2 ms·
Banks have very strict guidelines with how they handle sensitive documents with personal information. Can't say the same for the secondary market though. > No
by bko 10y ago
Banks have very strict guidelines with how they handle sensitive documents with personal information. Can't say the same for the secondary market though.
> No contracts, no history, no anything, just, this person now owe's you $X.
Going through the details isn't worth it to the buyers since its for such a small amount. They give them names, numbers and amounts to their phone bank and they see what they can get.
Killing off the secondary market would decrease the amount and cost of accessible credit to borrowers with bad or no credit history. It may or may not be right, but there is definitely a trade-off.
- stanmancan 10y agoGoing through the details isn't worth it to the buyers since its for such a small amount. I get that, but that's ripe for abuse, and it can be a nightmare for the consumer. These companies can effect your credit rating and prevent you from getting a mortgage. Lets pretend you have a false debt on one of these lists. It shows up on your credit report. You try to get a mortgage, but can't until this debt is settled. So now you either have to essentially pay their ransom to have it closed quickly, or proceed through length processes to have it forgiven if they don't have the appropriate documentation to prove it. Neither situation is ideal, and only exists because "going through the details isn't worth it". Maybe credit is too cheap if we have to follow shoddy practices to afford it. Maybe credit shouldn't be accessible in such large quantities to the masses as it is today. Either way, it's probably too late to change that now.
- st3v3r 10y agoI'm sorry, but I don't believe that for a second. It doesn't matter how little the debt is purchased for; those details are important.