Home > Credit Score > Could the Government Mandate Free Credit Scores?

Comments 0 Comments

govt free credit scoreThis year marks the 10th anniversary of the groundbreaking Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003 (FACTA or FACT Act) that granted all consumers the right to obtain a free annual credit report from each of the three major credit bureaus through  AnnualCreditReport.com.

Yet despite there being no shortage of free credit score offers in the marketplace since then, and much touting of the importance of accurate credit reports and high credit scores, consumers still lack free annual access to the credit scores most commonly used by lenders, FICO and VantageScore. (Note: Credit.com provides users with free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their credit reports in its free Credit Report Card tool.)

In the past, lawmakers attempted to move in the direction of mandating that consumers receive a free credit score used by lenders, and while the legislation led to other worthwhile consumer protections, the free credit score itself didn’t ultimately make it into the law. Now there’s another bill in the pipeline that aims to resurrect this. As with the originally proposed Fair Access to Credit Scores Act, consumers would be entitled to a free annual credit score along with their free annual credit report. But it faces some obstacles.

The Previous Movement for a Free Annual Credit Score

Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) introduced the Fair Access to Credit Scores Act in 2010, and it would have required the credit reporting agencies to provide a credit score along with a consumer’s free annual credit report. However, by the following year, the scope of the Udall bill had been heavily edited – and no longer required the credit reporting agencies to provide a credit score along with a consumer’s free annual credit report. What remained was an amendment to the Risk Based Pricing Rule that had been added to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act at the beginning of 2011.

The “Udall amendment” resulted in three types of credit score disclosures now available to consumers — the first of which, listed below, is an update on an existing notification, while the other two are new:

Adverse action (AA) notices — The “turn-down” letters sent by lenders when denying a credit application. AA letters, for years advising consumers of their right to a free credit report upon denial of credit, are now required to include a credit score, if one was used in the decision.

Risk-based pricing (RBP) notices — Sent to people who have been approved for credit, if given less favorable terms than those available to people with higher scores. RBP notices include information on how to obtain your free credit report, your credit score, the score range, and the reasons why the score was not better — if a score contributed to the decision.

Credit score disclosure (CSD) notice — An alternative method where the lender can instead send all credit applicants, including those approved for credit, a CSD notice. Lenders are not required to send you a CSD notice but if they do, it can be used in place of the Risk Based Pricing (RBP) notice as a means of complying with the disclosure rules. Entitled “Your Credit Score and the Price You Pay for Credit,” this notice includes a credit score, an explanation of the score, and information on how to obtain a free annual credit report.

New Legislation

The most recent attempt at legislation to expand consumer access to lender-using credit scores is the 2013 version of Udall’s 2010 bill, the Free Access to Credit Scores Act of 2013, introduced in the Senate in March by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and in the House by Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.). Under this act, consumers would get a free annual credit score along with their free annual credit report.

Supporters of the legislation believe consumers should be able to proactively obtain their credit scores annually at no charge without having to apply for credit, as the current Dodd-Frank score disclosures require. Critics, on the other hand, point out that there are many credit scores used by lenders, and having the government mandate which scores consumers receive could be problematic, both in terms of choosing which scores to endorse and giving the false impression that the scores provided are the only ones lenders use.

Such proposals and the Free Access to Credit Scores Act of 2013 clearly have a long way to go  — if they go anywhere at all. For consumers looking for an upside to this story, at this stage of the game the possibilities are indeed endless, meaning it may be a good time for people to let their legislators and regulators know what they’d like to see in terms of having access to the credit information currently only available to lenders and credit bureaus.

Image: iStockphoto

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

Certain credit cards and other financial products mentioned in this and other articles on Credit.com News & Advice may also be offered through Credit.com product pages, and Credit.com will be compensated if our users apply for and ultimately sign up for any of these cards or products. However, this relationship does not result in any preferential editorial treatment.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Our Owners

Credit.com is owned by Progrexion Holdings Inc. which is the owner and administrator of a number of business related to credit and credit repair, including CreditRepair.com, and eFolks. In addition, Progrexion also provides services to Lexington Law Firm as a third party provider. Despite being owned by Progrexion, it is not the role of the Credit.com editorial team to advocate the use of the company’s other services. In articles, reporters may mention credit repair as an option, for example, but we’ll also be sure to note the various alternatives to that service. Furthermore, you may see ads for credit repair services on Credit.com, but the editorial team isn’t responsible for the creation or implementation of those ads, anymore than reporters for the New York Times or Washington Post are responsible for the ads on their sites.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team