Question Of The Day: When Financing A Car, What Information Should Be Fair Game?

Steven Lang
by Steven Lang

Your personal information is valuable.

When I liquidated vehicles for Capital One, we typically examined over 14,000 variables before lending out our money to a customer.

Any customer. A credit card. An automobile. A commercial loan. It didn’t matter. We needed to get to know the economics of you first.

All of the low rates and big profits were dependent on buying your personal information, and then crafting decision models and metrics to determine your personal risk.

Our success in auto finance generated low rates for our customers and low delinquencies for our investors. But they both could have been far lower.

There is a line of demarcation between what is private, and what is public.

Your payment history? Public for the most part. There are those landlords, small money lenders and car lots that don’t report your credit history. But most utilities, credit cards, mortgage companies, and auto finance companies do so on a regular basis.

It’s a trade. You get money. They get the opportunity for a profit. Along with the right to buy and sell the resources needed to make sound future decisions.

Even the low tech version of a customer’s credit history work fairly well. Pay stubs, utility bills, bank statements, references, and recent housing information are typically used by car dealers to determine your eligibility.

So are criminal histories. In certain areas of this country you can type in a person’s name , state of residence, and the word “mugshot” or “arrested”. Or even access a state information database that records prison histories.

Lo and behold, you may see a familiar face staring right back at you.

All of these things are publicly available. But what about a few of the private things? Should they be fair game too?

If you were financing a car to a complete stranger, wouldn’t you want to know their recent accident history? Or the number of times over the last few years that their insurance was dropped due to non-payment of their premium?

I had three customers who wrecked their cars so far this year. Thankfully, they all kept paying on their full coverage insurance with a $500 deductible. That alone made a $13,000 difference to my bottom line.

A credit union that had the means to examine this behavior could make a lot of better decisions for their members.

A lot of insurance companies these days levy their premiums based, in part, on a customer’s age.

I am not convinced if that is always a fair way to measure risk.

That rare young adult who has managed to find a stable good paying job. Or that student who has earned a free ride to school and kept their GPA on the high end. I think they are far more responsible and creditworthy than that fifty year old who has consistently wrecked cars and dropped their insurance.

So where should that line be?

Should certain resources that are now publicly available become private?

Should other things that are only available upon a special request, become just as accessible as your credit report?

It’s a tough question. Ponder it.

Steven Lang
Steven Lang

More by Steven Lang

Comments
Join the conversation
6 of 44 comments
  • AJ AJ on Dec 07, 2012

    I'm all for tough lending standards. The harder the better. I use to work in the mortgage industry and I saw plenty of loans that were approved by Fannie Mae (not the mortgage company) to people that had no business owning a home. Fannie Mae gave us money to market to those people. Homeownership for everyone! One classic story is of a couple that got an low rate two-year ARM loan above the purchase price of the home. They took that extra money and paid off student loans. When when the low-rate went away, they stopped making payments for a year and then turned the house back over to the bank. They even went out and bought a new car when it was all done. (Oh, and then had to turn in the car due to not making payments.) I hope those days are long over...

    • See 3 previous
    • TW4 TW4 on Dec 08, 2012

      @corntrollio Bankers do not cause crises by lending too much money at interest rates that are too low. In fact, banks have always been loathed for the opposite. They refuse to lend to people in 'need' for big ticket items, and they charge exorbitant interest rates for the revolving capital they do issue. These lending policies have always aggravated other industries who want loose credit. This includes the Great Depression era, which is frequently attributed (by monetarists) to the inactivity of the Federal Reserve Bank during the 1929-1930 recession. The subprime loan crisis was caused by over-lending at below market rates. Obviously, this practice was influenced by government policy and government machines within the lending industry. I listed some of those policies and practices above. Politicians are now scrambling to maintain regulatory authority. They argue that CRA loans were not at a default risk; therefore, CRA/government is not to blame. Sorry, CRA doesn't operate in a vacuum. You either 'get it' or you're a servile sycophant who lets the government walk all over you, your family, and your fellow citizens. I don't particularly care whether the CRA continues or not, but I will not suffer fools who refuse to learn from the recent past. Those people will hasten the arrival of another credit failure, and another bout of rampant housing inflation that moves future generations of home buyers and the current lower-middle class farther away from home equity.

  • 22_RE_Speedwagon 22_RE_Speedwagon on Dec 07, 2012

    14,000 variables? How does that work?

  • 3-On-The-Tree Lou_BCone of many cars I sold when I got commissioned into the army. 1964 Dodge D100 with slant six and 3 on the tree, 1973 Plymouth Duster with slant six, 1974 dodge dart custom with a 318. 1990 Bronco 5.0 which was our snowboard rig for Wa state and Whistler/Blackcomb BC. Now :my trail rigs are a 1985 Toyota FJ60 Land cruiser and 86 Suzuki Samurai.
  • RHD They are going to crash and burn like Country Garden and Evergrande (the Chinese property behemoths) if they don't fix their problems post-haste.
  • Golden2husky The biggest hurdle for us would be the lack of a good charging network for road tripping as we are at the point in our lives that we will be traveling quite a bit. I'd rather pay more for longer range so the cheaper models would probably not make the cut. Improve the charging infrastructure and I'm certainly going to give one a try. This is more important that a lowish entry price IMHO.
  • Add Lightness I have nothing against paying more to get quality (think Toyota vs Chryco) but hate all the silly, non-mandated 'stuff' that automakers load onto cars based on what non-gearhead focus groups tell them they need to have in a car. I blame focus groups for automatic everything and double drivetrains (AWD) that really never gets used 98% of the time. The other 2% of the time, one goes looking for a place to need it to rationanalize the purchase.
  • Ger65691276 I would never buy an electric car never in my lifetime I will gas is my way of going electric is not green email
Next