I've been researching and while everyone seems to recommend a freeze, an alert seems better in many regards.
Following are my comparisons of security:
Freeze cons relative to alert:
*Does not protect against opening accounts with creditors who already have accessed credit in past
*Costs money and time with 3-8 companies depending on how specific you want to get (bypassed if you even miss 1 company)
*Grossly inconvenient whenever you want to access credit (costs money and time)
Fraud Alert pros:
*Free set up in minutes with one company and comprehensive alert established
*Requires 2 step verification to open credit regardless of whether established creditor or new creditor (always alerts and confirms)
*Doesn't derail any credit opening
Cons:
*Re-establish every 90 days
So fraud alert + monitor all accounts and credit to be thorough seems more effective than a freeze for maintaining account integrity.
Why Fraud Alert is Better than a Freeze
-
- Posts: 722
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 10:06 pm
-
- Posts: 5406
- Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 3:28 am
- Location: Wettest corner of Orygun
Re: Why Fraud Alert is Better than a Freeze
There's also an extended Fraud Alert that's good for 7 years if you're willing to do the paperwork.
-
- Posts: 988
- Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 12:49 pm
Re: Why Fraud Alert is Better than a Freeze
I thought fraud alerts, when made to one of big 3, only went to the other big 3. They go to the smaller ones also? Source?