Of course! but you might wanna make sure and wait for another member here to confirm my answer as I am not completely sure. Better yet, why don't you call the Discover Card guys because they can answer your Discover Card question better...

Just because Klesko can make up fake numbers doesn't mean that all numbers are fake. Just because Klesko's paintings suck doesnt mean that Von Gogh was a lousy painter, KWIM?.

We have all this talk in this board about how banks should underwrite loans better - the same is true for insurance companies. Credit is an additional datapoint in the decisioning process. If it helps is increasing accuracy I am all for it...

Except I can base my numbers off real numbers, like anyone else to draw almost any conclusion.

My point is simple...

Your credit history should be used in obtaining CREDIT.

Your employment history should be used in obtaining employment.

Your driving history should be used in obtaining insurance.

Each thing directly relates to another. One thing has nothing to do with another. Its that simple...

IF IT AIN'T FOR A NEW Discover card or LOAN...THEY HAVE NO BUSINESS PULLING HARD or SOFT.

(not saying anything about existing AR's for current credit card).

This post has been edited by GEORGE: 16 January 2010 - 10:39 PM..

Not in real world. This is why we need to have clean credit reports...

Or more regulation....

What if auto insurance companies start looking at health records to base their rates on? In fact many can argue that health records would actually be more related to auto insurance then credit. For example someone with epilepsy should technically have a much higher auto insurance rate then someone without because they are more likely to suffer an episode while driving.

You see it's a slippery slop. But since no companies can legally sell your medical records, there is no profit therefore no desire for such a thing.

I will stick with my simple point from above.

Your credit history should be used in obtaining CREDIT..

Your employment history should be used in obtaining EMPLOYMENT.

Your driving history should be used in obtaining INSURANCE...

THEY CAME UP WITH THE PULLING CREDIT REPORTS SCAM TO INCREASE PROFITS...NOT TO BENEFIT CUSTOMERS..

You DO NOT want more regulation. It's how/why insurance companies and employers started to depend on credit reports along with other type of reports! and more regulation will make it worse than it already is! It's just matter of time when they use anything for everything...

Lets be careful with the regulation subject. but my two cents no regulation creates what happened to the banks last year..

ONLY REGULATION I WANT IS CRA's CAN ONLY BE ACCESSED BY CREDIT PRODUCTS (as in Discover card or loans)..

Ahh, the old bogeyman, the slippery slope :-) I am sure you would have used the slipper slope argument when companies started using standardized third party credit reports to issue credit - how dare they use some statistical model to determine my creditworthiness? Informal fallacies like the slippery slope argument can be used to rebut anything under the sun.

Except that the real world is much more complicated than just that. When you buy a house they not only look at your credit history but also your employment history. When you apply for jobs in several types of industries they have legitimate reasons to check both your employment history and your credit history. Similarly since people with bad credit have more claims they get to pay more for insurance...

NOTHING ON MY CREDIT REPORT SHOWS HOW I DRIVE.

Or.

USE A CHECKING ACCOUNT.

Or.

USE A SAVINGS ACCOUNT.

Or.

USE OTHER VARIOUS PRODUCTS THAT "THINK" THEY CAN SEE HOW I WILL USE THEIR PRODUCT BY CHEKING A CREDIT REPORT.

(that is not a Discover card or loan).

This post has been edited by GEORGE: 17 January 2010 - 10:20 AM..

HOW DOES ONE EXPLAIN TO SOMEBODY WHO HAS BAD CREDIT (ZERO ACCIDENTS and CLAIMS) THAT THEY GET TO PAY $100's MORE THAN SOMEBODY THAT HAD 3 or 4 ACCIDENTS and CLAIMS JUST BECAUSE OF SOME RANDOM CREDIT REPORT SCORE.

This post has been edited by GEORGE: 17 January 2010 - 09:08 PM..

For anyone who has used Amica.

When I do a quote it says my payment is $141 a month for 10 months. Is that 10 payments for a full year coverage?..

I am not sure. I pay once a year. The reps are all really nice. Call and ask...

I changed to Geico about 6 months ago from Progressive. I'd been with Progressive for almost 10 years. I didn't realize how much they were overcharging me til I went to buy a new car. I was paying (with Discover card) almost $300/month for a 2000 4x4 truck and a 2000 4x4 Durango. Collision only on both. When I wanted to add full coverage for a 2007 Yukon, they wanted to up my bill to almost $500/month! I called Geico..and got BETTER coverage (high limit full coverage on both vehicles) including my new car for $109/month!!!.

I switched and have never looked back..

I have an old 2002 BK on my record....and still got good rates..

Don't even get me started on the whole credit-vs-insurance stuff. We've been down that argument so many times.... If someone is curious, use your search button. I think that argument has been debated at least a million times...

So I did Amica in my wifes name with me being the 2nd driver. It only asks for the primary drives SS number. When I did it with hers I got a quote of $124 a month compared to $141 as me being the primary.

I am still confused about their payment thing though. Says $124 in 10 payments. Does those 10 payments cover me for a full year?.

It also says this at the bottom.. Annual Premium: $1,246.64 so thats for a full 12 months right?..

Annual would be for a full 12 months. Is it possible that they are asking you for 2 months down payment and then 10 additional monthly payments?..

Okay I pulled my 5 year driving record and only showed two tickets, one in Oct 2005 and one in Feb 2006. I put that information in and Geico gave me a quote of $90 a month compared to $100 a month for Amica and compared to $131 a month for my current insurance place.

I talked to a Geico guy online and he told me that they pull credit for the online quote so if all my driving record stuff was correct then the quote would not change. I am assuming that once my record is clear in a year my rates will drop even more.

My current insurance is paid up until Feb 17th, then my next 6 month payment is due. If I signup for Geico do I need to call and cancel my current insurance and just not pay that bill and it will cancel on it own?..

I'd pay $120 more a year to be with amica. quality matters at some level...

I believe there is a different score for your car insurance not your regular credit score, but not all companys use this, but you will never get the actual quote until they pull the DMV report, which I was going to switch to them but they told me I had to agree to switching to them for them to pull my dmv, why would I agree to them if I don't know the actual price, does that seem right?..

I had Geico for over 10 years. They are cheap in price and cheap in service.

I was praying that I never had to count on them for anything major...

I don't know if this has been resolved yet, but I hope this helps.

I am a licensed insurance agent for CA, ID, WA, and OR..

In CA credit is not allowed to be a factor. For some reason, it is discriminatory to think that people who are financially irresponsible will be irresponsible while driving, just as it is discriminatory to think that young people will make worse decisions than older people, or where you keep the car will determine if it is more likely to be stolen/vandalized. Although all of these principals are actuarally sound, 'sticking it to the insurance companies' makes for a good platform to earn votes, even if it makes insurance more expensive for everyone else to subsidize the people who can't be accurately rated.

Credit can have a huge impact in some states. I'd reccomend checking with your state department of insurance to see if it is allowed, and they may even be able to tell you which insurance companies look at credit in your state. With Geico (Can't speak for other insurance companies), noone actually sees your credit score. The rating system will pull an 'insurance' credit score and determine what tier and company placement to put you in.

With the 5 year rating, the way it works is this:.

Nothing outside of 3 years is SURCHARGED but can still affect you.

If you have an accident outside 3 years but within 5, you will not get a 5 year good driver discount.

If you have tickets outside 3 but within 5, you will probably be put in a higher risk tier or company all together.

In case you don't know, most insurance companies have anywhere from 2 to 4 "Companies".

They will have a high risk, standard risk, and preferred company.

Within those companies, there will be what is called a tier.

For instance, say you have a ticket from 2 years ago, decent credit, and are 28 years old. You will get placed somewhere in the lower end of a standard risk group - Say... Indemnity, Tier 7 (scale from 1 to 20, 1 being highest rate, 20 being lowest).

Say you had the same stats but really bad credit, you may end up with Indemnity Tier 1.

While this sucks, the amount of time you spend with the company in good standing (good pay history = good credit), you will move up in tiers until you will be placed in the preferred company.

You mentioned you added those 3 tickets later in the quote and it raised it. While they are not technically 'charging' you for it, you are placed in a more risky tier than someone who has never had a ticket. Make sense?.

If you decline to allow credit to be run, you will usually automatically be placed in the tier with the worst rating for failing to disclose underwriting information, so it doesn't hurt to just provide the info.

You obviously don't live in CA because those tickets wouldn't have affected you..

This post has been edited by TBIAgent69: 27 January 2010 - 04:37 PM..