Colorado Senators KO Credit Ban
West News • January 28, 2005
By a 5-2 bipartisan vote members of the Colorado Senate Business, Labor and Technology Committee rejected a measure that would have banned insurers from using credit history to underwrite and rate ...
Insurance Journal is not responsible for the content of the message below.
Subject: RE: It's not low income and minorities
Posted On: January 28, 2005, 3:13 pm CST
Posted By: Tass
Comment:
I appreciate that good credit scores are a reflection of one's good character and that makes them a good risk to insure, however only a small portion of that is really true.
There are many who have DUI's that also have good credit scores yet they get a better rate than the basic person who operates on a cash basis - especially if they had some previous problem.
How about the person who does not have much credit yet does not have debt either. They do not generate a high credit score. Or, what about the person who relies on an insurance claim payment but gets stalled then runs out of resources and the credit departments ding them for late pay - including the insurance companies themselves. Is that fair?
What if there is any kind of dispute? The credit gets dinged first, then it takes an insurmountable effort to cure the credit rating. That is wrong.
Come in my office and get a policy - some companies will write in a very favorable tier, while others will not. What gives?
Same person - the credit score plain and simply discriminates against many unjustifiably.
Don't get me wrong, I would blindly be much more apt to write/loan money to a person based on good credit scores, but there are other criteria that could be used to judge a good risk as well. Consequently, more premium is produced for the insurance companies because there are "dings" on people that are good risks (if there credit score was not the factor).
The credit scores favor the insurance companies....period.
West News 
Subject: RE: It's not low income and minorities
There are many who have DUI's that also have good credit scores yet they get a better rate than the basic person who operates on a cash basis - especially if they had some previous problem.
How about the person who does not have much credit yet does not have debt either. They do not generate a high credit score. Or, what about the person who relies on an insurance claim payment but gets stalled then runs out of resources and the credit departments ding them for late pay - including the insurance companies themselves. Is that fair?
What if there is any kind of dispute? The credit gets dinged first, then it takes an insurmountable effort to cure the credit rating. That is wrong.
Come in my office and get a policy - some companies will write in a very favorable tier, while others will not. What gives?
Same person - the credit score plain and simply discriminates against many unjustifiably.
Don't get me wrong, I would blindly be much more apt to write/loan money to a person based on good credit scores, but there are other criteria that could be used to judge a good risk as well. Consequently, more premium is produced for the insurance companies because there are "dings" on people that are good risks (if there credit score was not the factor).
The credit scores favor the insurance companies....period.