Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
crash2006

New Ways Bankers Are Spying On You

Recommended Posts

can across this interesting is thisgoing ot be the new norm in this country?

Experian, one of the three major credit bureaus, bought RentBureau—which collects rental-payment data from large property managers—and expects to integrate that information into credit records before the end of the year

http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/111250/new-ways-bankers-are-spying-on-you?source=patrick.net#yfi_pf_main

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

can across this interesting is thisgoing ot be the new norm in this country?

http://finance.yahoo...net#yfi_pf_main

What i don't get is at what point there is a breach of data privacy. All organisations I have ever worked for have been paranoid about mishandling personal data, but there it seems like a commodity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Information is power.

If they know how much income you're getting, they could raise your rents. Or if they know you're about to go bust, they can kick you out and pre-reserve a new customer to take your place well in advance.

What have we created?

"The efficient killing machine"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Banks getting more credit scoring data, the sort they totally ignored when the lumped tonnes of toxic financial loans into packages for the wider investment sector, if they bothered to collect it at all. Good job the mortgage backed securities market is coming back, not; not even with the central slush bankers trying to force as man people into as risky assets as possible.

The banks have been incapable of assessing risk or making any reasonable lending decisions for years, they are corruput to the core, the worst of them should have gone to the wall, never to pollute the economy again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8127878/Surveillance-state-more-intrusive-than-ever.html

Surveillance state 'more intrusive than ever'
Britain is heading towards becoming a surveillance state of unmanned spy drones, GPS tracking of employees and profiling through social networking sites, the information watchdog has warned.

Some are taking action in the form of tarring speed cameras. This trend, begun by the Blair/Brown regime, to create revenue and jobs will not be reversed anytime soon IMO. Power--once in your hands is not easily reliquished. It usually has to be removed....forcibly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What i don't get is at what point there is a breach of data privacy. All organisations I have ever worked for have been paranoid about mishandling personal data, but there it seems like a commodity.

I dont see the problem here.

If you are a good credit risk, and spend wisely, it would be good if the banks and credit people had more data on you, because that will make them believe you are a good credit risk as well, which is important when they decide to lend you money. You will be able to borrow money at a lower rate. You will also be seen as a the sort of person that it would be good to let out a property too, and you will be able to command a lower rate.

As for the bad risks, they will either have to change their behaviour, or pay more. The banks and their shareholders will lose less money when lending, as they will have better information about the true risks when lending.

A bit like insurance on your car. If you are a careful driver, you rightfully get a lower premium. This can only be achieved when the insurance company gets individual data on you that it can trust.

The only reason to be secret about this stuff is if you have something to hide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of us do have something to hide, it's called our privacy.

What information are they gleaning that isnt already on a computer system somewhere?

How much is that privacy worth? Would you willing pay more for something to keep the information that one organisation can see, secret from the other organisation? That is what you are doing.

When you are doing something that involves trust, like taking out a loan, unless the organisation you are trading with is mad, they are going to want information from you. Try pleading privacy when asking they ask you how much you earn during a loan application. Sure, you can get a liar loan, but it will cost you a lot more.

People who are willing to expose their finances, because they have nothing to hide, will always get a better deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What information are they gleaning that isnt already on a computer system somewhere?

How much is that privacy worth? Would you willing pay more for something to keep the information that one organisation can see, secret from the other organisation? That is what you are doing.

When you are doing something that involves trust, like taking out a loan, unless the organisation you are trading with is mad, they are going to want information from you. Try pleading privacy when asking they ask you how much you earn during a loan application. Sure, you can get a liar loan, but it will cost you a lot more.

The fact that the information is on a system somewhere is irrelevant, it's how it is used and by whom. If I give my permission for my details held with group A to be used by group B then fine, however I need to be asked otherwise it's a breach of my privacy. And if I am approaching someone for a loan, I would expect them to have a certain amount of data to determine If I am good for it, not that my details can be automatically obtained from an unrelated source without my control.

People who are willing to expose their finances, because they have nothing to hide, will always get a better deal.

Isn't this just a form of blackmail? ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What information are they gleaning that isnt already on a computer system somewhere?

So if someone has already been spying on you, you might as well tell the whole world everything?

Shit, shit "logic."

How much is that privacy worth? Would you willing pay more for something to keep the information that one organisation can see, secret from the other organisation? That is what you are doing.

Erm privacy is free, people not knowing about you is the default position. It takes effort from someone else to break privacy. All that's being asked s that they don't make that effort.

how difficult would it be for experian to do nothing?

When you are doing something that involves trust, like taking out a loan, unless the organisation you are trading with is mad, they are going to want information from you. Try pleading privacy when asking they ask you how much you earn during a loan application. Sure, you can get a liar loan, but it will cost you a lot more.

And how much do you get to find out about the banker who also signs the form?

Get their name, address, schoo, sexual preferences etc do you?

How about the most important bit of info - they don't have any money to lend to you in the first place. This information disparity is a basic power play - and that power play can only be sorted out by equality.

People who are willing to expose their finances, because they have nothing to hide, will always get a better deal.

This isn't information that has willingly been handed over.

Edited by Injin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got nothing to hide except me and my monkey.... :)

That said--I thought the Koalishon were going to abolish the mutlitude of traffic spy scameras that boost revenue and have zero impact on accidents?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got nothing to hide except me and my monkey.... :)

That said--I thought the Koalishon were going to abolish the mutlitude of traffic spy scameras that boost revenue and have zero impact on accidents?

no, they were going to tell you what you wanted to hear and then steal your wallet.

For their bankster owners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that the information is on a system somewhere is irrelevant, it's how it is used and by whom. If I give my permission for my details held with group A to be used by group B then fine, however I need to be asked otherwise it's a breach of my privacy. And if I am approaching someone for a loan, I would expect them to have a certain amount of data to determine If I am good for it, not that my details can be automatically obtained from an unrelated source without my control.

Isn't this just a form of blackmail? ;)

The fact that the information is on a system somewhere is irrelevant, it's how it is used and by whom. - This point was about the paranoia some people appear to have about their personal information. People seem to be worried that more information will be stored on them, and yet they dont lose sleep at night because their bank has all those transactions of theirs on record. Indeed, most are probably reassured by the fact that the bank keeps all of this info.

If I give my permission for my details held with group A to be used by group B then fine - I think that this is really the centre of the argument. Of course a bank has to keep transaction details, it couldnt function if it didnt, notwithstanding the legal requirement for it to do so. But can group B access those details? Well the state can if it has a legal duty to do so, like a criminal investigation or a tax audit. However, I cant see why B would ever be allowed to access your bank details, unless you have given them permission in some form to do so.

When you do something that involves a credit check, do you not pass them your details and give them permission to seek out and check your credit? Indeed, if you told them that you cant check those details, they would show you the door. If you were asked by someone you didnt know if they could borrow some money, you would want the same facility would you not?

not that my details can be automatically obtained from an unrelated source without my control. - Well if it were unrelated, then I would object too. I would also wonder why a company was spending time and effort trying to retrieve irrelevant details about someone. This could leave it open to legal action because I am sure that it wouldnt be legal to do this. However, it will try and retrieve all relevant details, to give it a better idea of your creditworthiness.

Isn't this just a form of blackmail? - Nope. In any credit agreement, there has to be some sort of mechanism for ensuring that the borrower can repay. In the rawest form, loan sharks will beat you to a pulp if you dont. Building societies will take your home. Banks will take any assets that they can get, but they are far happier if you just repay. The only way that they can do this is to have the best information on you, so that they can discriminate between good and bad credit risks. This isnt spying, it is just business.

And if you dont like it, you can always walk away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont see the problem here.

If you are a good credit risk, and spend wisely, it would be good if the banks and credit people had more data on you, because that will make them believe you are a good credit risk as well, which is important when they decide to lend you money. You will be able to borrow money at a lower rate. You will also be seen as a the sort of person that it would be good to let out a property too, and you will be able to command a lower rate.

As for the bad risks, they will either have to change their behaviour, or pay more. The banks and their shareholders will lose less money when lending, as they will have better information about the true risks when lending.

A bit like insurance on your car. If you are a careful driver, you rightfully get a lower premium. This can only be achieved when the insurance company gets individual data on you that it can trust.

The only reason to be secret about this stuff is if you have something to hide.

:unsure:

Oh God. Not again. Are you some kind of a web bot or something? You certainly can't be a rational human.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that the information is on a system somewhere is irrelevant, it's how it is used and by whom. - This point was about the paranoia some people appear to have about their personal information. People seem to be worried that more information will be stored on them, and yet they dont lose sleep at night because their bank has all those transactions of theirs on record. Indeed, most are probably reassured by the fact that the bank keeps all of this info.

How many other peopel are reassaured doesn't matter. If you, joe bloggs or I am unhappy, we are unhappy. Your willingness to trust complete strangers (known fraudsters, conmen, spivs, thieves, funders of genocide, bubble formers etc) in no way has anything to do with mine.

You want to give Jamie Dimon all your details. Go for it. He'll ****** you with the info, but that's up to you.

If I give my permission for my details held with group A to be used by group B then fine - I think that this is really the centre of the argument. Of course a bank has to keep transaction details, it couldnt function if it didnt, notwithstanding the legal requirement for it to do so. But can group B access those details? Well the state can if it has a legal duty to do so, like a criminal investigation or a tax audit. However, I cant see why B would ever be allowed to access your bank details, unless you have given them permission in some form to do so.

yes, theres a problem here with the use of the word "bank". Really it's only got anything to do with the loan officer you meet, not the other several hundred thousand bank staff who can potantially look your shit up. And this is just for making a loan, this oesn't address the issues of them data mining, cross relating and using the info to wring every last penny out of you in ways you aren't even aware of.

When you do something that involves a credit check, do you not pass them your details and give them permission to seek out and check your credit? Indeed, if you told them that you cant check those details, they would show you the door. If you were asked by someone you didnt know if they could borrow some money, you would want the same facility would you not?

Problem - everyone is forced at gunpoint to borrow money. Ergo, everyone is being forced at gunpoint to hand their details over.

not that my details can be automatically obtained from an unrelated source without my control. - Well if it were unrelated, then I would object too. I would also wonder why a company was spending time and effort trying to retrieve irrelevant details about someone. This could leave it open to legal action because I am sure that it wouldnt be legal to do this. However, it will try and retrieve all relevant details, to give it a better idea of your creditworthiness.

Isn't this just a form of blackmail? - Nope. In any credit agreement, there has to be some sort of mechanism for ensuring that the borrower can repay. In the rawest form, loan sharks will beat you to a pulp if you dont. Building societies will take your home. Banks will take any assets that they can get, but they are far happier if you just repay. The only way that they can do this is to have the best information on you, so that they can discriminate between good and bad credit risks. This isnt spying, it is just business.

And if you dont like it, you can always walk away.

Desperately naieve.

Credit can't be repaid, that's the nature of interest.

And you can't walk away, all money is borrowed into existence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assuming most people pay their rent from their main bank account this is already well recorded on a computer somewhere.

It's not rocket science to take it a step forward and see if you do make the payment each month.

If you don't want them knowing what you do then take it all out in cash and put it directly into the hands of the people you need to pay.

Of course the spending 3 days a week dropping payments off will be a nuisance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And you can't walk away, all money is borrowed into existence.

All money is borrowed into existence?

What about the bloke that digs a gold nugget out of the ground, and turns it into a coin?

And that coin is used to buy a cow.

The coin is indeed money, as it has been accepted as payment. And no one owes anyone.

Money can be borrowed into existence, but not all money is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this aside, I really do not agree with a third party holding and using my personal financial data and using it as a commodity for their own gain, In my opinion, my bank who I have choosen to hold this data about me, can disclose this information to the minimal amount in order assess my credit worthyness to third parties if I seek their services, why can this not be the case?

A simple yes or no, should be enough! Why should a third party credit agency have access to such privileged information to the extent that they do, why is this considered normal?

Edited by JustAnotherProle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this aside, I really do not agree with a third party holding and using my personal financial data and using it as a commodity for their own gain, In my opinion, my bank who I have choosen to hold this data about me, can disclose this information to the minimal amount in order assess my credit worthyness to third parties if I seek their services, why can this not be the case?

A simple yes or no, should be enough! Why should a third party credit agency have access to such privileged information to the extent that they do, why is this considered normal?

JustAnotherProle,

A good question. This information that they gather is personal to you. I cant see any good reason why they should forward this information to anyone unless it is in respect of a transaction involving you in some way. If it were to be forwarded to anyone else, then I cant see how that wouldnt breach the law.

The reason why the information doesnt come directly from your bank, is that there are probably many sources that provide this data, so you need some sort of warehousing system that talks to many different places to obtain all the information. Your bank wont have all the data that they need.

I guess that if computer systems were 'quicker', then all of this information would be best accessed only at the time of the request, and not held separately in a third party system. What I think you are objecting to is that the Third Party systems hold this data just in case you want to carry out a transaction that needs a credit check?

A better solution would be if the third party system didnt store any data on each person initially, but grabbed that data at the time of the request (with your permission of course), used that data for the credit check, and then stored the information it had found in case there was a need to review it in detail later.

So the current systems are probably the way they are due to the impracticality of getting such data on an 'as required' basis. In other words, they have to store it in advance because it is impractical for them to get all of the required data at the drop of a hat.

I do think it is right though, that given the improvements in technology, it would be right to push these companies to retrieve data on an 'as required' basis.

Edited by leicestersq

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All money is borrowed into existence?

What about the bloke that digs a gold nugget out of the ground, and turns it into a coin?

he'll stillhave to acquire some money that's been borrowed into existence in order to pay his taxes.

And that coin is used to buy a cow.

he'll need to acquire some borrowed money to pay his tax on the transaction.

The coin is indeed money, as it has been accepted as payment. And no one owes anyone.

Except they owe the taxman, who wants that borrowed money.

Money can be borrowed into existence, but not all money is.

All money is borrowed into existence.

Or you go to jail.

Time to get real, frankly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I think you are objecting to is that the Third Party systems hold this data just in case you want to carry out a transaction that needs a credit check?

Yes exactly, the "as and when" it is required aspect is vital, I think it has something to do with the way Data Protection is very important in my job and it seems that the same type of principles should be applied. Why should a third party, once they have used the data ,be able to trade in it or use it for any purpose other than the initial reason for its use! ..I hope I make sense here! Especialy with personal financial data, which is so open to all sorts of abuse.

I do think it is right though, that given the improvements in technology, it would be right to push these companies to retrieve data on an 'as required' basis.

Exactly, if they want to use this data, they have to have a good reason for it's request, not simply assume, oh we have been given it, we can use it how we see fit now and for any purpose *and* possible make money from it's trade..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes exactly, the "as and when" it is required aspect is vital, I think it has something to do with the way Data Protection is very important in my job and it seems that the same type of principles should be applied. Why should a third party, once they have used the data ,be able to trade in it or use it for any purpose other than the initial reason for its use! ..I hope I make sense here! Especialy with personal financial data, which is so open to all sorts of abuse.

Exactly, if they want to use this data, they have to have a good reason for it's request, not simply assume, oh we have been given it, we can use it how we see fit now and for any purpose *and* possible make money from it's trade..

I didnt think we would agree, but I think we just have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A good question. This information that they gather is personal to you. I cant see any good reason why they should forward this information to anyone unless it is in respect of a transaction involving you in some way. If it were to be forwarded to anyone else, then I cant see how that wouldnt breach the law.

The reason why the information doesnt come directly from your bank, is that there are probably many sources that provide this data, so you need some sort of warehousing system that talks to many different places to obtain all the information. Your bank wont have all the data that they need.

I guess that if computer systems were 'quicker', then all of this information would be best accessed only at the time of the request, and not held separately in a third party system. What I think you are objecting to is that the Third Party systems hold this data just in case you want to carry out a transaction that needs a credit check?

A better solution would be if the third party system didnt store any data on each person initially, but grabbed that data at the time of the request (with your permission of course), used that data for the credit check, and then stored the information it had found in case there was a need to review it in detail later.

So the current systems are probably the way they are due to the impracticality of getting such data on an 'as required' basis. In other words, they have to store it in advance because it is impractical for them to get all of the required data at the drop of a hat.

I do think it is right though, that given the improvements in technology, it would be right to push these companies to retrieve data on an 'as required' basis.

hahahahaha...what a shame the Stazi didn't have modern computer databases....I'm sure that they would have protected your data.

:unsure::unsure::unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What people need to do is check their contracts with suppliers like utilities, council tax, and bank accounts.

If there is nothing in the contract that states they will share your data with a credit reference agency raise a complaint to the ICO.

Likewise if there is a clause in a contract stating data will be shared and you have opted to to not recieve marketing data from the company or have your details passed on to 3rd parties then a complaint might still be valid with the ICO as it breachs your right to have not have data passed on.

I havent looked yet but I wonder if there might even be an angle under some consumer laws which could also be used against the data sharing.

Either way all the Govt will do if this gains momentum is legislate against it like they did with the Financial Act 2004 (I believe) where the police are no longer obliged to investgate financial problems like card fraud. The banks are the ones who now do that role of policing!

£300 and a decent PI and you can pretty much find out whatever you want in any government database. Just ask the NHS...

No doubt LSQ doesn't have anything to hide though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think it might of been in the recent arguments over facebook privacy, might have been Mark Zuckerberg who said "everyone has something to hide"

Problem is with this type of agency once something is there it's probably extremely difficult to get it corrected, even if untrue, how many people have been refused credit as it is because of mistakes?

Also alarming is the urge by both Government and Private concerns to link these databases.

Information held separately isn't a huge problem, having a complete overview of everything about a person will turn out to be a tool for great evil whether the person viewing it is an individual a company or a government.

When reading accounts of successful people the thing that strikes you is the number of times some of them have gone bankrupt before making it big.

Guess that won't be happening in the future

Edited by madpenguin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 261 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.