re: Oh snap, FICO is about to get more racist/classist

The difference is you go into a store and see the price and decide if you want to pay it or not. You call an ambulance and even the ambulance company has no idea what they will be charging at the time they pick you up. Nor does the hospital. In fact, that they charge you depends on some sliding scale where the big insurance companies get huge price reductions and you get the full charge.

So yeah if you went to whole foods and there were no prices and you picked up a few tomatoes and a bag salad and they said... we'll send you a bill and next month you got 5 bills in the mail:
Vegetable stock clerk: $275
Scale usage fee: $75
Vegetable bag: $20
Cashier: $23,800
Processing fees: $2300
Shopping Cart return: $95

Total for your trip to Whole foods for a salad: $26565

You can't dispute those charges or call unfair practices. Or even pay what the insurance companies pay. So yeah if whole foods was ran that way.. I would say the same thing.

quote:

---

so now we are talking about life saving procedures only?

---

Not necessarily.

Yearly physical and other diagnostic exams based on age, medications for ailments/illnesses more serious that the common cold, casts for broken bones, etc.

And like salmon just alluded to, you know what your food bill will be, you get an estimate of what you'll pay for the new roof. You get the medical bill after receiving care with little negotiating power.

quote:

---

It sounds like we're penalizing people for getting into a bad situation."

---

Yes it called personal responsibility.

quote:

---

your total available credit shrunk so your utilization increased

---

I get the concept of utilization and why it would be important to see how extended you are versus your available credit.

What I think is missing from the equation is available credit versus real life capability of repayment. I know people that have available credit of 3X of their annual income because they do CC churning. That makes their score look great (bc low utilization) but IMO this is a liability of the companies issuing the credit. What if one day he decides to run every card up to the max and leave town or declare bankruptcy? Sure his score would drop then but the companies are on the hook for the initial credit allowed.

Typically a single CC will have max credit available but when opening a lot of cards with smaller maxes you can easily have total available credit much higher than you would ever be approved for on a single card. This just seems risky from the company extending the credit.

Definitely a racket.


If your credit score goes from 650 to 610, you're still a shitty risk.

If it goes from 810 to 850, you're still going to pay the same interest rate.

At a certain point, good or bad, the score doesn't matter.

quote:

---

Disputing and flat out defaulting on are completely different

---

They both hurt your credit.

70k available on 4 cards. 65k available on my Amex the last time I asked.

Bring on your scoring.

They’ve never looked at people that use credit to pay off credit? Seems negligent to me. Those people are risky AF, all they’re doing is transferring debt

quote:

---

why? What about failing to pay a roofer?

---

Because at the least it's a clusterfrick in billing, at the most its absolutely a predatory scam.


I paid off an ER visit, in full, 4 years ago. Settled on an amount and paid it all.


Started receiving collections calls last fall "oh sorry theres this other amount too". I denied it and they hit my credit score immediately. Its taken care of now but it is absolute bullshite what they try to do. I work with money all day long, and cannot fathom what it would be like to send a customer a bill from 5 years ago and know they have to pay it or face long term repercussions.