• UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    10 months ago

    All of that is technically true, but still kind of a shit policy as it consequently raises the cost of borrowing on someone who paid back the full loan plus interest.

    You can rationalize all these shit policies with any number of talking points. Some of them might even be actuarially sound. But they’re still shit.

    • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      All of that is technically true, but still kind of a shit policy

      Your complaint is with lenders then, not credit agencies. If someone misuses a tool, its not the fault of the toolmaker, but the person using the tool. Would you blame a hammer manufacturer because it is really crappy at driving in screws? I would hope not. You’d be upset at the person using the hammer to try to hammer in screws.

    • HopFlop@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Who would you rather give a loan to? A person who you know is currently able to pay you back or a person you know was able to pay back the loan 10 years ago?

        • HopFlop@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          Exactly, so that answers the question. When you finish paying your loan, you stop paying back money and thus your credit score is slightly lower than when you were actively paying back.

    • EatATaco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      it consequently raises the cost of borrowing on someone who paid back the full loan plus interest

      This is mostly likely untrue because she was paying off her debt the whole time she had the loan, and her credit score and history were probably improving that whole time. Maybe her score went up 300 points over the years of that loan, and then dropped 35 points.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        her credit score and history were probably improving that whole time

        Until she paid it off, at which point it dropped.

        Maybe her score went up 300 points over the years of that loan

        Maybe, but I highly doubt it. And 35 points is a big drop when you’re already in the 700-range. That can be worth a quarter point on a mortgage loan, which will end up costing you tens of thousands of dollars over the life of the note.

        • EatATaco@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          10 months ago

          And 35 points is a big drop when you’re already in the 700-range.

          Which means the tons of points she likely gained by paying off the debt for years saved her at least a point.

          I’m not arguing that a lower credit score isn’t worse, I’m pointing out that cherry picking a single month movement to claim that she got screwed for doing something that actually likely helped her doesn’t make any sense.