Reply
Member
Restore2011
Posts: 15
Registered: ‎01-03-2011
0

Credit Discrepancies

Hi All,

 

As my info over <-----there states I'm a newbie. Please bear with me.

 

I pulled my scores from myFico today, and I'm really glad I did. I've learned quite a bit in the short time (read: all of one day) I've been reading and posting.

 

Anyway, back to my scores. They're in my siggy, but right now I'm at 629 with TU and 667 with EQ. 

 

A 38 point difference? For real? UGGGGH!

 

So I comb through the reports page by page to see what's different. On page 2 of the report they both have the following:

 

1. "You have a public record and a serious delinquency on your credit report."  Yep, sure do. BK filed 4/09, discharged 7/09, lates before then because I became quite silly with my credit. I own that.

 

2. "You have multiple accounts showing missed payments or derogatory descriptions." Yeeeeep. See above. 

 

Here's where they differ:

 

#3 (TU) "You have a recent public record on your credit report." I mean....didn't I kinda already get dinged for that? BK discharged 18 months ago, though the little box under this area says "1 year 9 months ago.

 

#3 (EQ) says "You've made heavy use of your revolving credit." I have one credit card post-bk; $700 limit; zero balance as of last week, both bureaus show it at $256, which was the balance I paid off. TU has this as their #4. 

 

It gets tricky, too, on length of my credit history. EQ dings me for it being too short (I'm at 16 years 4 months) and TU gives me points for having an "established credit history."

 

Heeeeeelp! 

 

Why is this so?

 

Will the difference between $0 balance and $256 balance on a $700 limit really affect my score that much (when I used the score simulator it didn't seem like it)?

 

Is there one score that lenders look at more than others (want to get approved for a FHA loan this summer)?

 

Thanks for any tips! :smileyhappy:

 

*******
Ch. 7 BK discharged 7/09
myFICO pull 1/11
TU: 629 EQ: 667
Goal: Forget the score--I just want a house w/a comfie fixed mortgage! :smileyhappy:
But I guess the 700 club couldn't hurt!
Moderator Emeritus
llecs
Posts: 32,869
Registered: ‎08-04-2007
0

Re: Credit Discrepancies

[ Edited ]

Welcome to the forums!

 

The FICO formula between each CRA varies and it's easy to have a small score difference even if the reports are precisely alike. However, no two reports are alike and there could be subtle differences that can create a score gap. Small stuff like an old late reporting on one but not the other, one TL reporting on one and not the other, balance differences on one and not the other, and account statuses (stati?) can easily throw a very large difference in between scores. Look at my siggy below. It is a 28 point difference as of this post. The only differences between the two are that TU98 (the TU FICO found on here) treats my Amex differently than EQ and EQ has one extra TL that happens to be my oldest and TU or EX don't report it.

 

In your post, you copied and pasted FICO scoring reasons. There are actually codes assigned to each reason. If you ever applied for a mortgage, you'll see those same codes on your CR with a description next to each. Those reason codes are unique to each CRA and not every CRA uses the same codes. In other words, the Pos/neg. reasons on pages 2 and 3 of your FICO report will always vary, to an extent, between EQ and TU. They'll be close, but they'll never be alike or match up fully because the FICO formula differs.

 

Per TU's #3 and #1, I'd have to dig into my old reports, but I think #1 is a general statement that there are serious derogs on your report, #3 is a specific code towards having a PR. In other words, if the PR disappeared tomorrow, #1 would still be there. Looks like the bad baddies hurt more than the PR.

 

Per utilization, that hurts more on EQ than TU based on the formula difference. IME, EQ was always more sensitive to utilization changes.

 

Per length of history, this based on your scoring bucket (same to all the reasons really). It just so happens that in your scoring bucket for TU, your length of history is a good thing. In other words, you are being compared to others within a scoring bucket and scorecard and among those you are being compared to, you have a longer history which helps. In EQ, more people have an older history and that hurts. Scorecards are a good thing. It means that someone with a short history isn't being directly compared to someone with a pristine 30 year history.

 

A $256 balance on a $700 CL is a 36.5% utilization. That's high. Ideally, you'd want that card to report $63 or less (9% or less) for max points. If this is your only CC, and you don't have any CO CCs (because they too would factor into utilization), then the damage of having a $256 is very minor in relation to the baddie. In other words, I don't foresee but maybe 10 points gained if you got it below 9% because the baddies weight is so much stronger. You may want to consider adding another CC (I'd aim for a secured). If this is your only one, then adding a second should improve your mix of credit and help your FICO score a little.

 

Mortgage lenders look at all 3 FICO scores and take the middle of the three scores as a basis for the rate, PMI, approval, etc. If applying jointly with a spouse, then they will figure out the mid-score for you and spouse and use the lower of the two mid-scores as a basis. You'd want to aim for 640 at a minimum. Ideally, you'd want TU at 670 since lenders tend to use a different version of TU FICO (TU04) as compared to the one found on here (TU98). On the flip side, lenders still do use TU98 and you can always rate shop and find a lender that uses the older version. A few major lenders still use it, though most don't. BTW, be sure to opt-out will all 3 CRAs before applying. This prevents your report info from being sold to CAs. CAs will subscribe to CRs and if a mortgage inquiry appears, they will add the collection knowing you'd have to likely pay it in order to be approved.

 

 

 

Member
Restore2011
Posts: 15
Registered: ‎01-03-2011
0

Re: Credit Discrepancies

Omg! Thank you SOOOOO much for such a complete answer! I really truly appreciate it. I went through both reports with a fine toothed comb last night after my initial post and saw very (what I thought were) subtle differences.

 

You are right; the baddies hurt  worse because my was score was only in the 6s prior to the BK anyway. The sad part is that ALL the baddies (other than those included in BK; but I guess pre-BK baddies from when I stopped paying those cc at my lawyer's advice hurt too) are student loans (I HATE that stupid Sallie Mae opens every little thousand dollars as a separate tradeline. UGH!). I say this is the "sad part" because it's very easy to avoid lates on student loans (imo). Ah, well. I was young and very ill-informed.

 

At any rate, I'm convinced that I need a second credit card, but I'm trying to find a secured card that doesn't perform a hard pull. I have no points to spare (as you see)and I don't want to risk the loss right now--even if it would help in the long run.

 

Now as to the opt-out; I'm a bit confused as to why this will help me. Perhaps it's because I'm recovering from a really bad sinus headache and am still a little "off," or it could be that the learning curve over here is steep and my Master's sooooooo has nothing to do with this kinda stuff! LOL.

 

Seriously, thanks again for your help. :smileyhappy:


llecs wrote:

Welcome to the forums!

 

The FICO formula between each CRA varies and it's easy to have a small score difference even if the reports are precisely alike. However, no two reports are alike and there could be subtle differences that can create a score gap. Small stuff like an old late reporting on one but not the other, one TL reporting on one and not the other, balance differences on one and not the other, and account statuses (stati?) can easily throw a very large difference in between scores. Look at my siggy below. It is a 28 point difference as of this post. The only differences between the two are that TU98 (the TU FICO found on here) treats my Amex differently than EQ and EQ has one extra TL that happens to be my oldest and TU or EX don't report it.

 

In your post, you copied and pasted FICO scoring reasons. There are actually codes assigned to each reason. If you ever applied for a mortgage, you'll see those same codes on your CR with a description next to each. Those reason codes are unique to each CRA and not every CRA uses the same codes. In other words, the Pos/neg. reasons on pages 2 and 3 of your FICO report will always vary, to an extent, between EQ and TU. They'll be close, but they'll never be alike or match up fully because the FICO formula differs.

 

Per TU's #3 and #1, I'd have to dig into my old reports, but I think #1 is a general statement that there are serious derogs on your report, #3 is a specific code towards having a PR. In other words, if the PR disappeared tomorrow, #1 would still be there. Looks like the bad baddies hurt more than the PR.

 

Per utilization, that hurts more on EQ than TU based on the formula difference. IME, EQ was always more sensitive to utilization changes.

 

Per length of history, this based on your scoring bucket (same to all the reasons really). It just so happens that in your scoring bucket for TU, your length of history is a good thing. In other words, you are being compared to others within a scoring bucket and scorecard and among those you are being compared to, you have a longer history which helps. In EQ, more people have an older history and that hurts. Scorecards are a good thing. It means that someone with a short history isn't being directly compared to someone with a pristine 30 year history.

 

A $256 balance on a $700 CL is a 36.5% utilization. That's high. Ideally, you'd want that card to report $63 or less (9% or less) for max points. If this is your only CC, and you don't have any CO CCs (because they too would factor into utilization), then the damage of having a $256 is very minor in relation to the baddie. In other words, I don't foresee but maybe 10 points gained if you got it below 9% because the baddies weight is so much stronger. You may want to consider adding another CC (I'd aim for a secured). If this is your only one, then adding a second should improve your mix of credit and help your FICO score a little.

 

Mortgage lenders look at all 3 FICO scores and take the middle of the three scores as a basis for the rate, PMI, approval, etc. If applying jointly with a spouse, then they will figure out the mid-score for you and spouse and use the lower of the two mid-scores as a basis. You'd want to aim for 640 at a minimum. Ideally, you'd want TU at 670 since lenders tend to use a different version of TU FICO (TU04) as compared to the one found on here (TU98). On the flip side, lenders still do use TU98 and you can always rate shop and find a lender that uses the older version. A few major lenders still use it, though most don't. BTW, be sure to opt-out will all 3 CRAs before applying. This prevents your report info from being sold to CAs. CAs will subscribe to CRs and if a mortgage inquiry appears, they will add the collection knowing you'd have to likely pay it in order to be approved.

 

 

 


 

*******
Ch. 7 BK discharged 7/09
myFICO pull 1/11
TU: 629 EQ: 667
Goal: Forget the score--I just want a house w/a comfie fixed mortgage! :smileyhappy:
But I guess the 700 club couldn't hurt!
Valued Contributor
JM-AM
Posts: 3,302
Registered: ‎06-09-2010
0

Re: Credit Discrepancies

[ Edited ]

 


Restore2011 wrote:

Omg! Thank you SOOOOO much for such a complete answer! I really truly appreciate it. I went through both reports with a fine toothed comb last night after my initial post and saw very (what I thought were) subtle differences.

 

You are right; the baddies hurt  worse because my was score was only in the 6s prior to the BK anyway. The sad part is that ALL the baddies (other than those included in BK; but I guess pre-BK baddies from when I stopped paying those cc at my lawyer's advice hurt too) are student loans (I HATE that stupid Sallie Mae opens every little thousand dollars as a separate tradeline. UGH!). I say this is the "sad part" because it's very easy to avoid lates on student loans (imo). Ah, well. I was young and very ill-informed.

 

At any rate, I'm convinced that I need a second credit card, but I'm trying to find a secured card that doesn't perform a hard pull. I have no points to spare (as you see)and I don't want to risk the loss right now--even if it would help in the long run.

 

Now as to the opt-out; I'm a bit confused as to why this will help me. Perhaps it's because I'm recovering from a really bad sinus headache and am still a little "off," or it could be that the learning curve over here is steep and my Master's sooooooo has nothing to do with this kinda stuff! LOL.

 

Seriously, thanks again for your help. :smileyhappy:


llecs wrote:

Welcome to the forums!

 

The FICO formula between each CRA varies and it's easy to have a small score difference even if the reports are precisely alike. However, no two reports are alike and there could be subtle differences that can create a score gap. Small stuff like an old late reporting on one but not the other, one TL reporting on one and not the other, balance differences on one and not the other, and account statuses (stati?) can easily throw a very large difference in between scores. Look at my siggy below. It is a 28 point difference as of this post. The only differences between the two are that TU98 (the TU FICO found on here) treats my Amex differently than EQ and EQ has one extra TL that happens to be my oldest and TU or EX don't report it.

 

In your post, you copied and pasted FICO scoring reasons. There are actually codes assigned to each reason. If you ever applied for a mortgage, you'll see those same codes on your CR with a description next to each. Those reason codes are unique to each CRA and not every CRA uses the same codes. In other words, the Pos/neg. reasons on pages 2 and 3 of your FICO report will always vary, to an extent, between EQ and TU. They'll be close, but they'll never be alike or match up fully because the FICO formula differs.

 

Per TU's #3 and #1, I'd have to dig into my old reports, but I think #1 is a general statement that there are serious derogs on your report, #3 is a specific code towards having a PR. In other words, if the PR disappeared tomorrow, #1 would still be there. Looks like the bad baddies hurt more than the PR.

 

Per utilization, that hurts more on EQ than TU based on the formula difference. IME, EQ was always more sensitive to utilization changes.

 

Per length of history, this based on your scoring bucket (same to all the reasons really). It just so happens that in your scoring bucket for TU, your length of history is a good thing. In other words, you are being compared to others within a scoring bucket and scorecard and among those you are being compared to, you have a longer history which helps. In EQ, more people have an older history and that hurts. Scorecards are a good thing. It means that someone with a short history isn't being directly compared to someone with a pristine 30 year history.

 

A $256 balance on a $700 CL is a 36.5% utilization. That's high. Ideally, you'd want that card to report $63 or less (9% or less) for max points. If this is your only CC, and you don't have any CO CCs (because they too would factor into utilization), then the damage of having a $256 is very minor in relation to the baddie. In other words, I don't foresee but maybe 10 points gained if you got it below 9% because the baddies weight is so much stronger. You may want to consider adding another CC (I'd aim for a secured). If this is your only one, then adding a second should improve your mix of credit and help your FICO score a little.

 

Mortgage lenders look at all 3 FICO scores and take the middle of the three scores as a basis for the rate, PMI, approval, etc. If applying jointly with a spouse, then they will figure out the mid-score for you and spouse and use the lower of the two mid-scores as a basis. You'd want to aim for 640 at a minimum. Ideally, you'd want TU at 670 since lenders tend to use a different version of TU FICO (TU04) as compared to the one found on here (TU98). On the flip side, lenders still do use TU98 and you can always rate shop and find a lender that uses the older version. A few major lenders still use it, though most don't. BTW, be sure to opt-out will all 3 CRAs before applying. This prevents your report info from being sold to CAs. CAs will subscribe to CRs and if a mortgage inquiry appears, they will add the collection knowing you'd have to likely pay it in order to be approved.

 

 

 


 


PUBLIC SAVINGS will give you a secured card with no HARD PULLS. It will never un-secure but it is a step to your process.

 

Good Luck
May all your dreams and wishes become a reality!
Moderator Emeritus
llecs
Posts: 32,869
Registered: ‎08-04-2007
0

Re: Credit Discrepancies


Restore2011 wrote:

Now as to the opt-out; I'm a bit confused as to why this will help me. Perhaps it's because I'm recovering from a really bad sinus headache and am still a little "off," or it could be that the learning curve over here is steep and my Master's sooooooo has nothing to do with this kinda stuff! LOL.


Let's say I own a collection agency called StopCallingMeScumBag Collection Associates (SCA). Let's say you owe $$$ to an old utility for $500 and I, as a CA, purchased that debt. I have two choices off the bat: 1) I can start sending collection notices to pay and report on your CR or 2) I can send collection notices but decide not to report. Instead of reporting, I can pay a small fee to Equifax, Experian, and/or TransUnion and they will send me information about your credit reports. If they tell me you are paying your balances down, then that tells me you have have money to pay me. Or if you apply for a mortgage as indicated by a mortgage inquiry, then I'll find out and that tells me you have the $$$ to pay me. In the case of applying for a mortgage, I can then report driving down your FICO scores and that will either disqualify you if your scores go too low or if approved anyway, the lender will likely require you to pay me as a condition of closing. If you are required to pay, then I know I'll get my money and I walk away happy and you'll get a new home at possibly a higher rate or payment.

 

If you go to each CRA, you can opt out. Opting out will prevent the CRAs from showing your credit info. If in the same scenario you are opted out, and you apply for a mortgage, I won't even find out about it and may never report. Opting out doesn't prevent CAs from reporting, but it stops them from getting your info by which to make a decision to report. Opting out also cuts back on junk mail that is based around your credit like insurance offers, banking offers, or CC offers.

Member
Restore2011
Posts: 15
Registered: ‎01-03-2011
0

Re: Credit Discrepancies

IIecs you are the bestest! Thank you! I just opted out--but I did it via one screen (a link I found you posted elsewhere) instead of going to each CRA. Will that net the same effect?

 

I will also be securing that Public Savings Bank card. Thank you!!! :smileyhappy:

*******
Ch. 7 BK discharged 7/09
myFICO pull 1/11
TU: 629 EQ: 667
Goal: Forget the score--I just want a house w/a comfie fixed mortgage! :smileyhappy:
But I guess the 700 club couldn't hurt!
Moderator Emeritus
llecs
Posts: 32,869
Registered: ‎08-04-2007
0

Re: Credit Discrepancies


Restore2011 wrote:

IIecs you are the bestest! Thank you! I just opted out--but I did it via one screen (a link I found you posted elsewhere) instead of going to each CRA. Will that net the same effect?


Yep. Same effect. I think the address was something optoutprescreennotice or something like that. I never mention the site because I always forget it.

Moderator
MarineVietVet
Posts: 14,945
Registered: ‎07-14-2009
0

Re: Credit Discrepancies


Restore2011 wrote:

IIecs you are the bestest! Thank you! I just opted out--but I did it via one screen (a link I found you posted elsewhere) instead of going to each CRA. Will that net the same effect?

 

I will also be securing that Public Savings Bank card. Thank you!!! :smileyhappy:


If you went here Opt Out Credit Reports you're fine.

 

 

 

From a BK years ago to:
EX - 9/09 pulled by lender 802, EQ - 10/10-813, TU - 10/10-774

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they've made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem".

Member
Restore2011
Posts: 15
Registered: ‎01-03-2011
0

Re: Credit Discrepancies

Yep, that's where I went. Thank you! :smileyhappy:
marinevietvet wrote:

Restore2011 wrote:

IIecs you are the bestest! Thank you! I just opted out--but I did it via one screen (a link I found you posted elsewhere) instead of going to each CRA. Will that net the same effect?

 

I will also be securing that Public Savings Bank card. Thank you!!! :smileyhappy:


If you went here Opt Out Credit Reports you're fine.

 

 

 

From a BK years ago to:
EX - 9/09 pulled by lender 802, EQ - 10/10-813, TU - 10/10-774

"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they've made a difference. The Marines don't have that problem".


 

*******
Ch. 7 BK discharged 7/09
myFICO pull 1/11
TU: 629 EQ: 667
Goal: Forget the score--I just want a house w/a comfie fixed mortgage! :smileyhappy:
But I guess the 700 club couldn't hurt!
Frequent Contributor
Scuba
Posts: 455
Registered: ‎06-08-2008
0

Re: Credit Discrepancies

What an interesting read I had to bookmark this thread!

 

After reading this, it tells me my thinking is very one dimensional.

 

Thanks for such a thorough explanation.


myFICO is the consumer division of FICO. Since its introduction 20 years ago, the FICO® Score has become a global standard for measuring credit risk in the banking, mortgage, credit card, auto and retail industries. 90 of the top 100 largest U.S. financial institutions use the FICO Score to make consumer credit decisions.

>> About myFICO
FICO Score - The Score that matters
Click to Verify - This site chose VeriSign SSL for secure e-commerce and confidential communications.
Fair Isaac Corporation is a BBB Accredited Financial Service in San Rafael, CA
FOLLOW US Social Media Facebook Twitter Pinterest Google+
}