vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
How you answer is actually dependent on when they ask. If it is early in the process the question/answer is to determine the type of loan you are looking for: Auto loan, home loan, home improvement loans, education loans; all have products that are geared to those uses. In many cases they will use the item you are purchasing as collateral for the loan. In return for this they will offer you a low interest rate, because they know they can protect their money be repossessing the collateral.  For these standard loans they will ask for more specifics before they give a check for the money because they need to know exactly what you are spending the money on, and they will need to file legal paperwork to protect their money. If it isn't one of those standard loans then you are looking at a loan that is only backed by your signature. That loan could have a high interest rate. They are asking as part of the process of assessing their risk. Unless you are putting a lie on a form, I am not sure being untruthful puts you in jeopardy.  In some cases they don't care. People get lines of credit without knowing exactly what they are going to spend the money on.
"No shit. That crazy, ruthless republican notion that your credit rating shouldn't take a hit because you defaulted on the restructured home loan that you got when you defaulted on the *last* deal. Few people shed a tear for the borrowers who defaulted on jumbo ARM loans, but when a government does it we're all supposed to sit here and say ""that's ok. Take a mulligan""."
I'm not sure if there are nuances between countries and appreciate your question is specifically about the US, but in the UK, mobile phone contracts, including SIM only, as seen by the chat in this experion website chat shows that mobile contracts are included in credit ratings for 6 years.
You can sue them for damages. It would be hard to convince the court that the drop in the credit score was because of that loan, but not unthinkable. Especially if you sue through the small-claims court, where the burden of proof is slightly less formal, you have a chance to win and have them pay the difference in rates that it cost you.
Apart from the reasons currently given (which have to do with personal relations), wouldn't a good reason to take the loan from the bank be to build up a credit history and/or improve your credit score?
It won't hurt your credit rating. I wouldn't worry about it. The company can certainly pursue debt collections across borders but unless its a massive sum.. they will write it off. Now.. what the right thing to do is to take care of it... 1. for karma's sake and 2. so you don't make a bad name for foreigners.
Social Lending may help you qualify for a loan, but doesn't necessarily provide better rates. You have to shop around to get the best rates, this is a market as any other, so don't expect one place to be consistently below the market - either the market will move, or the place will move eventually, everyone wants to earn the most for the buck.
"I don't recommend balance transfers. Like many credit card things, they distract you with shiny (""0 percent interest!"") and ream you on a 'balance transfer fee'.  If you have a decent credit score and working relationship, talk to banks about opening what's called a 'signature loan,' and use that to shift the debt to a lower rate. A local credit union advertises rates 'as low as' 9.75 percent. Which is itself a shiny that you may not qualify for.  The really low loans rates you see are secured loans; if you don't pay, they can take the collateral."
They do get people's credit scores, report nonpayment on people's credit reports, and even send people to collections. Seems like borrowers have a reason to pay the bill. In 2008 I think this was a difference compared to the other peer lending sites, but I don't know if that's still true. Anyway, for what it's worth the site seemed to work fine and ""as advertised"" for me. I probably will not invest more money there for a couple reasons: However as best I could tell from my experiment, it is a perfectly reasonable place to put a portion of your portfolio you might otherwise invest in something like high-yield bonds or some other sub-investment-grade fixed income. Update: here's a useful NY Times article: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/05/your-money/05money.html"
Generally if there are enough details, they would match this up with your loan account and pass appropriate credit. The worst that can happen is;   In either case, watch your Loan account statement and it should show you the credit. If this does not then ask the company and they should be able to trace it and rectify. Under no scenario you would lose money.
I wouldn't advocate it, but one reason to pay a lower interest rate is if you have $990 on a $1000 limit credit card with 6% interest and $5000 on a $15k limit card at 10% interest. Having $500 to pay in a month and putting it on the lower interest would free up a greater percentage of credit on that card and could potentially help your credit rating I believe. I think having $1000 on 10 different credit cards w/ $15k limit reflects better than $10k on one $15k card, regardless of interest rates. Personally I think that's dumb b/c having the extra credit available is an opportunity to get into trouble a lot easier.
"I had about $16k in student loans. I defaulted on the loans, and they got > passed to a collection type agency (OSCEOLA). These guys are as legitimate as a collection agency can be. One thing that I feel is very sketchy is when they were verifying my identity they said ""Does your Social Security Number end in ####. Is your Birthday Month/Day/Year."" That is not sketchy. It would be sketchy for a caller to ask you to give that information; that's a common scheme for identity theft. OSCEOLA are following the rules on this one. My mom suggested I should consider applying for bankruptcy Won't help. Student loans can't be discharged in bankruptcy. You have the bankruptcy ""reform"" act passed during the Bush 43 regime for that. The loan itself is from school. What school? Contact them and ask for help. They may have washed their hands of your case when they turned over your file to OSCEOLA. Then again, they may not. It's worth finding out. Also, name and shame the school. Future applicants should be warned that they will do this. What can I do to aid in my negotiations with this company? Don't negotiate on the phone. You've discovered that they won't honor such negotiations. Ask for written communications sent by postal mail. Keep copies of everything, including both sides of the canceled checks you use to make payments (during the six months and in the future). Keep making the payments you agreed to in the conversation six months ago. Do not, EVER, ignore a letter from them. Do not, EVER, skip going to court if they send you a summons to appear. They count on people doing this. They can get a default judgement if you don't show up. Then you're well and truly screwed. What do you want? You want the $4K fee removed. If you want something else, figure out what it is. Here's what to do: Write them a polite letter explaining what you said here.
If I use my credit card on my ITIN and behave like a good guy (paying   everything on time), will it create history for my SSN next year or   will I have to start from scratch? Yes, you'll keep your history, it will be reported on your SSN when you update your creditors with it. I have an option of using a secured card v/s an unsecured one. Which   one is better from the view of my credit history? The one which you don't have to pay for. Consider the value of money you're using for the secured card, and all the fees and interest you expect to pay. Unless you're planning on a mortgage in the next couple of years, there's no rush with the credit. It is definitely not worth paying money for.
Well, it is a negative point of view, but nobody in the history of money has ever loaned money because they like you.  I suppose you could paint it as an honest point of view. All money lending is for profit.  If you have a high score, you are very likely to repay your loan because you are lower risk.  We always hear lower risk... but the risk is that they won't make money off of you. I think that just like we buy previously owned vehicles cars instead of used cars, and we banks call them service fees instead of junk fees, our credit score discusses our credit worthiness instead of profitability But none of that means you can't benefit from it.  It isn't a fear tactic, it is a way to judge each other.  You probably pay interest and fees to keep it high, but that is price of lending. I think the questioner has a negative view of credit (which I suppose is fine and is their right, I will defend their right to an opinion) but the way we do and judge credit is neither evil or benevolent. I could certainly agree that more transparency would be good, but only for honest folks.  If the credit bureaus made it public how they judged us, there would be a new industry for people who want to game the system. Update Since it always will cost to use credit, and using credit is the only way to prove your a low credit risk, it will therefore always cost money to raise your credit score. However the return on investment is exemplified in this question:  a person with no credit was able to get a loan, but at serious out of pocket cost.  Later, after establishing credit at a price of real money, he was able to secure a nearly identical loan for considerably less cost (in terms of interest paid) because he had proven himself worthy.  When I say proven, I mean paid interest. There is nothing wrong with questioning the system, change only occurs when people question the status quo.  And for sure our current system is not perfect, but like many employed systems while it is terrible but there is nothing better.
"Because the USA is the world's biggest economy - everybody in the world works with the USA (even if the american companies are not direct suppliers, they are surely somewhere in the supply chain). If USA credit rating is lower, that means american companies will find it harder to get loans to finance their business (i.e. the price of capital will be higher), and this will consequently lead to higher prices for partners of american companies, etc. This will certainly lead to slowdown of global economy. Plus, the lower credit rating also means that the USA govt. is less likely to pay off the debts (Chinese already stated they will diversify their bonds portfolio -i.e. they will start selling out american govt. bonds). This will lead to cuts in public sector in USA, less spending by the consumers, also probably less import from abroad and less travel which will affect - you get it - the ""RoW"". It's not by chance we have a saying in Europe, when USA sneezes, the rest of the world catches a flu!"
Cosigning a loan for someone else will make net worth decrease, whether backed by security or not.
The answer is generally yes.  Depending on your circumstances and where you live, you may be able to   get help through a federal, state, or lender program that:
I generally agree with the other answers.  Regarding the bit about your loan from your parents... Your arrangement with your parents is certainly material to you getting another  loan.  The mortgage application will probably require you to disclose all outstanding debt.  Obviously, if you choose to omit it and your parents don't tell, it probably won't come up.  But that would be unethical (definitely) and illegal (probably).   Whether this will interfere with you getting a loan is another question, but since it's your only debt it will probably be OK.
I am only familiar with American banks, but generally speaking, they will work with you if you can demonstrate that you have an adequate average income over a period of time. It is likely they will want a record of your income for at least the last 24 months (more would be better). The terms of the individual contracts (i.e. termination clauses, etc.) shouldn't be important as long as you have a demonstrated history of making a good income. I'd recommend finding a bank that performs manual underwriting, i.e. they actually have someone on staff that will look at your credit history, income, debt ratios, as opposed to them just generating an offer based on a computer model. Lending standards can vary quite a bit from bank to bank, and you have not listed your average annual income, so it is difficult to say whether they will offer you a mortgage, or for what amount, but you have a significant down payment. However, assuming that your numbers are good and that you can find someone intelligent to work with, it's unlikely that they will deny you simply because your income is uneven. Best of luck!
I haven't heard of these before!  (And I'm on the board of a Credit Union.) The 0.99% on loans is great.  It's especially great on a used car: the steep part of the depreciation curve was paid by the first owner. The network probably have a business relationship with the credit union.  Credit unions do indirect lending -- approval of loans that happens at the point of sale, which then the credit union gets as assets. Depending on the cost of that program, it probably won't hurt.  Your credit union wants to keep your business, because they know that you have a lot of options for where you bank and where you get loans.
In finance you are taught that debt financing is cheaper than equity financing.  Also to improve your credit rating, showing that you can carry debt responsibly and pay it off without a hitch sends dog whistle that the corporation is operating well.
No that will not count as a short sale although it may still affect your chances of getting a loan because some lenders wont want to see it on your credit if you are pursuing a new FHA loan. In the best case scenario you will need an explanation letter of why you did this. In the worst case scenario the lender will want you to wait to get financing.  Try and find a lender with NO FHA overages which means they don't put additional restrictions on giving you an FHA insured loan. That type of lender will be your best choice because they just follow FHA rules and don't add any additional requirements.
"The bottom line is that this just does not work, and as such you should not do it.  Here is a question that you really need to think about:  How will you handle non-payments?  How will you handle it when they talk about purchases they made or vacations they went on when they have been short for the last three months?  Yes, it will happen. The majority of people who engage in debt consolidation, which you are proposing, end up with the consolidated debt and more consumer debt.  One cannot borrow themselves out of debt.  Carrying credit card debt is a sign of poor money management and improper spending behavior.  That behavior will not change if you ""bail them out"" with the consolidation.  They need to find a way to work their way out of this situation by budgeting, living a more austere lifestyle, and earning more.   Encouraging them to do so will serve them far better then your generous attempts to reduce the pain of their own making. In the end it is always a parent's desire to help their children.  If you can afford to give, then it is well within your right to do so.  It is also within your right to qualify that giving with behavioral conditions.  However, if you cannot afford to give, it is best not to loan."
"My credit Union has a ""credit builder"" loan, they loan $1000 and put it in a savings account you cant withdraw from and take out automatic payments. That would be better, the whole point of credit is on time payments, but my lender told me the effects on credit would be minimum. Probably best for those with no credit history."
This is a good idea, but it will barely affect your credit score at all.  Credit cards, while a good tool to use for giving a minor boost to your credit score and for purchasing things while also building up rewards with those purchases, aren't very good for building credit.   This is because when banks calculate your credit report, they look at your long-term credit history, and weigh larger, longer-term debt much higher than short-term debt that you pay off right away.  While having your credit card is better than nothing, it's a relatively small drop in the pond when it comes to credit.   I would still recommend getting a credit card though - it will, if you haven't already started paying off a debt like a student or car loan, give you a credit identity and rewards depending on the credit card you choose.  But if you do, do not ever let yourself fall into delinquency.  Failing to pay off loans will damage your credit score.  So if you do plan to get a credit card, it is much better to do as you've said and pay it all off as soon as possible.   Edit:  In addition to the above, using a credit card has the added benefit of having greater security over Debit cards, and ensures that your own money won't be stolen (though you will still have to report a fraudulent charge).
"If your spouse wishes to buy a car and finance it with a car loan, they are free to do so. Once they have bought a car, they are free to let you use it. However, if you are the owner of the car, the loan is going to have to be in your name. Your spouse can't get a loan backed by an asset they don't own. They could get a personal loan and then give the money to you, but the interest rates would likely be rather high. Also, even if you aren't on any of the paperwork, you being married likely will affect the situation. It will depend on what state you're in. If you want to go that route, one of the best ways to find out is to simply have your spouse ask the people that would be providing the loan ""Can I finance this separate from my spouse, or will they be included in the credit evaluation?"""
You should also look outside the box. There are non profit credit relief organizations that will give you free credit counseling. Don't pay for it though. There are some organizations that are shady in offering counseling but they wreck your credit by asking you to stop making your payments. Some of the legitimate organizations out there have ties to credit unions and banks that can offer you some loans to consolidate your debt at rates lower than those you mentioned in your questions. You should probably also approach a credit union directly and discuss debt consolidation loan options. Even if you can only knock out the debts with the highest interest rate, that's a good first step.
The reason you would want to report to all three is because lenders don't usually query all three. Thus, it may be that your negative mark will be missed by a future lender because that lender didn't query the agency you chose to report to. Generally, it is cheaper to report to more agencies than to query more agencies, and since those reporting are also those querying, it is in their best interest to continue reporting to all agencies, and expecting others to do the same. Each agency calculates the score independently based on the information reported to that agency. Thus only reporting a negative item to Experian will mean that TransUnion and Equifax scores for the same person will be higher.
"Lots of loans that are shady to say the least are advertised currently on TV in the UK. I'm happily in a situation where I don't need a loan but might be asked to be a guarantor. If anyone asked me to be a guarantor for a loan, I'd either be capable and willing to loan that money to the person myself, or I wouldn't guarantee. I'd never, ever in a million years be a guarantor.  There is one company in particular offering loans ""the good old-fashioned way"" asking for 49.9% interest with a guarantor. That is an interest rate that can bankrupt the guarantor. If you take the loan with me as the guarantor, and you decide that you are not interested in paying back the loan, I'm stuck with this loan. So since the guarantor must trust you, if he or she is established in the UK, the best thing to do would be for them to take a loan from a bank (or any supermarket nowadays will give you a loan at a decent rate) in their own name, give the money to you, and hope that you pay back the money. I'm equally responsible for repayment whether I'm guarantor or whether the loan is in my name, so I'd get that loan at a decent rate from a reputable bank."
At least five of my co-workers are currently re-financing through Amerisave.  Four have had a wonderful experience.  The fifth has been dealing with a representative who constantly misunderstands him, asks for duplicate paperwork, and is in general fairly annoying to deal with.  He is willing to go through the hassle because he found the lowest rates through them.  All five co-workers recommend Amerisave despite this one co-worker's difficulties. Another person I know has refinanced through mortgagefool.com twice with good results. In general I think online lenders are like brick and mortar lenders in that some will be good, some will be not-so-good.
The buyer can get another cosigner or you can sell the car to pay off the loan. These are your only options if financing cannot be obtained independently.
When you need cash fast, Denton Auto title loans can help you with a bad credit car loan that puts money in your pocket within a short period of time. The company offers easy basic steps for car title loan approval.
"I really don't feel co-signing this loan is in the best interests of either of us.  Lets talk about the amount of money you need and perhaps I can assist you in another way. I would be honest and tell them it isn't a good deal for anybody, especially not me.  I would then offer an alternative ""loan"" of some amount of money to help them get financing on their own.  The key here is the ""loan"" I offer is really a gift and should it ever be returned I would be floored and overjoyed.  I wouldn't give more than I can afford to not have. Part of why I'd be honest to spread the good word about responsible money handling.  Co-signed loans (and many loans themselves) probably aren't good financial policy if not a life & death or emergency situation.  If they get mad at me it won't matter too much because they are family and that won't change."
This is fraud and could lead to jail time. The vast majority of people cannot obtain such loans without collateral and one would have to have a healthy income and good credit to obtain that kind of loan to purchase something secured by a valuable asset, such as a home. Has this been done before?  Yes, despite it being the US, you may find this article interesting.     Hopefully, you see how the intent of this hypothetical situation is stealing.
Also - the more credit facilities you have, the risikier you get. Say Company A lends you $8.000 for a down-payment - let's say you then go out and max out your other 100k facilities - you now have debt of 108k. What guarantee does the Company A have of repayment? Fewer credit facilities = better chance of getting a new loan.
Ok but if there's no money and nobody willing to lend, how are those payments made?   It's fine and dandy to have the theoretical obligation and willingness, but I'm wondering what happens when there's simply no more capability to borrow more.  Edit: Funny you say that, I'm moving in!