Disgusted...9 Point Rise With CC Util Dropping 100% To 6%

[jbh]

When I saw my Orchard Card report 100% util to 6%, plus a 7 year old 30 day late go away, TU went from 600 to 655.

When the same thing happened to EX (the 100% util to 6%) the dumb thing only jumped from 630 to 639. I am sick. They are identical reports with 3 ca's, same positive accounts. Actually, the ONLY diff is that TU did NOT receive the Crown Jeweler account yet. (EXP went from 616 to 630 after CJ reported, because overall util went down)

I guess this kills my dream of 'good credit score' until all ca's are deleted
What happened to the jump that TU got with the CC payment? Only 9 points for Ex? This makes NO sense

Ty for letting me vent. I am trying to figure this all out. What a waste of $ pulling it.

PS. EXP had a dispute on a CA (false info) that would run to 9/16, but that was resolved. That couldn't be it, could it? There is nothing else that is different about TU and EX

Message Edited by jbh on 09-11-2008 12:39 PM

[Anonymous]

As you well know, they use all different formulas. But I also would expect more than 6 points when you go to low util.

[Anonymous]

The only thing I can think of that could account for such a paltry increase is if somehow the OP was rebucketed at the same time the UTI went down. I know the odds of that are rather slim--it would be quite a coincidence. I'm definitely interested in seeing where that score goes from here.

[jbh]

Had me wondering. My EQ has 2 less ca's and was 658 before the report. I am waiting for EQ to show the balance payment. I also wonder if TU will GO DOWN when CJ reprots as my age will lower. Maybe that's what did it? :/

I just hope that when the 3 ca's are gone, I don't rise 4 points and then hear a raspberry and canned laughter when I log in.

TY

[haulingthescoreup]

How many collections do you have on each report, and what is the most recent date on each of them (if there is a difference among your reports.) Was the old late only on TU?

What differences remain among the three reports? (one has an older account that isn't on the others; another has one fewer late; etc.)

[jbh]

TU>>No CJ yet, utility rise as well as a 7 year old 30 day late that no other report had was removed.

EXP - CJ is reported, cc payment is reported but there was no 30 day late on record.

When TU went up, it went from 600 - 655. It has 3 ca's, all identical to EXP. Those 3 ca's are:

2+ years since date purchased
1 year since date purchased
2 years (Dec 06) since date purchased

The 2 years (dec 06) will fall off, by ny law, when I pay it off later this month so the point jump will be interesting to follow.

Other than Tu awaiting the CJ account to post, it is 100% identical to EXP in every way from good accounts to collections.

PS (edit) - By date purchased, I refer to when the CA took control of it, NOT the DOFD of course.

Message Edited by jbh on 09-11-2008 02:45 PM

[jbh]

As an update, my EQ went from 658-682 with the Orchard Payment. No CJ will post so overall util won't be as low as TU. So, a 600 TU goes up 55 points (with a 7 year old late falling off), EXP at 630 goes up 9 and EQ goes up 24 from 658. In short, there is no real clear pattern to base any of this off of. I know that EQ has only one baddie as opposed to 3 for the others.

I also noticed the fico simulator was accurate for TU (spot on) and 10+ points off I think for EQ. Just fyi for the # geeks out there.

[athensguy]

Well, one consideration would be that if the CJ account was already reporting on your EX, your average age is worse, and your overall util would not have improved as much. You basically got points only for single card util improvement.

[jbh]

Bingo. TY

From this point all I can do to raise points is remove ca's.