Mortgage Application Consent: Fill & Download for Free

There is no way the employee could fill out an application for you without your consent. We “sell” credit cards for the store where I work. You, the customer, have to provide legal I D, and a social security number.So, you are not going to get any compensation from Costco for a thing that could not have happened without your consent and you providing information.

Lenders should be trying to confirm that yo have the income and assets to support your mortgage and that the property is adequate.They are required to ask all the questions on the mortgage application including age, marital status and sex; as well as gather (if you consent) information about race and originThey may not ask about your future plans = are you planning to have children. They may not make value judgements: what kind of mother are you …

They spam them. If the question is about sourcing, anyone ever posted resume on Dice, Monster, or LinkedIn, had his/her contact information crawled, indexed and sold to salesmen of all kinds (not just recruiters) as a lead. If you ever emailed your resume to a recruiter, it could have ended up being sold as a lead somewhere else. Who knows. Even if you put “software engineer” on a credit e.g. mortgage application, it may become a lead. Read the fineprint.If someone never advertised his/her professional qualification online or got a job through recruiters, they will never find him/her. And they don’t care. There are plenty of existing leads (even from 20 years ago) to mindlessly fulfill spamming quotas. Recruiters are in the spam business, not the “finding the best man for the job” one.Spam is just that: spam. Not only unsolicited - unwanted. For one simple reason. The recruiter has to offer something better to approach even an employee who hates his/her job. Not sure how it is outside IT. Probably as bad. “Accounts Receivable” kind of jobs haven’t been very dynamic salary-wise lately.No one I know has ever been offered anything, but a lateral move by recruiters. At best. The middle class salaries haven’t been “stagnating”. They’ve been steadily shrinking thanks to “outsourcing”. Especially in IT. So your next job is always going to pay less.How people change jobs (and make recruiters money) in this economy? By being “persuaded” via cyclical layoffs (and more outsourcing). Theoretically a recession-hired expert “found unbelievably cheap” can linger at his/her job longer than six months (after the recession ends) - to be offered a $2K raise by a recruiter. Anyone smart enough to be an expert in his/her field is also likely to be ambitious - to wait that long.Hiring managers don’t bother cold calling/emailing. They know they can’t win. It is the “hiring science“ magic and BS salesman “success stories” of reaching out through imaginary proprietary databases, that lead hiring managers into belief someone else can trick a future employee into a money losing decision, saving them the indignity of a used car dealership style salary negotiation.There are no underpaid diamonds in the rough waiting to be discovered and offered $2K more. Anyone capable has made or is actively making efforts to find a better job. And keeps his/her technical skills sharp - another thing to consider wooing cubicle dwellers, who traded off compensation for “job stability”.If I posted my resume on Dice or made myself “available” on LinkedIn, I explicitly consent to recruiters’ BS, which will result in a some shitty job in a month, while I continue explicitly being “available” for another six months, until I finally get a job with the same salary I had before being laid off. Or slightly shorter commute. Or a better coffee machine in the kitchen. Or a cuter receptionist smiling at me when I enter the building. Whatever I can find to cope with the unsatisfying lateral move or pay cut.If I didn’t announce my availability, it means I truly have no time for intelligence-insulting sales tricks to make me change my job for a worse one.Note, two recruiters are making money on me during those six months. Do they care about the two employers, let alone the happiness of the “merchandise”? Rhetorical question. I’d say, if someone really wants to pose as a badass “poacher”, he/she should target newly hired candidates, as they are likely to be at their less than perfect “first stage” job, one needs to secure immediately upon being laid off, before proceeding to look for a decent long-term employer. Considering the real recruiters’ loyalty - to employers, they’d never do that, seeing even the worst “first stage” employer as a potential client. In fact bad employers rely on recruiters the most. And for recruiters, high turnover means more business.