By: Kristan Frend I recently gave a presentation on small business fraud at the annual National Association of Credit Managers (NACM) Credit Congress.  Following the session, several B2B credit professionals shared recent fraud issues   The attendees confirmed what we’ve been hearing from our customers: fraudsters are shifting from consumer to business/commercial fraud and they’re stepping up their game. One of the schemes mentioned by an attendee included fraudsters obtaining parcel provider’s tracking numbers to reroute shipments meant for their B2B customer.  The perpetrator calls the business’s call center, impersonates the legitimate business customer to place an order, obtains the tracking number, and then calls back with the tracking number to request that the shipment be rerouted. Often the new shipping location is a residential address where an individual has been recruited for a work-at-home employment opportunity.   The individual is instructed to sign for deliveries and then reship merchandise to a freight company within the country or directly to destinations outside the United States.  The fraud is uncovered once the legitimate B2B customer receives an invoice for goods which they never ordered or received. I encourage you to take a look at your business’s policies and procedures on handling change of address shipment  requests.  What tools do you employ to verify the individual making the request? Are you verifying who the new address belongs to?  You may also want to ask your parcel provider about account setting options available for when your employees submit reroute requests.  While a shipping reroute request isn’t always indicative of fraud, I recommend you assess your fraud risk and consider whether your fraud-related business processes need refining. Keep an eye out here for postings on these topics: known fraud, bust out fraud, and how best to minimize fraud loss.        

By: Staci Baker As more people have become underwater on their mortgage, the decision to stay or not stay in their home has evolved to consider a number of influences that impact consumer credit decisions.  Research is revealing that much of an individual’s decision to meet his credit obligations is based on his trust in the economy, moral obligation, and his attitude about delinquency and the effect it will have on his credit score. Recent findings suggest that moral obligation keeps the majority of homeowners from walking away from their homes.  According to the 2009 Fannie Mae National Housing Survey (i) – “Nearly nine in ten Americans (88%), including seven in ten who are delinquent on their own mortgages, do not believe it is acceptable for people to stop making payments on an underwater mortgage, while 8% believe it is acceptable.”  It appears that there is a sense of owning up to one’s responsibilities; having signed a contract and the presumed stigma of walking away from that obligation. Maintaining strong creditworthiness by continuing to make payments on an underwater mortgage is motivation to sustain mortgage payments.  “Approximately 74% of homeowners believe it is very important to maintain good credit and this can be a factor in encouraging them not to walk away (ii).”  Once a homeowner defaults on their mortgage, their credit score can drop 150 to 250 points (iii), and the cost of credit in the future becomes much higher via increased interest rates once credit scores trend down. Although consumers expect to keep investing in the housing market (70% said buying a home continues to be one of the safest investments available (iv)) they will surely continue optimizing decisions that consider both the moral and credit implications of their decisions. i     December, 2009, Fannie Mae National Housing Survey ii  4/30/10, Financial Trust Index at 23% While Strategic Defaults Continue to Rise, The Chicago Booth/Kellogg School Financial Trust Index iii  http://www.creditcards.com/credit-card-news/mortgage-default-credit-scores-1270.php iv  December, 2009, Fannie Mae National Housing Survey    

By: Kari Michel The Federal Reserve’s decision to permit card issuers to use income estimation models to meet the Accountability, Responsibility, and Disclosure (CARD) Act requirements to assess a borrower’s ability to repay a loan makes good sense. But are income estimation models useful for anything other than supporting compliance with this new regulation? Yes; in fact these types of models offer many advantages and uses for the financial industry. They provide a range of benefits including better fraud mitigation, stronger risk management, and responsible provision of credit. Using income estimation models to understand your customers’ complete financial picture is valuable in all phases of the customer lifecycle, including: • Loan Origination – use as a best practice for determining income capacity • Prospecting – target customers within a specific income range • Acquisitions – set line assignments for approved customers • Account Management – assess repayment ability before approving line increases • Collections – optimize valuation and recovery efforts One of the key benefits of income estimation models is they validate consumer income in real time and can be easily integrated into current processes to reduce expensive manual verification procedures and increase your ROI. But not all scoring models are created equal. When considering an income estimation model, it’s important to consider the source of the income data upon which the model was developed. The best models rely on verified income data and cover all income sources, including wages, rent, alimony, and Social Security. To lean more about how income estimation models can help with risk management strategies, please join the following webinar: Ability to pay:  Going beyond the Credit CARD on June 8, 2010. http://www.bulldogsolutions.net/ExperianConsumerInfo/EXC1001/frmRegistration.aspx?bdls=24143