Hacker News Reader

Comment by splintercell | Hacker News Reader

Technically someone can have complete ability to pay back their credit card debt, yet they might miss a credit card payment (like I did last year because I was out of the country due to a personal reason), yet that is counted against me.

The idea behind these criterion isn't to perfectly capture the creditworthiness of the applicant rather to give a general idea of their creditworthiness.

The aim is to be better than nothing. Also different cultural aspects play role in this too. For instance in West (at least in America) a lot of people don't take calls from unknown numbers (unless your phone is for professional use), whereas in other countries like India, taking calls from unknown number isn't an issue.

View on HN

While sure you could pay it because you had the money, not paying it is still bad and what you did should count against you.

I am not trying to be mean. But that is sort of how it has work. Think about it ... Let's say 50% of a creditor's debtors failed to pay on time -- while 100% of those who failed technically had the money? This would be devastating to the creditor as they would miss their payments and make them look bad and potentially prevent them from having the ability to lend money out in the future.

So on some level its not just about the ability to pay, its about the diligence. A lackadaisical debtor can be just as bad as a broke debtor. Not that I am calling you lackadaisical.

As you sort of pointed out - creditworthiness is not just the ability to pay, it's the predictability to actually pay.

To prevent this on my end I always run my bank accounts with a few months of cash forward so I can set my credit accounts to auto pay a minimum or in some cases full balance. Carrying debt is not something I really want to do.

>The idea behind these criterion isn't to perfectly capture the creditworthiness of the applicant rather to give a general idea of their creditworthiness.

That's the thing though, based on this article these signals for credit-worthiness would actually be damaging for me despite an otherwise perfect credit history. I take issue with broadening the scope based on societal norms.

If these are used to fill in a non-existent credit history that's one thing — but as factors in an already existing credit history they feel a bit troubling.

> Technically someone can have complete ability to pay back their credit card debt, yet they might miss a credit card payment (like I did last year because I was out of the country due to a personal reason), yet that is counted against me.

I am not sure if you have this capability but have you tried auto-paying the minimum balance?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com