file those complaints...

i filed complaints against fannie, freddie, and {UN}fair isaac with the ftc last week. chances are, it will be ignored, and they refuse to disclose how many complaints they've received against these three main consituents of the FICO-based mortgage & insurance scams presently being perptrated; the hit counter on:-- http://www.legalfox.com/credit/score.html
was over 37,000 last time i checked, and a brief review of each of the offending entities' websites impeaches their standpoints with great effectiveness. wells fargo plans to introduce a "risk-priced" mortgage program in the near future; fannie and freddie claim to offer the american dream to all on equal opportunity basis [what about the self-employed?], and {UN} fair isaac denied for years the affects their secret quackware programs were having upon a great many loan applicants, until the facts became so apparent and overwhelming they now post a median penalty scale on their website for all to see:-- how much you can expect your rate to be jacked-up based upon where you fall across their bell-curve credit scoring system. i continually the make simple observation that a borrower obliged to pay more each month on a mortgage and/or insurance is more likely to run into financial difficulty, and thereby poses greater risk of default, than one whose peridoic obligations are less. real estate isn't something you can pack up and carry off overseas, and in bankruptcy proceedings nearly always upholds the first mortgagor's equity position [notable exception, florida.] if the consumer owes more than 80% of the property's value, they, at their own expense, must secure the lender's position with pmi
[private mortgage insurance.] this cover's the mortgage holder's behind in case there is a shortfall between the amount owed and the amount realized should the borrower default on a home loan, or file bankruptcy. the premiums for this insurance which protect the LENDER are paid by the BORROWER out of pocket, minimizing that lender's exposure to the keyword almost as magical as FICO scoring itself:-- RISK....

consumer credit is somewhat different as it is usually not secured at all, or if so, perhaps by a vehicle, boat, furniture, or some other tangible asset whose value is depreciating. the lender's exposure here is far more broad, as the borrower and/or the collatoral may suddenly disappear, or become insolvent.

isn't it ironic that chase loaned me $50,000 at 0% for a full year, amex is now offering $30,000 at 3.9% good 'til payoff, and i can't procure a 6%, 80% LTV fannie or freddie mortgage collatoralized by my primary residence, because of my FICO score?? who would you say is at greater risk here? chase, amex, or the holder of the note on my $760,000 house with $442,500 outstanding balance? if i got into trouble, which creditor do they think i would pay first? following the computerized mentality now controlling the industry, {UN} fair, isaac's "risk-priced," future-predicting quackware says chase first, amex second, and my mortgage holder last.

keep those complaints coming, folks-- in the end, the whole story will be told, and those responsible for it will pay the piper. for the present, they're still the grasshopper merrying away the summer of their favor, while we ants prepare for what is yet to come.

it's going to be near 0 in boston tonight, 5 below tomorrow and next nights, with howling wind chill factors to 35 below or worse. they model me as an ant, so that's what i'll be, for now. when the frigid winter descends around them, my door will be locked tight, and my house nice and warm. winter's coming for you, {UN} fair isaac, fannie, and freddie. i don't wish upon you the same ill you have visited upon me, but if you freeze your nuts off when time is up, you'll get no sympathy. die if you must-- if you do, it is of your own doing, and of yours alone.

time to go--- goodnight to all, even my enemies. as much as i may hate what they do, i do not hate anyone. such is the true spirit of Christianity--:cool:

Doug, does the FTC regulate FNMA/FHLMC? Of course it can't hurt to complain with them. Did you get a confirmation # or anything?

Stay warm!

.. i have a reference number for my complaint at my office, which i can email to you tomorrow. they took the complaint and said it would be passed along to the proper legal and law enforcement authorities. this probably means it will be thrown away or put in nine mile file, and sometime this century somebody might take a look at it. the ftc doesn't respond to individual complaints-- they claim that if a great many complaints come in against a particular company, or if a "pattern emerges," the issue is more likely to be given some level of priority. that's why i'm encouraging everybody who is paying more interest or insurance premium than they have to, because of FICO scores, to file similar complaints. this can be done by phone, fax, e-mail, or snail-mail. the ftc rep talked on the phone with me for nearly an hour as i explained to her what FICO actually is, how it has affected me, and the damages i've suffered by its implementation and industry abuse. i'm also looking into a possible anti-trust action filed on behalf of the US governement by one agrieved american citizen, seeking to prove a monopolistic enterprise and oppression aforethought both individually and in the collective consumer interest, against fannie, freddie, and our favorite enemy, {UN} fair isaac. portfolio lenders cannot compete with the rates and terms of fannie & freddie mortgages because the federal government subsidizes their sources of funding. every borrower seeking a fannie or freddie backed loan is subject to a credit review and ultimate determination of worthiness by only one source:-- {UN} fair isaac's mystery quackware. if an applicant is offered anything less than the best loan product the lender has to offer, this is considered de facto by FCRA to be adverse action, which the consumer must be advised of and given complete and plausible explanation, not a string of quackware generated codes or cookie-cutter reason as to why their FICO score didn't come in higher. i've seen reasons on my own reports citing "length of time accounts have been open." does this mean too short or too long? my credit history goes back to 1981 and my wife's to 1969-- were the accounts contributing to this "reason" open for too much time or not open long enough? associate's national bank cited "history of delinquency" just recently as they denied a request to reopen an account that was always in good standing-- that initial closure in early 2000 was precipitated by a periodic review and followed up with an explanation specifying my FICO score as the reason. wells fargo denied a 70% rate-and-term refinance of my primary at the end of 2000 for this very same reason. christine has a fax copy of thier letter, as do a number of the legal people i've been consultating over the past two years. originated by the largest mortgage lender in the nation, this document is one of the most convincing pieces of evidence i can shoe prove how far the FICO abomination has gone. as i've said many times before, a credit scoring system is fine when used to expedite loan approvals and underwriting procedure; it becomes an affront to consumer rights only when relied upon so heavily as to formulate the sole basis to expedite loan denials, and not even a lender who feels that their applicant is well worthy of approval, can intervene. when such a lender is asked why they won't loan me their own funds, they are happy to pipe up the truth:-- we will, but we can't compete with the rates and terms of fannie and freddie, because we don't have the government subsidation they do. while denying my freddie or fannie application, they offered me a portfolio loan at 10.125%,30 year fixed, with one point. my mortgage broker told me that they have no flexibility whatsoever, because all fannie & freddie funds are under strict contractual terms between themselves as a loan originator, and fannie/freddie as the source of every cent the fed is willing to subsidize, to base their decisions upon FICO scores, and FICO scores ONLY. their position in this situation was not as a principal; it was as an intermediary. all fannie and freddie loans are originated by FICObound lenders, mandated by federal law. i got that letter citing my credit score as the sole reason for denial because that's all the information wells fargo had. they couldn't possibly provide anything more-- as they were never allowed to know how FICO scoring works, all they could do was exactly what they did:-- pass on to me a message that their investor wouldn't accept any loan into the bond portfolio collatoralizing it because i didn't attain the required number of points on their FICO mystical quackware scale. violation of FCRA? damn straight, but the official governmental position is that discrimination is legal and consumer rights can be swept aside if it's done by computer. in english, this means that politicians and government agencies who could step in on behalf of the victims have been adequately "lobbied" to turn a deaf ear and/or remain blissfully opiate to the problem until it comes back to bite them in the ass in the form of losing elections, government bailouts, lousy economy, or something worse, like a gory front-page news columbine type event, depression, banking collapse, stock market diarrhea, perhaps something we have yet to face. the old yarn says, a stitch in time saves nine. that was in the days when knitting was done by hand. today, a stitch in time saves $9,999,999.09 in woolen goods, and spares taxpayers the costs associated with a blanket manufacturer filing bankruptcy.

public awareness is of paramount importance here. the majority of people i interact with every day have never heard of FICO, or even credit scoring itself. i forewarn friends of this great scam, if given the chance, and advise them what to do to avoid it. a $70 phone bill leftover from 1997 could tack $400 onto your mortgage payment every month-- care to refinance that house you bought just a few months ago to get the better rate? failure to know the facts is what they're counting on; if they can get more money out of you, do you think they're going to reveal anything above and beyond what the law obliges?? nfw! [no way!]

a small segment of the consumer base can actually benefit from a system that has caused me so much loss, pain, and despair. this would statistically be those of low to moderate income, with little outstanding debt, holding no more than a handful of credit cards, paying the bills and the rent on time, perhaps a car loan, perhaps not. most of these folks are the first to say:-- i could never afford to buy!, when in fact they are the candidates FICO tends to favor.

myth:-- you need lots of downpayment money and/or high paying job to buy a house.

fact:-- all that's needed to buy real estate today is a high enough FICO score, and for the property to appraise at a sufficient value to collatoralize the amount of money you wish to borrow against it. if you go in with nothing at all, it can still be done, but the rate and terms of the loan aren't going to be too swift. first-time home buyers can get premium rates with as little as 3% down, 0 if you for VA or FHA programs. coming in with less than 20% equity will usually mean pmi [private mortgage insurance,] a premium paid to secure a lender's position in the event you default on the loan and a shortfall arises following sale of the house at foreclosure. some lenders cover this themselves; it is 100% toilet money, and as you pay your note down, and/or as property values increase, you can request a review to have these premiums dropped.

with FICO now controlling government lending policy, i've known of convicted sex offenders and other violent criminals to buy real estate from the comfort of their own cell, building equity even as they serve out long prison sentences. when they get out, a large amount of legitimately acquired equity, readily convertible to cash awaits them. for somebody wishing to go straight, this can afford a wonderful opportunity to live cheaply or even free, explore the vast realm of real-world entrepreneurial business, or start afresh in a traditional job suited to their level of skills and qualification. a certain degree of support from the outside is essential early on-- if this is available, one may step out of incarceration quite literally into the lap of luxury. for anyone in the penal system reading this post, i would suggest considering assigning power of attorney to your trusted contact on the outside [should it be necessary,] and a good real estate lawyer. you can go it alone with a lawyer you trust implicitly, and i mean implicitly. a FICO score over 680 gives you the upper hand in the world of automated loan decisions, but you still hold a low hand in the real world of human beings, guilty or not. be VERY careful, and you can use FICO to succeed in ways you perhaps never before imagined real or possible. if this small paragraph can get somebody of the fast track to hell and into the real estate market, i will indeed consider myself to have made at least one major accomplishment in this new year.

twelve years ago i was on welfare and foodstamps, this following graduation from harvard 0.04 points shy of cum laude, with junior and seniors years on full scholarship. one of my sisters enduring mental illnesses at least equal to my own graduated from smith, summa cum laude, while another sister whose condition was far worse started at smith and finished at harvard, interspersed with regular hospitalizations. i'm told this garbage runs in families and is primarily of biochemical origin. three doctors said i would never work due to epilepsy and one of the worst OCD cases [obsessive compulsive disorder] any of them had ever seen over the course of their careers. thanks to new medications, my wife and i bought our first home just 2 years later, and i earned nearly $200,000 in my best year of 1998. FICO robbed me of that victory as i went into another property in 1999. no need for rehash-- my postings here tell the whole story, from start to finish.

so much for tonight's ramble. good luck and good night--;)

http://www.secretsofthetomb.com/

Doug, I just heard "FNMA" and started listening to her on Coast. The Bonesmen may have a lot to do with your problem, since Bush has been in charge a LOT has changed as far as enforcement goes. It's not like things were great under Clinton, but the trend, the Bush appointments, it's scary. Just hope they don't own the judges.

Somebody recently wrote to me that Bush doesn't want the FTC writing opinion letters anymore, according to one of the FTC attorneys.

... i got halfway through reading all the details, and that's exactly what the bonesmen website is. Ph.D.:-- piled higher and deeper. do you really believe something so ridiculous, unless it's some ivy league prank?? nothing like this ever crossed my path when i was at harvard, and nothing so utterly stupid has since i graduated in 1990. fanaticism can be found everywhere-- i guess this is a yale-flavored cultists' bid for attention; second semester hazing-- one good reason not to live on campus.

if you take any of this seriously, i would say you've been listening to alot of bad radio, christine. i'm sure you're far too intelligent to fall for anything so ridiculously brainless.
baaarrrffff!!!!--:eek:

Doug,

I was wondering if I could email you and pick your brain alittle about Real Estate.

it just appears unlikely to me that an ivy league farce, as this one appears to be, could have anything to do with FICO fraud and its control over all of our lives, not to mention the elimination of free market enterprise in the most lucrative industry in the country. if such a secret society actually exists, and its actions should prove relevant to this horrendous problem, of course i would welcome correction and will look into if further. my family's connections to harvard, smith, dartmouth, mount holyoke, sarah lawrence, UVM, and some of this nation's finest prep schools [philips exeter, dana hall, middlesex, groton, daycroft, south kent, and deerfield,] date back to the early 1900's.

as always, thanks for your help--;)

others are welcome to ask any questions they wish, in this forum, or to me privately

Doug, as I recall, Mr. Greenspan was your hero, not that long ago.

Do a little research, look at who does what, and you'll see :)

The only thing that tops wealth is power.

Just do the research ...

Doug, I think you couldn't find the Federal Reserve Board members, the morons in charge of allowing banks to utilize Fair Isaac's scores. As I recall, it was Wells Fargo who declined you, not Fair Isaac.

Here's the member page for the Federal Reserve:

http://www.federalreserve.gov/bios/

And here is the page for the FNMA execs:

http://www.fanniemae.com/aboutfm/executives/index.jhtml?p=About+Fannie+Mae&s=Executives

It's been over two months since I sent my complaint to the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, no reply.

Maybe it's because I haven't been to Yale or Harvard, and I don't belong to any secret society or whatever club. Maybe you have better luck, as a Harvard graduate you might be more worthy. Pull some strings, do whatever it takes to get a response.

We'll talk about who runs this country and what's really going on when you got your replies.

... and i've pulled all the strings i can. i'll check out the links you've given me, and post here on how it goes. my 4 year old color laser printer rendered the spirit last week, and appears to be beyond repair. i need it for work and complaint letters about FICO, so add another $1500 or so onto my plasticard bills. i'm looking at xerox 8200DP as the most likely replacement-- if anybody has one they want to sell at a very good price [with warranty,] please contact me. references upon request--:)*

Household credit sent me an email last week encouraging me to go to their website and transfer high interest balances to them. i opened the link and found everything needed to complete such a transaction, except the rate and terms of the offer. when i called their customer service department, i was told to fill out the online form and i would be advised of the rate later, with an opportunity to accept or decline it. i owed $11,000 on my last statement, and since this was at 16%, i paid the account to $0. the rep i had on the phone had no idea what the rate of a new balance transfer would be, so they gave me another toll-free number to call. when i finally got somebody on the phone, i was told that the rate they were offering was the same 16% i just paid off. in essence, they were offering me nothing, and i told them i felt the solicitation by e-mail was deceptive, and may be in violation of truth in lending laws. a comlaint to the banking commission, and attorney general in the state [minnesota] where they're based may be in order, and i'm wondering if i should also submit a $1000 demand letter to these lame-brains for the federal part of this online trickery. my account there was opened in 1993, and has always remained in good standing. these folks also cannot keep track of a correct zip code, so i never receive statements from them, as explained more thoroughly in another thread in this forum.

thanks for the advice, and dougg huggs christine, without whose efforts and personal sacrifice the continuing success of this forum would not be possible-- :cool: