FTC Seeks Comment on Proposed Rule Implementing Law Providing Free Credit Monitoring for Active Duty Military Consumers, Project No. R811007
Sir/maam, I have a few points. Some are more relevant to this specific issue that others, but there are a few key differences between military and consumers in the general public and they way we are treated by different entities affects how we interact with the others. I think you will see this issue from a few more angles. I was ordered to Little Rock AFB for my last duty assignment. The base was built in Jacksonville AR after WWII because the "farmers donated land and needed business" We have been used as pawn to turn the developers into millionaires since. That is another town. They did not building to keep the troops when the base had enough. The goal became keeping active duty for Impact Aid and rental income. Our neighborhood had commercial filth and squashed lots forced after the fact. We begged for our lives, but the dictators get make a profit. It is an ongoing scam that changed a few faces after I complained. None of this matters under tyranny. The amount of pay from benefits and how the troops are paid has an impact on credit. If they live on vs off base, the pay is significantly different and that skews any indicator that measures income vs debt. It can give the impression that a person that lives on base is more reliable than one who does not because the "rent"is deducted from pay. The other may have a significant difference in debt to income levels and have the same "income" A "filter" in the algorithm that give the score might provide a clearer picture of their debt and asset management skills. 2) I was a homeowner in the United Kingdom. England was the location of RAF Mildenhall and I bought a home when I was transferred there. People assume we do not invest in property and live on base. Credit is an issue that affects people moving to and from overseas locations. No one here wanted to deal with calling the Bank of Scotland for my mortgage history. Please some thought to international agreements with respect to personnel transfers too. I know it would be a paperwork nightmare if the ambassadors and commanders have to start dealing with credit history's, but perhaps there could be a file added to the personnel files with that countries equivalent. Moving back to the USA after numerous years leaves the troops without a credit rating or history.#3 Having to give out orders to businesses gives them our social security numbers and the base information might be sensitive for other reasons. A separate letter, or a version for use non-government users that gives a point of contact at the base could help protect them from being victims of identity scams. #4 Seamlessly closing the date gap when troops are overseas so that a file does not have a gap because of their service might be an option that helps too. If they go overseas, it is possible that they simply did not use US businesses.It is possible to be paid in US banks and transfer almost everything else to foreign currency accounts for bills. #5) Perhaps a base liason could access the database when people are assigned or transfer out. They have to check in and out at the finance and legal offices. If one had a computer interface, there would not be a burden on the public agency. #6) If the troops and retirees are negatively affected by corrupt rezoning by a State Representative, JP, Mayor, School Board members, and Senators, that data should be retained for Base Realignment and Closure discussion. Some of my friends and co-workers lost everything they invested in their homes when their bases closed. The next round should protect the communities that did not use us as pawns for profit.