Talk:Credit score in the United States/Archive 1

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

The ratio of debt to available credit is a major factor in determining the score (old discussion; info already incorp'd)

I'd like to add that the ratio of debt to available credit is a major factor in determining the score. I don't have access to a scoring model, so I can only estimate that this factor is less important than ongoing debt, but more important than length of credit history (i.e. 3rd place on the list of bullets). If there are no comments in teh next coupl of days, I'll add this. Simon G

Simon,

Nobody has an accurate model for scoring because it is a 'secret forumula' owned by a private company- Fair Isaac Corporation. No offense, but unless you reference the sources of your opinion with publicly-available studies, it would remain 'your opinion'. ~CreditWatchDog

CWD

Unfortunately I can't do that, because my knowledge comes from working in the credit industry for the last 10 years or so. I'm not sure of how to reference "common knowledge" in a professional field. Suggestions welcome! :) Simon

I take it that CreditWatchDog doesn't have any useful comment to make, after all, beyond a excessively wikified mish-mash of the obvious and the obtuse. Perhaps it would be best if he left it to those who are competent to comment, in future. Simon

Credit rating is not a synonym for Credit score

"Credit rating" currently redirects to this article, "Credit score".

The term "credit rating" is used more broadly than "credit score" in the "credit rating" is a metric applied at the institutional and financian instrument level in addition to the personal level. For instance, it is appropriate to say "the credit rating of the company's bond issue was AAA", in which case there is no possible reference to personal finance. I'm not qualified to compose an appropriate article to ameliorate the confusion, but I trust that a domain expert will step forward to do this composition, or put me in my place as not knowing what I'm talking about :). Regards, Courtland 02:34, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

Usefulness of article

This article is of limited use unless you happen to live in the USA. Might it be better to move it to Credit score (USA) ? Arcturus 22:20, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree. Is there some kind of flag that you can put on an article that has lots of country specific content? Also, could someone add some content for the UK and other countries? -- TomRobinson 10:06, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

From 18 September 2005 to 14 December 2005 the article did have the flag {{limitedgeographicscope}}, shown next. It was added and removed by anonymous editors. — Joe Kress 07:10, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I've put the Globalise flag back. Arcturus 18:32, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

--Edeshields 14:42, 6 February 2006 (UTC) I agree. Here's a solution. Other than the first paragraph that accurately explains the concept of a credit score, the remainder of the article should be relocated under FICO Fair Isaac Company as a description of their system.

--Gargletheape 15:01, 7 February 2006 (UTC) Why should "Credit score (United States)" reflect a worldwide perspective anyway?

There are many credit scores around the world, one of which I am the author of. Wikipedia is not the place to try and establish a single vendor as owner of a generic term. Also, just because an author thinks he knows how the formula works, this doesn't mean he actually knows how it works, nor should he publish guidance that suggests he has the answer.

I suggest most of this content should be removed and relocated.

This is an article about credit scores in the U.S. Seems relevant enough to me. Justforasecond 16:31, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

(1.) I think someone created a new Article called "Credit Score (USA)" and had plain old "Credit Score" redirect to it to solve the international problem. (2) We now have FICO as the meaning of credit score (usa) which is metaphorically similar to saying "Soda Pop" is always "Coca Cola". --Edeshields 07:22, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

There seems to be more than that at the moment. Still needs work, but a useful and appropriate article. flux.books 00:42, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Would anyone consider adding a paragraph "building up a credit score from scratch" ? This would be extremely useful for foreigners who intend to live in the US. Especially if you plan to stay just for some years e.g. visiting scientists, certain aspects of everyday life are really hard to cope with. Using a foreign credit card e.g. is more than inconvenient if you are a resident alien (and it's really expensive!)

I don't know a whole lot about it, I'll look around. If you're a foreign scientist you'd be a good candidate to start putting this together ;) The same basics apply (pay bills on time, etc) but there are probably some shortcuts given your standing as a bill-paying adult that can accelerate the process. Justforasecond 18:00, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

The biggest problem you'll have is a complete lack of credit history in the U.S. If you look here you'll find some (very old and possibly outdated) advice. The author claims it is possible to get credit references from other countries to try to help when attaining a card. In practice, I have no idea how you'd do this. To me, it seems that most banks are uncomfortable with making any type of credit decisions in a non-automated fashion. You might have an easier time finding a bank that can pull your foreign credit reports; I talked to National City and they told me they have the ability to pull Canadian credit reports, for example. Anyway, there are plenty of no-fee checking accounts in the U.S; if you're just looking for the convenience of having a plastic card, you could use a debit card, which will work anywhere a regular credit card would. These are free at all the major banks I know.Josh 01:15, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Bankrupcty Risk Score

When will this be further investigated and included to wikipedia? --ConradKilroy 16:38, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

We're a bit busy but its on our radar screen. Looks like it is scheduled for addition sometime in 2008? j/k I've never heard of this score but just put the basics of an article together -- click on Bankruptcy risk score. Justforasecond 18:35, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

There's the Bankruptcy Navigator Index (BNI) score, produced by the US credit bureau Equifax.—Preceding unsigned comment added by KidC (talk • contribs)

credit rating

Are you penalized if you use a credit card every month and pay it off every month even before you get the statement?

I was told I have derogatory statements on my credit report and trying to figure out if that is it or if the fact I have taken a year to payoff my hospital bill is it

the easiest way to find derrogatory statements is to get your credit report. the negative info is usually in a separate section. you can get all three of them for free at http://www.annualcreditreport.com

also, if you've been turned down for credit, by law you should be given a copy of your credit report.

this isn't the best place to ask, but you won't normally be penalized for paying your credit card off every month. negative things are usually 1) bankruptcies 2) judgements against you 3) collections 4) very late payments (> 60 days) 5) somewhat late payments (> 30 days) 6) requests for your credit report (this supposedly makes you look desparate). it might be *slightly* better to not pay the entire credit card balance each month. like if you owe $100 and the minimum payment is $30, pay off $95 so your account still looks active, but really that is a very minor point.

given what you've said, your hospital bill is probably the problem, but get your report(s) and find out for sure. if the hospital bill really is the issue you can sometimes get the negative item removed. if you've paid it already give the office a call and see what you can manage. if you havne't paid them and have the funds to do so, see if you can make a deal where they remove the negative remark in exchange for payment.

if you are trying to get a home loan in the near future you may want to know your fico score before applying, but if you aren't trying to get a loan hold off on this because it costs a fair amount of money (~$45 for three scores)

send me an email if you need more advice. Justforasecond 16:39, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

so if leaving $5 on your account each month is better than paying off your entire balance, then what is the advantage of such cards as american express charge cards where you are required to pay off your balance each month? these cards seem to be targetted towards wealthier folks whom the credit card company is not worried about making their payments. i am also trying to understand whether it is better to pay it all off or to leave a balance.

    :I use my credit card for all of my purchases and always pay in full at the end of the billing cycle.  I                          have a FICO score of around 750 (which is pretty good). Papercutzz2 (talk) 19:55, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Australian Credit Scores, Any Different?

Does anyone know if Australian credit score calculations are done any differently from American ones?

I found a clean credit resource website with several articles on improving your credit score, but they seem to have an American slant.

Does anyone know if the same principals apply for Australia?

Cheers, Sammy

Hey Sammy. That site is definitely for US scores. The issue of non-US credit scores has come up before, unfortunately the article currently doesn't have any information about them. Google does return some results but at first glance I don't see a lot of high quality information about scores outside the US. The same general policies probably apply though -- establish a credit history, pay bills on time, etc Justforasecond 22:06, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

FICO score of zero, etc

I don't see a citation for the FICO score of zero for the financial adviser, but it is impossible. The minimum FICO score is 300.

The idea of "needing" a FICO score is also misinformed, since it is impossible to not have one, no one is in need of a score.

As far as cell phones, all major carriers require either credit checks or huge deposits. One company requested $10,000 from a friend of mine a few years back. I am not sure if they use a FICO score, but they do use some scoring system. If your score is poor you can still get a cell phone and service but often with lower spending limits and other restrictions.

The pie-chart distributed by Fair-Isaac is inaccurate. For example, if you file for bankruptcy your score will drop dramatically, this is not represented on the pie-chart at all.

I'll let this sit for a while and give the anon editor a chance to respond.

Justforasecond 18:30, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

If you ever listen to Dave Ramsey's syndicated radio show or attend one of his live events he has a response from the official myFICO.com website telling him that they are unable to fullfill his order for a FICO score because he has had no record of debt for the past decade.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/18/earlyshow/living/money/main951008.shtml

http://www.daveramsey.com

If a cell phone company wants $10,000 for a deposit then your friend should find a cell phone company with a brain. I had a friend who claimed chapter 7 and 6 months later it only cost him a $400 deposit to get a phone. After 12 months the $400 was refunded to him. The only other time you would usually see a deposit that high EVER required is if you had a previous past due account with that company with a high balance.

The FICO score is a gimmick that the banks and the lending industry use to convince people that they should stay in constant debt to keep a good "credit rating" and it works very well to fuel the common practice among the middle and lower classes to buy what they cannot afford on payments. It's a artifical excuse people are given to continue buying what they cannot afford.

You do NOT need a FICO score to buy cars, homes, cell phones, get student loans, etc. The reason I know this is because that's how I live and I've never had a problem obtaining any of these before.

DebtFree

If I had a million dollars, I wouldn't need credit either. For the rest of us, credit is a powerful tool when it is used responsibly. If you own your home outright, be prepared to receive no financial aid when your child applies for college. And credit allows people with modest incomes (not millions) to maintain emergency savings while they make large purchases. You shouldn't have to scrape down to the last pennies in your checking account just to buy a car. And if you can get a credit card for free, pay no annual fee, and start building a good credit score, why not do it??

Anyway, this article isn't the place for a discussion like that. Maybe another article about credit in general could argue the benefits that leverage brings to consumers and the economy as a whole, vs. the exploitation, etc. But this is an encyclopedia entry about credit scores, not a forum for debate about credit. Josh 02:42, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't think you actually read Dave Ramsey's book. That or you do not get the point. He has a million dollars because he did not borrow money. If I have no house payment sending my kid to college is no problem. Borrowing money is by no means "saving" for an emergency. If you had read his book you would know that is the first thing Dave Ramsey tells you to do. SAVE for an emergency instead of relying on credit. I've never had to "scrape down" to my last pennies to purchase a car because I budget for it in the future. If you can afford the payment please explain to me why you cannot afford to save the same amount each month into savings? Of course credit cards are free because they are charging you 18%+ on any balance. Do you really think that the banking industry spends billions on advertising credit cards each year so you can use their "free money"? Everyone argues the "responsible use" of credit cards but apparently only 20% of card holders do it. Middle class people generally stay that way because most have been convinced the use of OPM (Other People's Money)is how you build wealth when ironically must end up middle class or retire poor. A lot of people need to wake up and realize that banks are NOT non profit organizations. DebtFree

Well, I don't think any of this really relates to an article about a credit score. But I don't mind a discussion, so I will post my feelings on your talk page! Feel free to take a look and respond (or delete my comments if you'd rather not see them there). Josh 04:12, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I work at a large Canadian Bank. If you have no bureau history (i.e. score) your credit application will be treated as high risk, so you're either declined or offered a lower credit limit/higher interest rate. Historically, borrowers with no bureau history are very high risk. KidC 16:51, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

This may vary within the financial sector. Young adults who have had no time to establish a credit score, like college students, are often given the benefit of the doubt and given a good rate when first applying for a credit card or to determine a cellphone deposit. — Joe Kress 01:32, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

A credit score of zero could be the result of never having borrowed money from a financial institution. My grandfather was a farmer who had never borrowed a dime from an institution and he didn't have a credit score. --Drizzt3737

Purpose of a FICO score

I changed the "Purpose of a FICO score" section. Perhaps the whole section should be deleted because it isn't sourced. At any rate, the section was very badly written and wasn't even grammatically correct in many places. I kept the content roughly the same, I therefore don't necessarily endorse the content but it nonetheless it needed to be cleaned up and made more academic in tone. (I also the removed the dubious "qualification" of "New York Times Bestselling Author." The "Left Behind" authors are also "New York Times Bestselling Authors". 66.74.157.12 20:26, 3 June 2006 (UTC)Dave

I deleted the whole thing. It directly contradicts information from the rest of the article with absolutely no citation. Until it's fixed, it doesn't belong in an encyclopedia entry. Josh 02:32, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

That section has been repeatedly added, first by 160.36.31.98 beginning 29 March 2006 and then by 160.36.31.242 (obviously the same editor). It looks like a "spin" was put on some information by an advocacy group, emphasizing their agenda while not mentioning any info that disagrees with it. I have read books by Suze Orman (The Road to Wealth; The Young, Fabulous, and Broke) and Dave Ramsey (The Total Money Makeover) to determine their positions.

Dave Ramsey does advocate the elimination of all debt, however he accepts a mortgage as a debt that does not have to be paid off until all other financial goals have been addressed, including funding your retirement — he even advises that a mortgage debt may be obtained if it is a 15-year mortgage whose payments do not exceed 25% of income (the same kind of mortgage that Suze Orman advocates). He also mentions that you must make sure that all info in your credit report is correct — if not, it must be corrected. Of course, Dave Ramsey cannot have a FICO score of 0 because the minimum FICO score is 300. The anonymous editor apparently thinks that 'no credit score' means a score of 0.

Suze Orman changed her mind regarding credit card debt. She originally thought that it was all bad, but within her "Young, Fabulous, and Broke" books she thinks that some may be necessary, providing that it is only used for necessary living expenses when you are just beginning your career. She also thinks that an auto loan is a good debt if you need a car to get to work — nothing fancy, just basic transportation.

At least one cell phone company (Sprint) does obtain your credit score in order to determine the amount of your deposit. If the score is good, no deposit is required. If it is bad, then a high deposit of $250 is required. If you do not have a credit score, like a young adult who has never applied for any credit, then they require a modest deposit of $100. Any deposit will be refunded (or at least credited to your account) in the bill for your 13th month if you have been paying that phone bill for at least 12 months.

Some large employers will perform a preliminary screen of a large pool of applicants by requesting their credit scores — a survey that I took asked my opinion of that practice. If the score is bad, they won't invite those applicants in for an interview; if good, then they may or may not invite them depending on other info, but thereafter it is never used again by that company to 'grade' that applicant.

Except for erroneously equating no credit score with a score of 0, there is no outright lie in the section, but it certainly doesn't have a neutral point of view. However, to provide the article with both points of view would necessarily require a large section that has precious little to do with a credit score. I cannot provide any published source for the phone deposit or applicant screening uses of a credit score, so they not make it into the article.

— Joe Kress 06:47, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Vantage Score

The vantage score is avalible from all three of the credit reporting agencies, and is offered as a competitor to FICO. This should be noted. I work for TransUnion, so I probably shouldn't be the one to write this section of the article, but somebody should do research and add info about the Vantage score.

why isn't annualcreditreport.com on a *.gov tld?

I'd have a lot more faith in annualcreditreport.com's being a legit site if it were on a *.gov domain. Why isn't it? I mean, the people who issue *.gov tld's are responsible for the existance of this website, aren't they? TerraFrost 03:34, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Although free annual credit reports are mandated by the FACT act, they are managed by Central Source LLC, not the government, so they cannot be on a .gov site. Central Source LLC is a joint venture of the three credit reporting companies established to comply with FACT, see its Privacy Policy. Congress probably did not want to establish and fund another government agency to manage the act, so it required the companies themselves to do it. — Joe Kress 05:44, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

This Fed. Trade Commission links to annualcreditreport.com and gives lots of useful explanations:

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/credit/freereports.htm —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.32.171.253 (talk) 04:41, 28 February 2007 (UTC).

Citations needed

I've noticed a lot of "Some consumers believe", "Many companies use", etc. in this article, without any citations to back them up. Could people add in some reputable-source references for some of these, so that readers can ensure that what they are reading is accurate, and not just something that a random Wikipedia editor thought up? --ΨΦorg 13:51, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Rights to know Credit Score?

I was disappointed when the law requiring credit reporting agencies to provide a free credit report (in the U.S.A.) didn't require one's score to be included. Has there been any discussion about this, and is there anything relevant to this that could be included in the article?

Credit history via SSN

The bad credit fixer would like to discuss the issue of credit history being generated by accounts assigned to social security numbers which in many instances are not correct or can be faudulent.

Social security numbers are public and can be obtained from any 1003 Residential Loan Application or purchasing leads from the credit bureaus. This practice has created the situation where millions of Americans find accounts which are not theirs on their credit reports.

In most circumstances these accounts create a negative credit history and it is very difficult if not impossible to get them removed. Instead of innocent until proven guilty, individuals are considered responsible for the accounts until they prove otherwise. This is ridiculous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.229.125 (talk • contribs)

FICO model is flawed

Based on my recent credit experiences, although the calculation proposed in the FICO looks good it is depending on data input from several credit corporations and banks, that offers a great door to unfair credit scoring.

I explain myself, my score was greatly lowered recently.

I investigated the issue to discover that I had a pending 100$ balance on an old phone service that I canceled in 2004. The company just sat there and tried to mail me to my old address with obviously no success.

We are in 2007 now and they still never managed to reach me, that is, even after giving my account to a collection agency. My phone number and address are publicly available. Anyone can find me and eventually call me.

Nobody called me and my account has been delegated to 3 different collection agency since 2004.

The original company plus the 3 agencies. That makes 4 entities that didn't really bother to find me for the 100$ that was due. They sent mail that I never got.

I just recently ordered a credit report for myself because I wanted to see where I was standing. Surprise!

Very low score, main reason, I had a collection agency registered on my profile and a 100$ balance due. Probably sitting there since longtime...

I'm the one who found the agency, called them and told them that I owed them 100$ based on my credit report. I wanted to know why and where this balance was coming from. After spending a day on the phone I discovered what it was and I paid the freaking little 100$.

I called the original company, they could not care less about the fact they put me on this bad situation by reporting me to the credit reporting agency without ever speaking to me first. If I would have been aware for a second that I had a 100$ balance with them, I would have paid it!!!! I mean come on!!!

They mail to nowere and then they send my case to collection! No one ever called me. (A telecom company!!!!)

Worst thing is, statement from my credit report: "Bear in mind that satisfying that satisfying or paying off the collection item or derogatory public record will NOT remove this information from your credit bureau report. The fact that it occurred is still predictive of future repayment risk, so it will still be considered by the score. (For 6 years)"

Ya right Columbo, you're such a great detective that you think the way the telecom company handled my account is 'predictive of future repayment risk' for me!!!!!????!!!!

I called the Telecom comany about it. "Sir there is nothing we can do, it did go to collection, the report is right!" I replied, "Well you can certainly do something about it, write a letter to the reporting agency to explain the situation" "We don't do that sir, we never did and never will. We are big and blablabla"

I could not believe it. I called Equifax about it, they could not do anything about it. To all these people, my account has been sent to collection for real and the report is good.

FICO is dependent on the companies that feed it's data input...

I don't know what to do anymore. Equifax and the telecom company are on the other side of the fence, holding there hands together like an old couple and are laughing at me, the little circus pet.

How about we implement a credit scoring system that will need a log of the actual communication attempts that led an account to collection. What if we implement a credit scoring that will consider collection as: first, an attempt to locate the individual. Second to probe the intentions of the individual in regards to the balance due? (I pay you immediately = good score, I refuse to pay = bad score)

How to make this system proof again bad handling of corporations that are "too big" to keep a good business relation with it's good client that are fully willing to keep things straight and pay the bills on time?

Since I learned all of this, I'm against credit verification to the bone. Especially if it's NOT to lend me money; like the the owners of apartments, and all other type of entities that I pay before usage of the service.

Especially insurance company that I will pay entirely on one shot! What do you wanna check me for, I pay you up front!

Plus everytime people check, your score goes down!

Only a bank lending you money should have access to this kind of tool.

Well, I've always been a good payer that honor his debts, now corporations and computers have affected my reputation badly. Nobody want to lend me money no more, looking at me like the 'bad payer' that I'm said to be...

FICO is a dangerous tool, watch out folks! [unsigned]

I agree with you on this. Clearly the system is broken when no one even looks you up for free in the online white pages to try and find you. The idea of measuring people's credit history is valid, but the present system of executing that idea is rather flawed. But it's perfectly profitable for the people running it, hence "Sorry, sir, there's nothing we can do." Hopefully in years to come the pendulum will swing a bit. Things like annualcreditreport.com, MyFICO, and TrueCredit didn't even exist until recent years. At least now they exist, although the latter two ought to be less expensive. But the industry has a ways to go before they're treating people fairly. — Lumbercutter 18:11, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

You're right and maybe sometime soon, more people like us will react to this and eventually make the governmental legislative entities put a little more emphasis to the idea of 'equal credit opportunity'... Forcing banks to better implement the credit scoring idea. Since the implementation of these credit scoring models, the quality of services provided by creditors have greatly lowered and the response time has tripled up. It feels now like a dumb automated process that is very flawed in it's current ways of implementation and yet very fast to score you.

flawed use of "median"

I've removed an initial references to a "median" where it was apparent that the user didn't understand the statistical concept. ~~ Mike S

I'm partially reverting myself. Leaving 'the' made no sense, but removing it as well as 'median' makes more sense, and satisfies your concern that median is a single score where half the scores are above it and half below it, rather than the middle range of scores. — Joe Kress 22:32, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Is this wrong?

Although not as widely used, these scores (e.g. TransUnion's "TransRisk", Experian's "ScoreX", and "PLUS" scores), are less expensive for borrowers to buy than is the FICO score.

Should that be "less expensive for lenders to buy"? DiggyG 01:13, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Probably - but, more fundamentally, does anyone know if that's true? Is there a citation we can use for that? Are the prices to lenders or borrowers published somewhere? --24.215.178.155 05:22, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Merge suggestion

An IP user added the following to the article. I have tagged the article with a merge suggestion. I have no opinion abut the validity of this suggestion:

It is suggested that this page be merged with Credit History. I really cannot understand why america should be accorded so much importance that it has a separate page for credit history.

Gwernol 14:30, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with the merge. This has nothing to do with whether America is accorded importance; it has to do with whether the subject meets the notability guidelines and whether there is enough information or potential information to write an encyclopedic article. The answer to both is yes, so a merge is not the way to go.--Kubigula (talk) 15:28, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

How does one get a credit score started?

I'm MartinD, on the Dutch Wikipedia. I just wrote a short article on Credit score there, and I thought of the following question. One needs a credit score to obtain credit (credit card, a loan, etc.), but in order to obtain a credit score, one has to show that one can be entrusted with a credit card, etc, it would seem. How does an American get out of this loophole, or am I mistaken? Perhaps it would be possible to obtain a credit card with a small limit, on the basis of "nothing adversely known"? Any answers would be greatly appreciated. Best regards, MartinD. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.171.24.219 (talk) 21:13, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

- Hi Martin,

There are a couple of ways to start your credit here in the US.

parents or someone with credit co-signs with you on a loan. They take the responsibility if you stop paying.
get a rediculous high rate credit card or car loan (20-45%) to build your credit.
and the worse yet...the only option I had as a young person...I was offered a $1500 bank loan at 15% interest...wait...it sounds fine right? NO! I was given the loan and automatic payments were set up...HOWEVER...I was not allowed to use or touch the money in anyway. Basically I was charged 15% interest that the bank was then able to turn around and loan right back out since it was in a non-touchable savings account. THAT is how I began MY credit journey!! Cheers, Robin Mybuddyrobin (talk) 07:07, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

- Martin, it can actually be even easier. When you open a regular savings account with a bank, you sometimes get the option to apply for credit at the same time (your ATM card gets a Visa/Mastercard/etc. logo on it and you can then use it to charge things. In my case, I opened my account in high school, and after I turned 18 I was offered a credit card with the ability to borrow up to the amount in my account, which was about $1000 at the time. They raised my credit limit in future years as my savings increased. Heian-794 (talk) 17:42, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Removed NPOV template

The section "Makeup of a Credit Score" had an NPOV template, but the talk page contains no discussion of said NPOV problem. I've removed the template.palecur (talk) 17:49, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Scoring facts

There is one citation in this entire section, which reads as if it is OR. Needs citations for every contention in the section. • Freechild'sup? 02:03, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Should information on how to doctor a score be included?

What is Wikipedia's policy on mentioning how to do something wrong? For example, should an article on terrorist attacks include information on how to commit one? Is telling readers how to doctor a credit score appropriate? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.10.94.38 (talk) 23:17, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia does discuss the methods used in various terrorist attacks: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ANFO#Terrorist_use Perhaps you should be wikipedias official censor and protect us from what we shouldn't know.71.123.125.65 (talk) 17:43, 2 April 2009 (UTC)