Fair Isaac is NOT fair

[haulingthescoreup]

A CSR may say that getting a card back is dependent on your score, but I seriously doubt that. For one thing, most of them don't even know if their own company are using FICO's, FAKO's, or an inhouse scoring system, as does AmEx.

What lenders look at are your credit reports. And your reports say what your revolving credit util is, plus any negatives, etc. Few lenders bother to pull a score when doing account reviews --why should they pay for a score? All they need to do is look at your report and see what, if any, changes are occurring. If you get caught in the domino effect of one lender after another CLD'ing you, and you have balance(s), then yeah, that bright spotlight is shining on you. And by "you" I don't mean any specific poster; I just didn't want to type "one" instead of "you."

In my reply, I mentioned the effect of a new late. A previous poster had written (I thought) that a new late had hit, and he was being treated as if he were a bankrupt. If I misread that, I apologize.

And fwiw, there is only one FICO employee I know of who posts here, and that's the admin in charge of the forums, and he uses his own name with a big FICO logo by it. I'm always amazed at those who think that those of us who have (sort of) figured out the system and try to explain it to others so that we can all use it to our advantage are accused of (1) defending the scoring system and (2) being FICO employees.

At any rate, OP, I hope that the CLD's stop soon for you and things start to turn around. I'm afraid that you are a classic case of someone who had a high-ish util/ balance, and the sorry excuses for banks that we have nowadays got skittish and slashed you. It has happened to a lot of people besides you, many who participate on these boards, and it will undoubtedly keep happening to many after you. This is only one of the reasons that so many people are firing their banks and switching to credit unions. (Not that CU's aren't capable of doing the same thing, but they seem a lot less temperamental than the Wall Street banks that you and I and everyone else have already rescued once.)

[Anonymous]

---

@haulingthescoreup wrote:

It has happened to a lot of people besides you, many who participate on these boards, and it will undoubtedly keep happening to many after you.

---

This is a key point that cannot be emphasized enough. Time after time, on this board and several others, new members post with an underlying theme that they are being singled out and treated unfairly by their banks, the scoring system, or whatever. Sometimes it seems like there should be a requirement that new members must read X days of prior threads so they understand that huge numbers of other people, many with higher scores and more pristine credit, are now experiencing widespread adverse action far more frequently than any other time in the past decade.

It has also been pointed out countless times that scoring models, whether Fico or Fako, are only tools that reflect risk assessment based on group behavior. It is up to lenders to decide what other criteria they use in conjunction with credit scores. It is up to consumers to educate themselves as to what behavior spooks banks and change their purchase patterns or payment patterns accordingly. Actions that previously escaped banks' attention now result in often severe adverse action. The financial environment has changed drastically.

Another point - CSRs are notoriously unreliable when it comes to offering valid reasons for a particular adverse action. Banks supply their CSRs with vague or plainly incorrect excuses to feed to customers. And sometimes, CSRs just make things up. In general, given sufficient information, people on discussion boards like this one or CB can provide a more accurate explanation of why a specific bank took adverse action.

Finally, it takes little research to figure out that various posters, including myself, are obviously not employees of Fico. If someone accuses Fico unfairly, we try to point out why their assumptions are incorrect. Conversely, if we think Fico has fallen short in some area, we don't hesitate to say so. Find a thread about TU'98 or MyFico's ScoreWatch, and see how many of us "shills" have blasted Fico as much or more than anyone else ...

[MidnightVoice]

Just in case the OP is still around.......

I have been on this board since the very early days, and there has been only one "normal" poster who was an FI employee, as far as I know, and he clearly stated (several times) that he was here as one of "us" not as an FI employee    All the rest of us come here to learn, and many stay to help others learn.  FI provides this forum for us to discuss matters, and pretty much leaves us alone if we avoid the 3 things you should not discuss in polite company - Politics, Religion and Sex. 

I have learned a great deal about FICO scores, credit, loans and a variety of other financial matters by hanging around here.  At least in part due to the information I have found here, I am a FICO High Achiever, and, more importantly, I know how to stay in that exalted group.

So thank you FI for providing the Forum, thank you Barry and Raine for helping keep it going.  But MOST OF ALL, thank you fellow forum members and posters

[StartinOver]

I first caught on that there was a FI employee here when I kept reading financial and credit scoring articles on the internet that were quoting him .

[firedogut]

"We did nothing to create this problem, except NOT to use available credit"

This is what you did wrong.  I'm sorry but I don't mean to sound rude or anything.    You do not have a right to credit, it is a business agreement between you and the creditor.   It is not good business sense to tie up credit on someone that does not use it.   It is my responsibility to read all of the terms of service and understand what is going on.   If you have multiple cards you need to use them every once in while.  

You can not be mad at Fair Isaac, it is not the scoring model that caused your issue.   I will grant you that the Credit Card companies should have sent out notices that if you don't start to use the card they will close it.  However you agreed to the Terms and Conditions when you got the card.   Almost every card out there has the ability to close the account for any reason that they feel is in the best interest of the company.  If you did not agree to that then why did you sign the agreement?

[3elizabeth]

I think I know the frustration the OP is feeling.  If Fair Isaac is so fair, then why are we kept in the dark on the formulas?  Why not put their cards on the table and let people work with that?  Why the secrecy?  And in my mind, no matter how you cut it, it's very unfair to have years and years of good credit impacted by one slip up.  There is only a range of 500 points to work with and one late payment on a card that has been open ten years with no late payments before that takes a hit of 10% (if you're lucky)?   No dilution for good behavior.  That's fair?  And then all the other companies who CAN, not because they NEED to, slam the door too and start a snowball effect on the credit of someone who was blindsided by a credit company, that's fair?  No, it's not. Not in way, shape, or form.  

 If it's so fair of credit card companies to close your cards for non-usage, why isn't it stated in the contract? None of mine give that reason for closing a card.  None of my cards will even tell me that they will close them for not using them, much less how long I can go without losing them.   All we ask is a "fair" shake.  All we want is to know the parameters we have to work with.  Nothing is regulated except the ability of the credit industry to hold us hostage.  And before I get a response that tells me not to use credit if I don't like it, that's really not the point of my post.  We all know that we have this option, but discussing how we feel about something is healthy and many of us grow and learn by discussion.  This is a website that helps people manage their credit  and help themselves and others to improve their scores, because FI keeps our scores from us unless we pay for them and won't reveal the way those scores are derived.  Good luck OP, I hope things get better very soon.  

[MidnightVoice]

---

@3elizabeth wrote:

I  If Fair Isaac is so fair, then why are we kept in the dark on the formulas?  Why not put their cards on the table and let people work with that?  Why the secrecy?

---

Intellectual property - if they told us the formula, then the company could not make moneey!

---

@3elizabeth wrote:

  And in my mind, no matter how you cut it, it's very unfair to have years and years of good credit impacted by one slip up.  There is only a range of 500 points to work with and one late payment on a card that has been open ten years with no late payments before that takes a hit of 10% (if you're lucky)?   No dilution for good behavior.  That's fair?  And then all the other companies who CAN, not because they NEED to, slam the door too and start a snowball effect on the credit of someone who was blindsided by a credit company, that's fair?  No, it's not. Not in way, shape, or form.  

---

This is statistics.  Most people who have a certain behavior pattern pose a certain risk.  There will be outliers, but this is true in everything.  That is, unfortunately, reality.  Nothing in this world is 100% safe or correct

Just remember - Life is not fair

And Catch-22 - they can do anything to you (or me) that you (or I) can't stop them doing to you (or me) 

[Anonymous]

I read practically everything on this site and thought I had the system pretty well figured out. My score was 743 when I owed thousands on credit cards. I paid down my 3 credit cards and let a different card report a 1% balance each month. EQ Score was 812 last month. A couple of weeks ago, I paid the last 2 payments on a personal loan... lost 10 FICO points when it reported this week. There's nothing listed as negatively affecting my score, 4 positive things listed. The only difference in my report is that the personal loan reported $970 balance last time and $0 balance this time. My debt got smaller, my accounts got another month older and they ding me for 10 points. It sure doesn't make sense to me.

[marty56]

EQ can ding you for no CCs reporting a balance.

[marty56]

---

 All we ask is a "fair" shake.  All we want is to know the parameters we have to work with.  Nothing is regulated except the ability of the credit industry to hold us hostage.  And before I get a response that tells me not to use credit if I don't like it, that's really not the point of my post.

---

There is enough information here in the forum for anyone to play the FICO score game and win without knowing anything about the FICO formula and why CCCs do what they do.  Yes sometimes life happens and we have to revolve a balance or we pay late or even default on a card but the rules are simple once you know them and understand cause and effect on your score.