Then when my score is good enough they say I have a chargeoff. Yet I was stupid enough to pay those. I should have disputed them over and over until they got sick of me. Because paying those LOWERED my score.
Now my score has gone up but I still have those marks. I’m working on those marks while having a higher score though. So I can do some things like put a roof over my family’s heads now, when I couldn’t before because the credit nazis Equifax, Experian and Transunion won’t fix what they have on my reports.
A lot of the info is wrong and they removed some of my good accounts without me asking for them to be removed and they’re not 7 years old either.
I won’t deny the chargeoffs. I lost my job…I got harassed at my job, and I got fired. Guess they didn’t believe men can get harassed and tormented too.
I’m getting crushed by a system that never says “Hey this guy got a bad break, let’s give him a chance”. Instead they want to crush me into submission.
Sorry but I believe there is a time and place for everything.
200 calls a day?
You get 200 calls PER day?
200 calls? … PER DAY?
REALLY!?
Yes…that is the average # of phone calls. People are finding that hard to believe but it is true. There are millions of people out there who have had credit issues in the past. Word of mouth is amazing and when you can truly provide a service for people, it gets out there. You must remember…this is on a national scale. 200 calls is not alot when you are dealing with the entire nation. Many of those calls are from skeptics and non-believers. Most of them are referrals or people who visited the website. I help loan officers, real estate agents, personal/car loan prospects and people who need a general boost for any reason. You see…if a loan officer calls me and has 10 clients who need to raise their credit score, each of those people need to call and have their credit evaluated. We deal with hundreds of loan officers and realtors who have many many deals that had to be turned down due to credit. Now…here comes ASR Solutions making those deals possible. Trust me…200 calls is nothing compared to what the future holds! The biggest topic today is CREDIT!
Build your own d… credit!
Just think if someone could package up CHARACTER and sell it to those who lacked it.
Neither they nor their buyers would posess it.
Jimbo
“Nothing earned = nothing gained”
That statement is void of any substance and definitely not a fair comparison. Character and credit are 2 totally different things. For one, character is a personality trait and credit maintenance is something that can be controlled if you understand it. The problem is, most people do not understand how credit works. If you give someone a credit card for $500, and they max it out with intentions to repay the $500 at the end of the month and they lose their job…then what? If someone has a medical condition and no health insurance and the medical collection shows up on their credit report, it could drop their score dramatically. Is that fair? I do not like when people criticize this program for the wrong reasons. Most people have good intentions and really want to do the right thing…or simply just need a little boost to accomplish something very important to them.
Remember, you can purchase a home with a 500 credit score. But with a 600 credit score, you’ll have to put less down and have a little better of an interest rate. I am not changing the rules, just making it easier and more affordable for people. Now what is wrong with that??
check this link from Inman
http://www.ewriting.pamil-visions.com/img/2006-03-10_-_Inman_-_Industry_watchdogs_warn_of_credit-booster_sites.pdf
Yeah Yeah Yeah, I’ve read that article many times…somebody is always going to have something to say. Bottom line is…right now, right this moment the credit card companies allow authorized users to be added. It’s perfectly legal and that is the bottom line. Nobody’s fooling the creditors or lenders if they had a problem with authorized users they would change their guidelines.
The Inman report is dated 3/06. If it were determined to be fraud by the FBI or FTC, wouldn’t they have taken action by now?
I recall the days when a lender would actually pull your credit report and then base their decision on a multitude of factors and not just a number. These days FICO scores are relied on too heavily by lenders. FICO has caused lenders to take the human element out of the equation. Was it intended to be used as the sole determining factor for credit worthiness? These days it is used by lenders as the first filter for deciding a persons loan qualifications. Sometimes you must have a minimum number just to get an invitation from the lender to come in and sit down to discuss the loan further. Never mind that you might have additional information relevant to determining if the loan makes sense. Like when a consolidation loan could actually lower your debt and monthly payments. Instead of using the score as one of the many tools a lender has at their disposal, it is now used as THE deciding factor without further consideration. That practice impairs and harms otherwise worthy borrowers who but for some past incident beyond their control is now labeled high risk. An 800 score borrower is as susceptible to bad luck as a 600 score borrower. FICO scores don’t reflect that, nor do lenders take it into consideration. Some would say luck should have nothing to do with it. I agree. But to be “FAIR” let’s remember luck works both ways.
My problem with the score is, it is only backward looking. Lenders consider your worthiness based on a “formula” which derives your score from information (or lack thereof), attained from previous lenders, without knowing the circumstances which created that information. If the score is intended to represent ability to pay based on past performance, then why isn’t how they came to be also considered? They are your numbers, you created them, you influence them. You change them with every financial situation you find yourself in. Including situations which may be no fault of your own. Also referred to as, that’s life.
How could trying to change your score be loan fraud? Is there a law requiring lenders to use FICO as part of their loan criteria? I certainly never asked to be graded and scored for borrowing purposes. (or for insurance purposes) If lenders (and now insurance companies) choose to rely on FICO, they should do so at their own risk. No one is forcing them to do so that I am aware. As long as the borrower does not lie on the loan application, however the lender chooses to determine the borrowers qualification is up to them. Bottom line is it is their responsibility to do their due diligence.
I see it as leveling the playing field. Perhaps if a lender is aware that this is taking place, they will do their due diligence and truly consider ALL the information a potential borrower brings to the table. And stop relying on some magical number produced from questionable information.
If the FBI and FTC want to investigate something, perhaps they should start with lenders who discriminate against people who they perceive to be high risk based solely on a number.
Lenders use the FICO scores to make the loan process more objective and less subjective. I’ve seen one underwriter turn down a file and another approve the very same file because they had been in the business longer and could read a file. If anything, lender standards are lower since they started placing more emphasis on FICO scores, not harder.
When loans are sold on the secondary market, the investor isn’t going to look at each individual loan. They are buying a basket of loans that meet certain criteria. One of the criterias is the average FICO score.
when you borrow money, you agree to pay it back. You do not say, “I’ll pay you back unless…” Would you loan money to someone who thinks they have a good reason not to pay you back?
If you have a low FICO score, its not because somebody is picking on you. Its because you haven’t paid the lenders back as agreed. No ifs ands or buts. You are a bad credit risk because you haven’t paid back your loans or credit cards. If you personally lent me $10,000 and I said, “Oh, I can’t pay you back because…” how are you going to feel? how are you going to get your money back? Would you loan me money again? If someone came up to you and said “Thailanddave wants to borrow $10,000 from me, do you think I should lend it to him?” what would your advice be after I borrowed money from you and didn’t pay you back. That’s what a credit report is.
Oh, you lent out your credit card and somebody ran it up and its not your fault? Would you just leave $5000 laying around? If your credit card has a $5000 open limit, that’s the same thing. If it was stolen, file a police report and you aren’t responsible for the bill. If it wasn’t stolen and someone ran it up on you, then you are responsible because you weren’t responsible with your credit cards.
So you tell me, without FICO scores, how would an underwriter who has never met you decide if they should lend you $400,000? Maybe you have a good job and are a real nice guy, but if you don’t pay your bills, nobody wants to lend you any more money you aren’t likely to pay back. That’s all an underwriter is trying to decide. Can you pay it back (your job), will you pay it back (your credit history) and do you have enough collateral (your house) that can be sold to get the money back if you don’t pay voluntarily. Pretty simple stuff.
“Lenders use the FICO scores to make the loan process more objective and less subjective.”
That would be great, if it were always true. In the real world you must have a minimum score before even getting to discuss the loan. Today your just a number. Many lenders may as well hang a sign on the front door that reads: 620 and below need not bother apply.
“If anything, lender standards are lower since they started placing more emphasis on FICO scores, not harder.”
Correct. They place too much emphasis on FICO scores and stopped looking at the borrower and their credit history. A lender can base a loan on anything they like. And to often judge on numbers which don’t reflect a borrowers true worthiness. This leaves many good borrowers who otherwise might be a good risk, out.
“When loans are sold on the secondary market, the investor isn’t going to look at each individual loan. They are buying a basket of loans that meet certain criteria. One of the criterias is the average FICO score.”
Thanks for making my point. That we’re just a number.
”when you borrow money, you agree to pay it back.”
When you loan money, you accept risk. No one is forcing you to make a loan. But if you decide to, it’s under your terms to which borrowers must agree. Not the other way around.
“You do not say, “I’ll pay you back unless…”
You do not loan based on a best case scenario. You loan on a worst case scenario and are well compensated for your exposure. Things happen beyond the control of the borrower and the best you can do is hope nothing goes wrong. If that were not the case you would never make a loan.
“If you have a low FICO score, its not because somebody is picking on you. Its because you haven’t paid the lenders back as agreed. No ifs ands or buts. You are a bad credit risk because you haven’t paid back your loans or credit cards.”
A low FICO score could mean many things. One of which might be because you didn’t pay back “as agreed”. That could mean late or not at all. In the case where someone may have been late on a some payments but did ultimately pay everything in full, has little or no debt and still can’t get a loan despite good income, assets and equity, a low FICO score doesn’t truly represent their worthiness.
"So you tell me, without FICO scores, how would an underwriter who has never met you decide if they should lend you $400,000? "
Look at my credit history, look at my current situation, ask me about late payments in my report, and determine if I am a good risk based on current relevant information instead of a backward looking number which tells you nothing about whether I am a good risk today. Again, FICO has taken the human element out of the equation. “Pretty simple stuff.”
“If someone came up to you and said “Thailanddave wants to borrow $10,000 from me, do you think I should lend it to him?” what would your advice be after I borrowed money from you and didn’t pay you back. That’s what a credit report is.”
I don’t have an issue with credit report history. In fact I wish lenders would use it more and FICO less. My issue is that lenders won’t even take time to look at your CR because they have already looked at your mid score and determined you are just to high a risk.
“Maybe you have a good job and are a real nice guy, but if you don’t pay your bills, nobody wants to lend you any more money you aren’t likely to pay back. That’s all an underwriter is trying to decide. Can you pay it back (your job), will you pay it back (your credit history) and do you have enough collateral (your house) that can be sold to get the money back if you don’t pay voluntarily. Pretty simple stuff.”
Let me give you a real life scenario of how someone can fall through the cracks thanks to FICO.
Middle score of around 600. Good income. Nice guy. Had some late payments in the past, but paid everything in full. Never went bankrupt. Currently owe less then 45k in total debt. Own my house (recent professional appraisal 65k) with no liens. All I am seeking is a loan so that I can consolidate my existing 45k debt (950 monthly) to one lower monthly payment (750± monthly)with better rates and the benefit of being able to have the interest to write off. Makes sense right?
The first thing I am told is without at least a 620 score they can’t help me. No pulling credit reports. No need to, I told them my mid score. So I go to the “subprime” lender market. They are happy to take a look. But it will cost you dearly. Higher rates, higher closing costs and more restrictions. All as a result of what? A number. A number which doesn’t tell the lender anything about me the borrower except that I may be considered high risk. When in fact I could be less risk then someone with a 700 score who has been able to borrow much more then they could manage all thanks to having a “good” score. God forbid they have some major life altering situation which leaves them with reduced income for a short period. As a result they fall behind on some payments. Not that they don’t want to make this months payment to you. But they just can’t at this time. As a result their score drops. Eventually they get back on their feet and in no time are all caught up again. Problem now is those late payments dropped their score. As result they’re interest rates go up. Their monthly payments go up. Now they are having a hard time making the minimums. They sure looked good on paper when you loaned them the money. Nothing indicated they might fall behind. Not even their great score!
It’s not the FICO score that’s the problem, it’s the lender who puts to much dependence into it and nothing else.
The credit bureaus scoring methods are a joke! I have seen people with almost identical credit reports have 2 totally different credit scores. I have had clients send me their credit reports that they pulled from MYFICO.com or one of those companies, and when I pull their credit report the next day or even the same day, the scores are all together different. As said above by “motomech” lenders decided to take credit scores as their main determining factor for lending. Nobody is forcing them to do that, they use the lazy way out rather than pulling apart the credit report and checking the true credit worthiness of a borrower. Almost all loans are qualified through DU (Desktop Underwriting) A computer is left to decide the fate of your American dream.
For example, if a first time homebuyer has 10 tradelines on their credit report and 7 out of the 10 have either had a late payment or missed payment, their credit scores are going to be very very low. However, with further investigation, you find that this potential homebuyer rented for 10 years and was never late on their rent, not even an hour late. If this person wants to boost their scores to qualify for a home loan, there is nothing wrong with that. People bust their butts to pay rent and it is never reported to the credit bureaus…shouldn’t on time rent payments be one of the strong determining factors in qualifying a person for a mortgage? I would think the answer would be yes, but rental history is completely null and void if the credit scores are too low. These are the type of situations that make seasoned tradelines seem all the better! They make life hard enough, and this one way to ease some of the pain that people experience on a daily basis!
Everyone just leave him alone. No one has offered proof that it is illegal or a scam. Just your opinions. Which aint worth jack compared to the facts. And the fact is yes it is legal. here is my proof supporting this. 1. Straight from the Credit Burreaus mouth. 2. Straight from the Federal Trade Commission. Links to the resources are below after the quote from the FTC
"Account “Users”
If you open an individual account, you may authorize another person to use it. If you name your spouse as the authorized user, a creditor who reports the credit history to a credit bureau must report it in your spouse’s name as well as in your’s (if the account was opened after June 1, 1977). A creditor also may report the credit history in the name of any other authorized user.
Advantages/Disadvantages: User accounts often are opened for convenience. They benefit people who might not qualify for credit on their own, such as students or homemakers. While these people may use the account, you - not they - are contractually liable for paying the debt.
"
1.http://www.experian.com/ask_max/max060105b.html
2.http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/credit/divorce.htm
Thank you for those links. This will help me convince people that it is a perfectly legal. This not only proves it, it is a legitimate method for helping those who could benefit from it. THANKS!!
No problem. I have a ton of articles supporting the FACTS. While some people may think its unethical or immoral the fact remains that it is 100% legal and the FTC and the Credit Bureas recognize it.
Wanna see a quote from the Fair Isaaic, the creator of the FICO Score? And how he recognizes authorized user accounts and the benefits and how it affects the fico score. Can’t get no more proof than that. Let me know and i’ll post the links
Please do. Knowledge is power.