The law[1] specifically excludes " A consumer reporting agency to the extent that it is covered by the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. Sec. 1681 et seq.)."
Blacking out credit history would obliterate lending, which would in turn collapse asset prices and lead to a complete restructuring of entire industries and society itself. If that were on the table, you would’ve heard.
This is primarily about the companies that buy your phone number from your gym membership or supermarket loyalty card and sell it to telemarketers. They won’t be missed.
Yes, and it only tracks defaults; and you're notified 30 days before being added to the file. And you are removed from the file as soon as you repaid what you owed.
I don't think society would need to be restructured.
Many countries do fine without private third party entities managing people's credit history and score. Instead, you have to provide data on your credit worthiness each time you request credit from a particular bank. Such as bills, income proof, assets etc.
In which countries can you default on a loan and then go get another one like it never happened? Sure it might be the state hosting the mechanism instead of a private company, but that mechanism is pretty important.
Yeah, if you default on it and there's a court decision etc. then it gets recorded in a government system and you are on a blacklist.
It's quite different and a lot less fine-grained than feeding all your credit-related and non-credit-related history into some ML model to estimate your credit worthiness.
It is. But as a credit bureau, Equifax was already subject to some data protection regulations from the federal government - that's a large part of why they could even get in trouble in the first place. Due to details of constitutional structure in the US, California's general data protection law can't legally be applied to companies that are already subject to a federal data protection law.
[1] http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?...