So my moms experian is at a 783, and her transunion is at a 825 (got these scores from here), and the files are identical with experian having 4 more inq than transunion. I find it hard to believe that 4 inq can cause such a huge dip.
she only has one derogatory marker, that is on both tu and ex, a 30-day late on her kohls account.
heres where it gets weird, it looks like the 30-day late is having no affect on TU but is affecting EX, on CCT (creditchecktotal) it looks like this for a 3B pull:
any idea why it would have such a big affect still and only on ex?
edit: looks like it hasn't updated on experian since 2010? but its reporting every month?
@Anonymous wrote:
@willwar14 wrote:
@Anonymous wrote:The difference is because the 30 day late is gone from TU.
Nope the 30-day late is still on TU.
pulled a fresh copy of her TU report this morning, and its still there.
It may still be there, but it is not reported in the info you posted. That's why it reads "time since negative: never".
Time since last negative is a 3rd party presentation bit I think... there's no mention of that in a TU report dated 3-9 in my case, only statements as to derogatory and date.
It's possible there's something strange going on like your now you see it now you don't tax lien that plagued your TU account for a while... as the score should be the score from the bureau, not calculated on CCT's side.
That said, 40 points is certainly feasible for a difference in the bureaus even if the design goals were less than that for identical reports. Course my FICO 9's are so absurdly out of whack that it's just downright strange... like Equifax/FICO went wrong somewhere on that algorithm or glitch worthy, or it might be down to just inquiry distribution as there's really nothing else different (and that's a 75 point differential, albeit with one very recent inquiry on EX). In the OP's scenario little things make outsized impacts: every little blemish that the pretty people on TV have is magnified in 1080p and higher, kinda analogous here heh.
