No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
I've been comparing my TU & EQ credit reports. One I just got today and the other, a couple of weeks ago. When viewing them side by side here at myfico.com, as you know, they're pretty much laid out the same way. For example, I'm looking at the "Credit-At-A-Glance" tab. I'm in credit recovery mode and my scores have been improving, slowly but surely over the months so I'm not going to say anything here that's going to be overly impressive but you know, it is what it is. Anyway, TU's credit-at-a-glance shows Total Past Due: $1,287 on 12 accts/Zero late payments/6 accts with balances/4 accts in collections FICO: 591
EQ's credit-at-a-glance tab shows Total Past Due: $10,761 on 6 accts/71 late payments/10 accts with balances/Zero accts in collections FICO:593
The scores are close but wow...is how they're reporting affecting anything? If you ask me, just looking quickly, the EQ Report looks horrible (ok, worse than the TU)! Why would they report that I have nothing in collections? And 71 late payments looks insane...
I know my credit situation very well and TU's, I'd say, is pretty accurate. But EQ, why such the difference in reporting....? Is this "typical"?
Thanks for any info you may be able to share! :-)
It is not the CRAs that are apparently responsible for the discrepancies. CRAs dont report anything other than what creditors have first reported to them.
It costs creditors money to report to a CRA. So some dont report at all, or only report to one or two, and not all three.
Creditors never have an obligation to report.
This is common.