FICO 9 Score: Inaccuracies

[Revelate]

---

@WoodlandFlora wrote:
The rest of the list--
too few accounts in good standing(again not accurate as I have five current accounts open and zero derogatories)
Short credit history--oldest account is 11+ years
No balance on revolving account


You would think with zero collections and exceptional payment history FICO9 would not state a serious delinquency. It has to be a bug. There is zero explanation and if MF can't find it then something isn't accurate.

---

Interesting.

I don't have anything to add as to why something is being interpreted as a derogatory; however, your list does beg some questions regarding FICO 9 where thicker files may well be needed for score optimization vs. FICO 8 and earlier... and are you $0 across the board on your credit cards and other revolving accounts?  Let a small balance report on at least one of them.

If you're not at $0 on revolving accounts, wonder if you got some other file calculated for that score / reason codes... which doesn't make a whole lot of sense across 3 different bureaus.  I'm just looking for inconsistencies at this point.

[WoodlandFlora]

We have another account which does not have a $0 balance and we are working on paying that account down. I am an AU on that so it apparently isn't factored into my scoring.


It is indeed odd, not to mention frustrating.

[Revelate]

---

@WoodlandFlora wrote:
We have another account which does not have a $0 balance and we are working on paying that account down. I am an AU on that so it apparently isn't factored into my scoring.


It is indeed odd, not to mention frustrating.

---

Oh, let a balance report on one of your personal responsibility cards, if your AU is being discounted that's a straight negative on every single FICO algorithm we're familiar with.

I don't *think* that would be the wierd reason code, but it could well be a part of the score difference.

[WoodlandFlora]

So since we aren't using the card it is making us take a credit score hit? We are tying to not use it to pay down the balance. We still have it open, but have made the choice to not use it for the last two months. So this could cause the 9 to drop?

[WoodlandFlora]

The reason code still bugs me even after confirmation my report is squeaky clean. 

[Revelate]

---

@WoodlandFlora wrote:

So since we aren't using the card it is making us take a credit score hit? We are tying to not use it to pay down the balance. We still have it open, but have made the choice to not use it for the last two months. So this could cause the 9 to drop?

---

No, the problem is the rest of your cards that you are listed as personally responsible for, are $0. 

If the AU is being discounted from your FICO 9 (and FICO 9 may have changed the AU implementation from FICO 8) and the rest of your revolving accounts are $0, that is a negative under every FICO model prior to FICO 9 for certain, and likely holds for FICO 9 too.

I would try to fix simple things first in this case, and that's a simple thing.  Let $5 report on one card and then see what the scores do.

[WoodlandFlora]

I've used the card so a balance is/will be reporting. I may be confused about the AU factoring in on both models. We just want to pay the balance down and not use it if possible. It is an AMEX, and I'm hoping they don't close it for not using it while we whittle the balance down.

[cashnocredit]

---

@WoodlandFlora wrote:

The reason code still bugs me even after confirmation my report is squeaky clean. 

---

As well it should.  Reason codes are not generated by MyFICO. They are provided along with the FICO score from a black box algorithm that runs at and on the CRA databases. It is looking at raw database stuff and clearly is buggy.  This is a technical issue regarding the FICO 9 proprietary software. The reason codes are mandated by law to accompany the scores and are listed in order of impact.

It is, on it's face, not accurate. I would document the hell out of this and forward it to FICO corporate to help out their programmers find the problem. If you don't get satisfaction there take it to the CFPB. The CFPB likes to work on clear cut cases of error and whatever bug caused this it may well affect many more poeple. Most programming bugs don't show up as blatantly.

ETOA:

Also, the same reason codes would be sent to anyone running your credit using FICO 9.  Fortunately that isn't a lot of people. Yet.  I really hope FICO resolves this promptly.

[WoodlandFlora]

I've lost serious sleep over this. The bureaus all show my 8 scores as stellar and no derogatories. MF says well 9 is so new we don't have enough data to tell you what t is and yet it is my scores on the line and a big drop between 8 and 9. They've said don't worry, but how can I not? How can they say I have a derogatory or late when the CRAs show nothing?

I am at a loss. I pulled scores from the CRAs and all show current, never late.

Why would it suddenly change with the 9? MF days oh check back in six months and don't worry. Umm how is that acceptable?!?

If I was 60 days plus late it would show on the 8 one would think, right?

[WoodlandFlora]

How/where do I contact corporate for MF and get through the gatekeepers?
Reps keep telling me they can't find anything, and one was rude and belittling saying it's all based upon the algorithm and I needed to get over it essentially and they the CRAs showing I wasn't delinquent must be a mistake---insert anger and such here. He refused to dig more and basically negated what the prior rep and two supervisors stated.

I am so frustrated.