3 ms·

People wouldn't be able to get this information without SCHUFA - at least not doing a fair bit of work. SCHUFA did work to build a system of gathering and provi

People wouldn't be able to get this information without SCHUFA - at least not doing a fair bit of work. SCHUFA did work to build a system of gathering and providing this information in a consolidated way. I don't think people should have a right to demand this value be provided to them for free. If everybody now demands this information for free, why would this business continue to operate? And if they don't, how will landlords get information about who is financially reliable and who isn't? In the US is works because landlords typically will not accept self-obtained credit reports. They pay the credit agency directly. As a consumer I can get my information for free, easily - but my landlord will still want to pay the agency for their own copy.

sokols 3y ago
They are required by law to provide the information once a year, for free. The complaint here is that the “free” report contains less information than the paid one. Information which could affect a decision about a loan or maybe a decision of some landlord about a prospective tenant.
- Nifty3929 3y ago
  This wasn't clear to me in the article: "With the help of manipulative designs, people are prevented from obtaining a free copy of their data in accordance with Article 15 GDPR – even though they would actually be legally entitled to it." Maybe you're talking about the score, but the score isn't data - it's an algorithm. "For example, in the case of the complainant, the free information included only a 'basic score', while the paid information showed six different 'industry scores.'" And this is basically how it works in the US as well. When you get your free credit report, it will contain a score, but not the same score as is seen by a business requesting the report - because there are many different scores used for different purposes. The business pays for the score that matters to them which is different than what the consumer sees. None of this feels particularly nefarious to me.

sokols 3y ago

They are required by law to provide the information once a year, for free. The complaint here is that the “free” report contains less information than the paid one. Information which could affect a decision about a loan or maybe a decision of some landlord about a prospective tenant.

Nifty3929 3y ago
This wasn't clear to me in the article: "With the help of manipulative designs, people are prevented from obtaining a free copy of their data in accordance with Article 15 GDPR – even though they would actually be legally entitled to it." Maybe you're talking about the score, but the score isn't data - it's an algorithm. "For example, in the case of the complainant, the free information included only a 'basic score', while the paid information showed six different 'industry scores.'" And this is basically how it works in the US as well. When you get your free credit report, it will contain a score, but not the same score as is seen by a business requesting the report - because there are many different scores used for different purposes. The business pays for the score that matters to them which is different than what the consumer sees. None of this feels particularly nefarious to me.