I think the false "identity theft" idea that the banks have promoted has started to really get people confused. The idea that a person can own the facts about t

I think the false "identity theft" idea that the banks have promoted has started to really get people confused. The idea that a person can own the facts about their behavior toward others, when you think about it, is very strange. In theory a credit report is just a report from people you have borrowed money from on how well you repaid the loan to them. I don't think anyone would feel that they should legally be able to prevent people from telling other people how they have truthfully interacted with them. I don't think most people feel it is unfair or immoral to release "unfavorable" information. If one didn't pay back a credit card, most reasonable people think, "OK that's true and on my report. My bad." What people think it is deeply wrong is for a fraudster to get a loan from a bank, the fraudster does not pay, and the bank libels them by sending a false report to the credit agency saying they defaulted on the loan. This agency and bank have no penalties for propagating the libel/slander and this libel will hurt the person in many ways. Everyone knows that getting this libel to stop is very difficult and the credit agencies and banks don't care about fixing the errors. The run-a-rounds people go through are legendary. People fear getting libeled by banks and other issuers of credit, so much so many buy insurance for "peace of mind". The credit reporting agencies are like Ticketmaster, a company set up to take the heat and misdirect the anger when some other entity is screwing you. Ticketmaster plays front man for the concert promoters/venues/bands whereas the credit agencies play front man for the banks.