How is it reasonable? Anyone checking your credit score already knows that you're applying for new credit, because you're applying for new credit with them.

Dinging your score over that only punishes you for soliciting credit offers from multiple lenders at once so you can choose the best terms. Which ought to be an antitrust violation.

It's a defense against the double spend problem. It minimizes potential timing issues that could allow someone to simultaneously taking out multiple credit lines without the ability to properly evaluate the risk.

But it isn't, because the reduction in credit score from the query doesn't necessarily prohibit two simultaneous loans, it just makes the terms worse (and so makes default more likely).

And there are obviously better ways to prevent "double spend," like reporting the new loan being granted, which actually should reduce the credit score due to the new debt. It's not as if we can't make computers capable of updating this information in real time.

The interesting thing I've noticed is that opening a new credit account often doesn't actually get that information on your credit report. It sometimes only shows up after you've made the first payment (either loan or credit card). I wonder if that's why the system dings you for too many hard credit inquiries. I agree with you that there's no reason why this couldn't be fixed, though.

Or rather it discourages people from attempting to apply at multiple places to get the best offer..

Typical rate shopping is not discouraged: https://www.experian.com/blogs/ask-experian/do-multiple-loan...

That's usually not the case, though. I was just looking around at Chase's credit report tracking thing, and they have this to say on credit inquiries:

> The VantageScore credit score model takes rate shopping, e.g., for a mortgage or car loan, into consideration. All inquiries for mortgages, auto loans and major credit cards that appear in your credit file within a 14-day window are interpreted as a single inquiry.

I believe that's the case for the FICO score algorithm as well. I think a 14-day window is probably too short, but it likely does cover most situations.

But if you're applying for, and repeatedly being rejected for, extension of credit by third parties that is absolutely something a pre-existing lender would reasonably consider when thinking about risk.

You have to understand that there is a no "credit denied" feedback into the credit rating system. The standard pattern for an approved credit application is a hard-pull followed by the opening of a new tradeline, both of which affect your score. If you're applying for credit, but not being approved, then that just shows up as a hard-pull with no new line.

The FICO score is also set up specifically to ignore additional hard-pulls for the same type of credit within a bounded period; so if you go shopping for a mortgage (or an auto loan, or a student loan), then multiple queries within a 30 day period are coalesced, and only count once from a scoring perspective.

I dont think its unreasonable for one’s credit score to get dinged if half a dozen lenders check their score - that means the consumer went through the initial stages of trying to get multiple loans.

But more importantly the ding is maybe 10 points which is pretty much irrelevant to the “buckets” that define credit worthiness (>800, 700-800, etc).

Plus individual lenders can look at the report themselves and make their own determination.