I, too, fell within that category at one point in time w/TU. And yes, it bothered the crap out of me. I did have CCs and a car loan and a mortgage and never, ever missed a payment on anything, yet TU was 25-30 points lower than the other CRAs, granted it was 700s, but much lower than the others. I didn't understand the scoring system at that time though.
Are you saying that there shouldn't be a risk factor built into FICO scoring? In other words, should a mortgage, an installment loan, an unsecured CC and a loan from a CFC to be weighted the same? I think not. A CFC begins making reminder calls in as little as one or two days past the due date to ensure that their payment is a priority for its customers.
They should not have the same risk factor as any of the other types of TLs.
Now, is it TU to blame that they want a different algorithm than the others and weigh different TLs differently. This is the same thing as wondering why Car insurance company X will give you a different rate than Car insurance company Y, when they are presumably looking at the same data to rate you. Or life insurance and medical insurance too, for that matter (they also have a "score" for you that YOU ARE NOT PRVIY TO ACCESS). They all have their risk tolerance with which they are comfortable and will score you based off of their internal company matrix. How is this different?
Read some of my old threads about TU. I have my share of beefs with them. My beef however, is not with FICO. It's with the CRAs that won't update information on a timely basis that would perhaps cause my scores to be more in line with one another.
Are you saying that there shouldn't be a risk factor built into FICO scoring? In other words, should a mortgage, an installment loan, an unsecured CC and a loan from a CFC to be weighted the same? I think not. A CFC begins making reminder calls in as little as one or two days past the due date to ensure that their payment is a priority for its customers.
They should not have the same risk factor as any of the other types of TLs.Now, is it TU to blame that they want a different algorithm than the others and weigh different TLs differently. This is the same thing as wondering why Car insurance company X will give you a different rate than Car insurance company Y, when they are presumably looking at the same data to rate you. Or life insurance and medical insurance too, for that matter (they also have a "score" for you that YOU ARE NOT PRVIY TO ACCESS). They all have their risk tolerance with which they are comfortable and will score you based off of their internal company matrix. How is this different?
Read some of my old threads about TU. I have my share of beefs with them. My beef however, is not with FICO. It's with the CRAs that won't update information on a timely basis that would perhaps cause my scores to be more in line with one another.
Starting Score: 469
@borg_cube wrote:
FICO's very own explanation on this website of the scoring models admits that even if all three CRA's have EXACTLY the same information, the scores may not be the same.So that's FICO's fault? The three CRAs want different algorithms, that's why they were developed. Blame the three CRAs for not wanting the exact same one. The CRAs are trying to set themselves apart for their customers--giving them what they think they want.Isn't that special? That alone should disqualify the FICO model.The medical analogies don't fly here. Nowhere does a private company have the right to report your specific health issues to other private companies to be sold to other private companies and demand that you must adhere to their monopolized industry standard "secret formulas" every time you wish to engage in a health related adventure.Oh, but there are "medical health reports" (for lack of a better term) and they are pulled and used when you apply for life insurance and private health insurance. I used to sell the insurance (no I am not proud of it), but hey it happened. I had a client who was in great physical health, but upon the "med. health report" being pulled, he was declined. I guess it had something to do with his emotional health.
In fact, even when applying for life insurance, you can only be asked about your health and then must submit to testing if the company chooses that path. They are not allowed to pull your records from your physicians, etc.See above comments.FICO isn't the problem per se, that firm just developed a method of credit evaluation which has been widely accepted...good for them. The problem is that the method is not clear and available. The problem is that it forces certain behavior for its own benefit and that of the industry, not necessarily for those whose information is being manipulated.You are not the client. The CRAs and lending institutions are. They are asking that FICO provide information in such a manner and that's why it exists.Just tonight, I was with a guy who bought a new car in 10 minutes! Signed and delivered in less than 30. It was insane. While such convenience is a positive aspect of the FICO model being used to benefit consumers, this over-reliance has led to the current mortgage crisis, out of control debt, and toxic debt spreading over the entire globe. My friend should have had to wait until his FICO scores were reviewed, income could be verified, bank statements gone over, references verified, etc.Again, failing to see how this is FICO's fault. It's the fault of the desperate car dealership who took the risk. No one twisted the dealership's arm to make that sale. They must really be desperate...on a Sunday night? Dealerships in my neck of the woods are not allowed to be open on Sundays. Have to give us a day that we can look without being hounded by the guys in plaid suits and white patent leather shoes.I know people with FICO scores in the mid-high 700's who don't even work or have any reasonable income. And yet, they could waltz right in and buy a car in under an hour.Again, not FICO's fault.Dear FICO, just post the formula, it's the least you can do since it controls almost every serious financial decision we make. You've no doubt sealed the IP angle here, so just do it.Then, it will become generic and FICO will go out of business, as everyone else will have the formula and FICO scores would sell for $.50 a pop. Remember when IBM was on top of the PC world...no longer. They lost their competitive advantage to all of the IBM compatibles.I am sorry that I can't think of the exact name of the "medical health or credit reports" at this time. My brain is fried, as it's 1:30 and I have been up for about 20 hours or so.
Oh, I don't know, it got silly there for a while, but the recent arguments got a bit more enlightening! 
It takes people a while to mentally separate out what is cause by FICO scores, what by the CRA's, and what by lenders, and how each one affects the others. Plus what has resulted from our personal actions and choices!
It takes people a while to mentally separate out what is cause by FICO scores, what by the CRA's, and what by lenders, and how each one affects the others. Plus what has resulted from our personal actions and choices!
Hmmm. This thread seems to be generating more heat then light on the subject