Serasa: Barbosa deserves more credit. FHC, only R$ 778
Amid the controversy surrounding the agreement with the TSE (Superior Electoral Court), a list is released that the company provides to its clients regarding citizens' ability to pay. The Supreme Court president is recommended a limit of R$ 25,9; Lula would be entitled to R$ 10,8. Meanwhile, Serasa (a Brazilian credit bureau) indicates that FHC's (Fernando Henrique Cardoso's) name was even consulted for a purchase at Tiffany & Co. jewelry store.
247 – Following the controversy surrounding the agreement between the TSE (Superior Electoral Court) and Serasa (a Brazilian credit bureau) regarding the sharing of voter data, a list of payment capacity containing information from public officials has been made public. Read the full story. Monica Bergamo, from Folha:
RANKING
Another embarrassing situation for Serasa, which last week saw its agreement with the TSE (Superior Electoral Court) annulled, an agreement that would have given it access to information on millions of voters: the publication, by the website Consultor Jurídico, of data that the company discloses to its clients about the payment capacity of citizens such as Dilma Rousseff, Joaquim Barbosa, Fernando Henrique Cardoso, Eike Batista and Tiririca.
RANKING 2
Serasa suggests to its clients a credit limit of only R$ 2,1 for Dilma. For the president of the Senate, Renan Calheiros, a limit of R$ 12,7 is recommended. Joaquim Barbosa, president of the STF (Supreme Federal Court), is the authority who deserves the most credit: R$ 25,9.
RANKING 3
According to the Serasa table published on the website, Lula deserves a credit limit of R$ 10,8. Fernando Henrique Cardoso, on the other hand, deserves only R$ 778. Serasa, also according to Consultor Jurídico, indicates that FHC went to Tiffany & Co. to make purchases: his name was consulted by the jewelry store on June 5th.
FOR A FEW
Serasa states that the data "is intended exclusively to support its clients in making credit and business decisions." Access to and publication of the information, "as occurred in this case, violates the principle of the intended use of information, distorts the purpose of the services provided by the company, and subjects offenders to applicable sanctions."