Timeline for Credit scores & defamation
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 23, 2023 at 7:47 | comment | added | User65535 | "If a statement is true, it cannot be defamatory" that is not strictly true I do not see this as a major issue in this answer, but you may want to consider qualifying this statement. The current X/Media matters lawsuit means this is currently relevant. | |
| Nov 22, 2023 at 20:03 | comment | added | ohwilleke | @Patrick87 "And it might not even be intentional." In most cases, under U.S. law, defamation must be intentional, or at least reckless. Arguably, an intent requirement is implied in law by the First Amendment. | |
| Nov 22, 2023 at 20:01 | comment | added | ohwilleke | @Patrick87 "I thought defendants in defamation suits typically had to prove their claims true" not necessarily. Sometimes truth is an affirmative defense, but often falsity is part of the prima facie case. | |
| Jul 21, 2016 at 18:37 | comment | added | Patrick87 | @phoog And it might not even be intentional. The FICO algorithm could have a very rare bug, or the computer that ran the algorithm could have had a bad CPU, or... or maybe you're on somebody's "enemies" list. Really there are a lot of ways for the score to incorrectly penalize you. | |
| Jul 21, 2016 at 18:19 | comment | added | phoog | @Dawn I suppose not. After looking into it a bit, I have found that the FICO score is in fact calculated according to an algorithm devised by Fair Isaac Corporation. So certainly if they call it a FICO score, they would have to use the FICO algorithm. The Wikipedia article at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_score_in_the_United_States seems to give a good overview of the situation. Every indication I could find online, though, is that inaccurate credit scores result from inaccurate information, not from a prejudicial application of the scoring formula (as postulated in this question). | |
| Jul 21, 2016 at 18:15 | comment | added | user3851 | @Patrick87 there are several defenses to defamation. Truth is one. Opinion is another common one. There are others. | |
| Jul 21, 2016 at 17:52 | comment | added | user3851 | I don't think credit agencies guarantee to their customers that they use any particular method of producing the scores. | |
| Jul 21, 2016 at 17:50 | comment | added | Patrick87 | @phoog Thanks! One final clarification - I thought defendants in defamation suits typically had to prove their claims true (affirmative defense, like self defense). Would they not be required to prove that number is the result of their algorithm? That would suggest they'd have to turn it over if they argued that, no? Also - sometimes algorithms have bugs. | |
| Jul 21, 2016 at 17:47 | vote | accept | Patrick87 | ||
| Jul 21, 2016 at 17:31 | comment | added | phoog | @Patrick87 I have edited the answer to add some more thoughts in response to your comment about unfair treatment on the part of the credit bureau. | |
| Jul 21, 2016 at 17:31 | history | edited | phoog | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1505 characters in body
|
| Jul 21, 2016 at 17:03 | comment | added | Patrick87 | @Dawn It sounds like the consensus here is that the score would be protected opinion. I am still not so sure. Milkovich v Lorain Journal Co seems to say that opinions which imply defamatory facts are not protected opinions. If you have a score the CRB considers "poor" or worse, I think a reasonable person might infer that this is because of poor or insufficient credit history. Otherwise, people must believe the score isn't derived from the information in the report, which - if claimed - might result in less use of their scoring systems. | |
| Jul 21, 2016 at 15:05 | comment | added | user3851 | It is opinion because how can you prove it wrong. If I heard that my score is 598, how could I prove that wrong? What is my objectively correct score? You are correct that saying "in my opinion" doesn't necessarily make something an opinion for defamation analysis. Whether or not you pay your bills is a question of fact. The degree to which you are likely or not to pay future bills is a matter of opinion. | |
| Jul 21, 2016 at 14:56 | comment | added | Patrick87 | @Dawn Can you elaborate on why the score would constitute an opinion? Whether or not you pay your loans and bills seems to be a question of fact, not opinion. I mean, saying "X spits in the food he serves at his restaurant" is defamation or not regardless of whether I say "in my opinion" first, right? | |
| Jul 21, 2016 at 14:50 | comment | added | Patrick87 | Can you add some explanation of how giving someone a credit score lower than what his credit history merits is different from simply lying about that person's credit history? When I say "merits" I mean a score that would result in treatment by lenders that is significantly more consistent with what people with similar histories typically get. | |
| Jul 21, 2016 at 14:48 | comment | added | user3851 | And, the score is their opinion of your credit. It is not a statement sufficiently factual such that it could be be proven as false. | |
| Jul 21, 2016 at 14:04 | history | answered | phoog | CC BY-SA 3.0 |