Prevent Customer Harm
Credit Bureau Reporting: Preventing Customer Harm Through Full-Population Testing
Full-population testing is the responsible thing to do.
Does sample-based manual compliance testing ensure a fair and equitable experience for ALL customers?
No. Sample-based testing leaves room for unknowns that can significantly impact customers. It’s also impossible to know how many customers may be impacted with a sample-based approach.
What if you could prevent inaccurate reporting?
To find out download our case study…
Download Our Case Study to Learn More
VALIDATOR tests over 99% more loans in less than 1% of the time.
Do in 20 minutes what it would take one year and 500 people to complete.
CASE STUDY
Scenario 1
- Bank merger, banks on different instances of MSP
- Same full population test applied to data from both portfolios and MSP instances
- Tested for borrower protection during forbearance period and up to 6 months after, if
actively seeking assistance
Outcome
- Testing identified business process and data differences between the two portfolios for a specific group of customers in forbearance
- Conversion without this insight could have negatively impacted one group of customers, requiring post conversion manual cleanup
Scenario 2
- Large consumer loan sub – servicer tested compliance to required response times for qualified requests
- Requirements vary across states
Outcome
- Testing identified compliance issues
- Business processes not designed to capture the data required to demonstrate compliance
- Processes and training did not consider state specific differences in timing and conditions
- Identified non–compliance trends across certain types of requests, e.g., email vs. letters
