|
Wednesday, July 21, 2004
By Ted Roelofs
The Grand Rapids Press
Grand Rapids resident Crystal Taylor says it's tough enough trying
to pull herself out of poverty.
Taylor, 23, owes $1,400 on a phone bill that has been hanging over
her head for years. But when you add the fact that insurance companies
can use her credit rating to raise her rates, Taylor figures enough
is enough.
"That's isn't fair," Taylor said. "You got other
bills you're paying, and that makes it harder."
A state hearing today was to air public reaction to a proposal
by Gov. Jennifer Granholm to ban credit scoring in setting automobile
insurance rates.
Insurance companies call the system a fair way to set rates, warning
that consumers with good credit ratings will see rate hikes if the
practice is banned.
Backers of the ban say it will benefit most insurance customers
by forcing insurers to roll back rates as much as 45 percent.
Julie MacDougall, a credit counselor with Greenpath Debt Solutions
in Grand Rapids, sees clients with all sorts of credit problems.
But when you add higher insurance rates to unpaid bills and credit
card debt, MacDougall said, that makes it tougher for many to dig
out of debt.
"It does seem like it hits you when you're already down,"
MacDougall said. "This just makes it worse."
MacDougall said she dealt with a couple clients in the past two
weeks with unusually high automobile insurance rates.
"They said they were told by their insurance company that
it was because of their credit score," MacDougall said.
"It does seem like you are going after folks who are already
struggling."
Linda Watters, head of the state Office of Financial Services,
contends the measure would require insurance companies to lower
their base rates by 10 percent to 45 percent.
But she acknowledged under questioning in June by Republican members
of the Senate Banking and Financial Institutions Committee that
those with good credit scores could end up paying more.
"Rates will go up, and we don't want to be blamed for it when
it happens," said Dyck VanKoevering, general counsel for the
Insurance Institute of Michigan.
"We think people with good credit backgrounds ... should be
rewarded."
According to VanKoevering, customers with good credit scores could
expect rate hikes up to 20 percent or more if the credit scoring
ban takes effect.
VanKoevering accused Granholm of "confusing people" by
promising rate reductions of 10 percent to 45 percent.
He also denied the contention that credit scoring unfairly discriminates
against low-income consumers.
"Insurance scores do not take into account income or race
or national origin," he said.
Grand Rapids insurance agent Renee Zylstra believes the credit
score system has its flaws, especially since different companies
use different systems in determining a credit score.
"There are a lot of things that are wrong with it," she
said.
But Zylstra predicted lots of unhappy customers -- those who get
discounts because of good credit scores -- if that system is rescinded.
"They are going to be back screaming at us," she said.
In the June hearing, Democrats argued that poor people wind up
subsidizing customers with better credit.
Watters maintains that credit scoring is unreliable and unfair.
Among her criticisms:
Credit scores often are based on incomplete or incorrect information.
Credit scoring penalizes consumers who are victims of economic
or medical catastrophes.
Those who use no credit or little credit can be penalized with
a bad score.
State Sen. Gerald VanWoerkom, R-Norton Shores, a member of the
banking committee, said he is concerned that government may be meddling
where it doesn't belong.
"I tend to think when the government sticks their nose into
it we often set up an unnatural situation in the marketplace,"
VanWoerkom said.
VanWoerkom said he still was "trying to get a handle on whose
rates are going to go down and whose rates are going to go up."
The ban on credit scoring would take effect in January unless the
House and Senate reject it.
Mortgage
Rates News, Mortgage News, Financial News
|