• 2010 Credit Suit
• Liars & Cheats
• CreditFactors
• Fight Back!!!
• RESISTANCE
• TRADO
• News Releases
• Contact

2003 Suit (appealed, Experian filed credit reports on PACER)

Friday, July 24, 2009

Reader mail: American Agencies won’t quit collecting and reporting 9-year-old disputed debt

Hi Christine,

I just read some of your thread on a fraud forum.  I’ve been contacted by American Agencies and told that I owe a phone bill for a number that was never mine, at an address in LA where I never lived, and at a time (2000) when I wasn’t even living in the country!

Despite this, and despite the fact that the statute of limitations runs out after 7 years, they still tell me it’s a valid debt and that I must prove it wasn’t me!  It appears the same thing happened to you.  I’m wondering what you would advise me to do in the face of their false claims? (They say they continue to report it on my credit report...and will do so until they’ve been paid).

Thank you SO much. 

Sincerely,

...

It’s unbelievable how collectors IGNORE the law.

Dispute with the credit bureaus who report the account:

“Please IMMEDIATELY delete the American Agencies collection.  It is NOT my account and even if it was, this debt is from 2000 and should have LONG been deleted from my credit reports.”

And if they are calling you, write to American Agencies:

“This is NOT my account.  Please do NOT contact me again and immediately delete this collection from my credit reports.”

Please contact me if they don’t delete.

The FTC claims to have investigated American Agencies back in 2003 or so when I sued them—can everybody tell how effective the FTC is?  I now document the FTC corruption at http://credit-reporting-collection-ftc-complaints.info/

I hope that many MILLIONS of (near) judgment-proof people will get a clue, stop paying their unsecured debts and leave this corrupt system to let it die.

Sunday, April 19, 2009

FNMA nad FHLMC tightening underwriting guidelines, making it more expensive to get a mortgage

Mortgage industry changes throw new hurdles in borrowers’ way

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are tacking on extra fees for many loan applicants, while some lenders are going even further in tightening underwriting rules.

By Kenneth R. Harney
8:59 PM PDT, April 18, 2009

Reporting from Washington—Mortgage rates and house prices are down—which sounds great for buyers and refinancers. But mortgage industry underwriting and appraisal changes taking effect this month are putting new hurdles in the way of borrowers and loan officers.

Take Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s add-on fees for loans purchased after April 1. In some cases, applicants are being hit with extra fees of 3% to 5% because of the type of property they want to buy or refinance, their credit scores or the size of their down payment.

Some major lenders who sell loans to Fannie and Freddie are going further—tightening underwriting rules beyond what either corporation requires. For example, as of April 6, Wells Fargo, one of the country’s largest mortgage originators, imposed a new minimum FICO credit score of 720—up from the previous 620—on all conventional loans purchased through its wholesale system that have less than a 20% down payment. It also began requiring a total debt-to-income ratio maximum of 41%—down from the previous 45%.

Fannie Mae now has a mandatory fee of three-quarters of a percentage point on all condominium loans, no matter how high the applicant’s credit score. For a once-popular interest-only condo loan with a 20% down payment and a borrower credit score of 690, Fannie imposes the following ratcheted sequence of add-ons: one-quarter of a percentage point as an “adverse market” fee; 1.5% for the below-optimal credit score; three-quarters of a percentage point for the interest-only payment feature; and the same because the property is a condo. The total comes to 3.25% extra, which can be paid upfront or rolled into the loan.

...

They’re determined to destroy America.

If I hadn’t learned how to use common sense underwriting in the 80s and if I didn’t KNOW how well it works, it wouldn’t be so upsetting.  EVERY underwriter knew how to make sure that good people got good loans—until FICO scores came along in the mid 90s. 

The criminals at Fair Isaac can be proud to have paved the way for the destruction of America.  They’re not the only ones at fault, need to credit the author of this article too.  Kenneth Harney has known for many years that FICO scores don’t predict defaults and he did NOTHING to stop them.  Note that any criticism of FICO scores is conspicuously ABSENT from the article.

A notable exception is the 2/08 Business Week article linked at:

Lenders agree: FICO scores do NOT predict defaults

I truly appreciate Dean Foust’s and Aaron Pressman’s work. 

The million dollar question:  WHAT HAPPENED?

Why are lenders STILL using FICO scores?

Aren’t things bad enough yet?

Are we all supposed live like the poor in Mumbai?

THE poverty-stricken father of Slumdog Millionaire child star Rubina Ali plans to become a millionaire himself-by SELLING his nine-year-old daughter.

Instead of FINALLY taking action to get back to COMMON SENSE underwriting and to reverse the American course to HELL, the banks, Fannie and Freddie do everything they can to destroy what’s left of America.

Earlier today I posted at Trado:

Are houses at priced 50% of the market high bargains? Adrian Salbuchi’s take on the dollar

All bets are off. NOBODY knows what will happen.  We are in uncharted waters.

I DO know that FICO scores don’t predict but CAUSE defaults and everybody with half a brain and willing to spend a few hours to learn about FICO scores will come to the same conclusion.

Tens of thousands have read my submissions to the FTC and FRB.

And not a single person with just a little bit of power or influence gives a damn.

I don’t get it.  You don’t have to be a patriot or in any way care about others to want to DO something.  Do they all think they’re the “elite” and so wealthy that they won’t suffer? 

How could anyone NOT care about America turning into a slum?

Monday, April 06, 2009

Do I want my Verizon litigation included in a book?

I recently got a LETTER which I just opened and actually almost threw away unopened because it was hand addressed and I thought another note buyer was trying to get me to sell the note I no longer have.

So it turned out to be someone with a Verizon dispute who wants to write a book about it.  Somehow he knows about my 2003 lawsuit against Verizon, but didn’t see that they were dismissed because my breach of contract claim was a state claim, not federal.

Strangely, his letter contains no phone #, fax or email.

I have no idea why people think that I have TIME to write LETTERS.

And I don’t even want to THINK about Verizon and the fact that my friend and relative Dorothea might well be alive today if Verizon and the FCC hadn’t ignored my disputes of this entirely totally fraudulent collection—Verizon was collecting an UNCASHED refund check it had issued in error.

I’m looking for new prepaid cellphone service since Tracfone sucks so bad and the airtime is so expensive.  There are so many carriers and prepaid options, but as I went through the list, I realized:

Sued.

Should have sued.

Settled.

Should have sued.

Sued.

...

They ALL suck.

We’re facing an army of corporations willing to kill a human being over a disputed and entirely fraudulent bill.

There’s no difference between Verizon and AT&T and Sprint and T-Mobile and DirecTV and Dish and Frontier and Netzero and any other phone company or internet service provider. 

FACT:  You can’t stay in business if you don’t do business like THEY do business.

Do the math.

They HAVE to overbill and defraud and ignore disputes to remain competitive.  Since the REGULATORS ignore their deplorable practices, anything not only goes, but MUST be done to stay in business. 

The REGULATORS’ open encouragement of fraud and illegal practices is the main reason for the horrible business practices we are subjected to.

And I’d rather focus on more current and much less painful issues than Verizon.  There are so many CURRENT systemic problems and even more important, I’m busy with litigation and leaving the system.

My adobe addition far exceeds my expectations and it’s great to have something work out well.  The grapes are growing and the cuttings are looking promising, got corn seedlings going and I should be eating the first tomatoes in a few weeks.

Friday, March 20, 2009

Fair Isaac is struggling:  new Beacon mortgage score

It’s obvious that Fair Isaac is desperate.  Experian terminated the resale agreement and lenders agree that FICO scores FAILED:

Lenders agree: FICO scores do NOT predict defaults

As I have documented YEARS ago, Fair Isaac is so utterly and totally incompetent, its programmers can’t even correctly analyze the Equifax credit reports:

5/4/07 - FICO scores add FICTITOUS Equifax late payments long after charge-off

2/26/07: Open Letter to Fair Isaac Regarding its Addition of FICTITIOUS Derogatory Data to Credit Reports and Sale of Defective myFICO Reports

So here is their latest desperate effort to stay in business:

New FICO Credit Score for Mortgage Lenders Debuts

BEACON Mortgage Score from Equifax offers unprecedented predictive power to help mortgage lenders and loan servicers make smarter mortgage decisions

March 11, 2009 (Minneapolis, Minnesota and Atlanta, Georgia) — FICO (NYSE:FIC), the leading provider of analytics and decision management technology, and Equifax (NYSE: EFX), a global leader in information solutions, today introduced BEACON® Mortgage Score, a new FICO® industry score specifically designed to help mortgage lenders make the best possible risk decisions when addressing both current homeowners and those aspiring to own. Equifax plans to make the new score available in April to mortgage lenders and servicers for use in their loan servicing decisions including mortgage loan modifications. 

The new score builds upon the predictive power of today’s BEACON® credit risk score which is widely used in the mortgage industry. By focusing specifically on mortgage risk performance, FICO scientists have developed a version of the BEACON score with significantly greater power for assessing mortgage repayment risk.  In early validation testing, the performance of BEACON Mortgage Score was compared to that of the general risk BEACON score when predicting mortgage repayment risk specifically. The new score identified up to 25 percent more of the high-risk mortgages and home equity lines-of-credit that later became seriously delinquent. In light of today’s housing crisis, this new score can aid servicers in earlier identification of borrowers at risk, mitigating the high cost of consumers moving to foreclosure.

In business terms, these early results suggest that the use of BEACON Mortgage Score by the industry potentially can save it $1 billion in foreclosure costs and help keep an estimated 115,000 more struggling homeowners in their homes.

“One of the goals of our alliance with Equifax is to bring both companies’ assets and expertise to bear on the uncertainty facing lenders, borrowers and investors,” said Lisa Nelson, vice president of Global Scoring Solutions for FICO.  “This new score is one of the first fruits of that alliance, and it couldn’t be more timely or valuable for mortgage lenders, loan servicers and the securitization industry.”

“Everyone in the mortgage industry is working hard to manage risk more effectively, which will help address the rising foreclosure rate while allowing servicers to keep their doors open to qualified new borrowers,” said Dann Adams, president of US Consumer Information Solutions for Equifax. “The BEACON Mortgage Score is an innovative solution with unprecedented visibility that will provide greater predictive strength at a time when the industry needs it most.”

To assist clients, BEACON® Mortgage Score retains the same 300-850® scoring range, minimum scoring criteria, and inquiry treatment as previous versions of the BEACON® score.  However, to achieve its significant increase in predictive strength, FICO’s new scoring model assesses several additional data variables derived from Equifax consumer credit files, selected specifically to predict mortgage repayment risk.  As a result, the model includes 15 additional score reason codes that help lenders understand and explain the scores.  Businesses interested in more information about BEACON® Mortgage Score are welcome to contact FICO at .

...

Until we get some legislators and regulators with IQs above 60 and a conscience, I can only recommend that (near) judgment-proof readers STOP paying their unsecured debts and walk away from their over-mortgaged homes.

The economy is DOOMED as long as lenders continue to use Fair Isaac’s PROVEN TO FAIL scores.

Good people will continue to pay higher rates and become homeless just because they don’t have the MONEY or KNOWLEDGE to manipulate their artificially low FICO scores.

Vote with your money and STOP supporting the criminals.

Update:  I noticed the horrible Google ad for credit scores next to this post.  Obviously, those credit bureau “consumer” scores are even WORSE than FICO scores because no lender uses them. 

PURE fraud.

For MANY years I refused to put ads on my sites and I apologize to all who get screwed.  If you had donated, the ads wouldn’t be there.  I don’t get rich of the ads. But I got tired of begging for donations and the ads pay for about half the server cost.

Tuesday, February 24, 2009

Houston backs off credit score enhancement plan to pay off first-time buyer credit card debt

I could write a book in response to this article:

White backs off ‘credit enhancement’ with tax dollars
Houston plan ‘hit a nerve across this country,’ councilwoman says

By CAROLYN FEIBEL
Copyright 2009 Houston Chronicle

Feb. 24, 2009, 8:44PM
Mayor Bill White yanked a controversial plan Tuesday that called for the city to use taxpayer funds to pay off some personal debts for first-time home buyers, following a flood of outrage and criticism from across the city and beyond.

“I don’t think we ought to be in the business of paying off someone’s debt so they can buy a house,” White conceded during an impassioned City Council meeting. “Paying off people’s credit cards is ridiculous.”

Many council members expressed “embarrassment” over the idea, which received national media attention after the Chronicle wrote about it in Tuesday’s editions. The story appeared to strike a nerve among taxpayers already angry over the recession, the housing meltdown, and federal bailouts of banks and automobile companies.

“Everybody’s outraged about this,” said Councilman Ron Greene, adding that a constituent e-mailed him a copy of a bill and asked him to pay it. “This was not well reasoned.”

The “Credit Score Enhancement Program” would have given up to $3,000 in grants to individuals who are trying to qualify for mortgages through the city’s homebuyers assistance program. City officials had said some applicants fall short of eligibility by only 10 or 20 points on their credit scores, and paying off some debt balances can quickly improve their numbers.

Councilwoman Pam Holm waved a thick stack of e-mails from angry residents.

“I do not understand how we can ever justify spending taxpayer dollars to pay somebody’s credit card,” she said. “I don’t understand how it can be even considered to come up. I am truly embarrassed. I think it shows poor leadership.”

National outrage

Kris Errickson, a stay-at-home mom from northwest Houston, appeared before council to voice her indignation.

“This proposal is a slap in the face for the average Joe who is trying to get ahead,” Errickson said. “The government should not punish taxpayers and bail out those who cannot buy homes.”

Errickson said later that she and her family moved recently from the Heights to a less-expensive home near Timbergrove. “We adjusted our living so we could afford to live in a house,” she said.

“If you can’t afford it, and you can’t qualify, then you shouldn’t have it,” she said.

Councilwoman Anne Clutterbuck said news of the plan had hit a nerve across the country.

“Giving people the ability to increase their credit score artificially because we’re allowing them to pay off their credit cards is exactly what got us into this (national economic) crisis in the first place,” she said.

Hoped to curb crime

Councilman Jarvis Johnson said the $3,000 grants were not a good idea but said the city needed to promote home ownership because it increases the tax base and lowers crime.

“If you look at where the money was going to be put, into Houston Hope areas, they are areas that are typically underdeveloped ­­— where there is crime because of a lack of home ownership,” he said.

The $3,000 grants would have been available only to those who agreed to buy a home in a Houston Hope area. Those neighborhoods, which the city is trying to revitalize, include Sunnyside, Denver Harbor, Fifth Ward, Trinity Gardens and Acres Homes. The $444,000 proposed for the program was leftover money from a $1.5 million appropriation the city made for emergency home and roof repairs after Hurricane Ike. Councilwoman Wanda Adams said the money should be spent on those still in need of home repairs.

Good intentions

Housing Director Richard S. Celli said that the plan would only have been able to help applicants pay off installment debt like student loans, and not revolving debts, such as credit cards.

“This program was never intended to pay off someone’s flat-screen plasma TV,” Celli said. “This program was intended for hardworking, credit worthy low- to moderate-income individuals who needed a helping hand in paying off some debt like a medical bill or a student loan.

My first thought was:  What a stupid idea, waste more money on the banks.

My second thought:  Those credit card bills are most likely going to get paid anyway since the account holders want to buy a home. 

Then I read some of the comments in response to the article and they just go to show how VILE and incredibly IGNORANT so many people are.

The same goes for the government.  The IGNORANCE is overwhelming.  You could replace half the American people and especially elected officials with monkeys and nobody would notice the difference.  You just can’t beat their stupidity.

It’s hard to believe that despite the Business Week 2/08 article on FICO scores NOBODY bothered to ORDER FNMA and FHLMC to STOP utilizing FICO scores.  The gruesome details:

Lenders agree: FICO scores do NOT predict defaults

The Houston money would be MUCH better spent on MAKING Obama issue an executive order to prohibit FICO scoring.

Just think of the GOOD jobs you’d be creating by hiring back some of the many thousands of underwriters to MANUALLY underwrite mortgages and auto loans again.  It takes skill and experience and these are high stress jobs, but they are also good paying job.  Desirable jobs for skilled Americans.

You add 1 - 10 hours of work to each loan.  It takes time to request documentation from borrowers to prove the incorrect credit reporting and to establish whether a loan SHOULD be approved.  “Compensating factors” should be part of many low income borrowers’ approvals.

It would be too cool to be treated as HUMAN BEING.

Isn’t it WORTH a few extra underwriting hours to prevent so much misery, foreclosures, suicides and economic crisis by putting truly qualified people into homes with properly underwritten fixed rate mortgages?

That’s what I used to do in the early 90s until FICO scores become MANDATORY.

I turned away many prospective clients because I did not think they’d be able to stay current on the loans.  Despite HIGH debt/income ratios and past credit problems, I’m not aware of ANY of my buyers being late on their mortgages.

They knew to contact me if they ran into trouble.  Many stayed in touch and sent referrals and/or we refinanced as rates went down. 

I’m disturbed by the idea of paying people to buy homes in high crime areas.

That’s like the signing bonus in the military, it might well get you killed.

I’m especially worried after reading some of these vile comments in response to the article.  They’re not going to help anyone.  If the economy gets worse, the people in the cities and especially in those bad neighborhoods will be so screwed. 

Crime is high now?  What if unemployment doubles?

One of the primary reasons my buyers did so well was that they bought into the very LOW end of GOOD neighborhoods on the San Francisco peninsula.  You can’t imagine how many fixers I’ve seen.

It was a LOT of work and I could only do it because I got both the real estate and mortgage commission and part of my commission went back to the buyers for remodels/carpets, whatever.  Obviously, the homes all needed at least some cosmetic work and landscaping, but we made sure they were structurally sound.  I’ve learned so much from the home inspections.

Even during the last real estate slump in the early 90s most of my clients had NO problem refinancing with lower rates and some even got cash out for remodels due to appreciation.

I don’t think you can revitalize bad neighborhoods by putting more poor people into subsidized and possible CRAPPY homes.

I’m not familiar with Houston, so I don’t know how bad it is.  But sometimes, you just have to be realistic and bulldoze everything.  Rebuild or turn the neighborhood into a park? 

There’s so much that COULD be done.  Develop a NEW sustainable town for people wanting to try something different.  Building isn’t so hard.  So many construction workers are unemployed.  Land is cheap.  The possibilities are endless and the sky is the limit!

I’m afraid the geniuses in Houston or any government could only screw it up.

I can only hope that the SUCKER BUYERS get a clue and don’t just buy houses because they can.

Owning a home and struggling to make the mortgage payment, especially in a BAD neighborhood and in a crummy house, is not all it’s cracked up to be.

I don’t expect Houston or any government to take action to prohibit FICO scoring unless there’s MASSIVE pressure from the general public.

So you might want to send this post to your city or state housing departments and if you’ve been campaigning for Obama, try to get his staffers’ attention.  I’m still waiting to see some CHANGE, but heard Richard C. Hoagland yesterday and he was very optimistic about changes in the Obama administration.  One ought to give him a chance.