03-29-2012 08:23 PM
I still never got the update when new Amex hit. I wonder if backdating made it not be a new account.
That is EXACTLY what happened.
SW doesn't remember what was on your last report, so it doesn't see that an account is new to your reports. It just sees that it has an opening date of March 2012, and it's March 2012 (or whatever), so hey, it's new.
If AmEx had pulled a hard on EQ, you would (presumably) have gotten an alert for the inq. But since they almost always pull EX, you wouldn't get that either.
Unless the new/ old AmEx account somehow makes your score change, you most likely will not get a SW alert.
I pretty much expected a small bump because it should have slightly increased AOAA and lowered utilization.
Stubborness is the only thing preventing me from burning a Score Power report. Also, I don't want to let myself be annoyed if the score changed and there was no alert, LOL! I'll give it another week.
Each of those (change in AAoA and change in util) are factors that have ranges that trigger changes.
* ranges that trigger changes, tra la, tra la *
Anyway, changing from 14% to 11% probably won't trigger a score change, while changing from 10% to 9% might. (or might not)
Changing from 13 years AAoA to 15 years might not trigger a score change, while changing from 4 years to 5 might. (or might not)
It all depends on whether your util, or your AAoA, or your oldest account age, and so forth changes enough to move into a new range. If you think about it, this makes sense. It would be nuts for your FICO's to flip back and forth every time your reported util fluctuated between 3 and 4%, or every time your AAoA moved up or down a year.
Back in the day, when we could buy all three FICO reports here, a bunch of us burned through a bunch of cash pulling reports every time one account had one measley change, partly for the rush, and partly to try to break the scoring formula. We often didn't get the rush, and we definitely didn't break the scoring formula, although we often triumphantly posted that we'd figured something out, which six months later turned out to be completely wrong.
We sure broke a bunch of budgets in the process, though.
03-29-2012 08:59 PM
These couple of days this post had broken quite a few milestones. Apparently this is the longest and most viewed Non-Mod post in this specific section. If just my credit score also zoomed up like that (Well if I had a penny for all my wishes....).
Having said that I would say to all of those who pointed out as to why not cancel within 10 days the answer is trying to give sometime for the product to work and see how it compares with my other score tracker with unlimited reports and then life happens (Unfortunately for me it happened in hospital with my two year old so my priorities got rearranged.). I always observed that companies with contracts are always little lenient with the contracts. So if you try to cancel within few hours of the contract start and that too when you just rushed back from the hospital they generally did cancel the contract and refund the amount. It was the lack of this understanding at FICO's side compounded with all the things going on at that time which really made me mad (I generally am a calm person .....ask those who know me ).
Now after a week I am happy to say that the situation at personal front is much better and also thanks to Barry my issue had been resolved amicably. So I guess that makes for start of a most likely a sweet weekend.
Thanks to Mods (My username looks a lot different...just different HeHeHeHeHeHeHe) and all of you for sharing your one cent or two.
Ciao and hopefully everyone has a great weekend (the weather is gonna be the best though so that's a positive)
With Best Wishes
03-29-2012 09:33 PM
I'm glad to hear that your two-year-old is doing better. That's the sort of thing that will turn your hair grey overnight.
And I hear you about the current myFICO CS policies. This is a fairly recent change, and I must say that I think it's a change for the worse. IMO, it's trying to grab money now, maximizing current profits, with no regard for customer retention and future growth... I truly worry about how American business has changed over the last 10-15 years. Customers are no longer customers --we're just sheep waiting to be shorn.
OK, I'll climb down off my soapbox now. At any rate, I'm glad to hear that Barry was able to make it right for you.
03-30-2012 02:02 AM
My gut says burning a Score Power report will just result in being annoyed, LOL!
12-02-2012 12:15 PM
well when you tell someone you get 10 free days, then you charge on the 10th day...that means you only got 9 free days...sounds like false advertising you me...sounds you need to charge on the 11th day...
12-09-2012 01:08 AM
I've had Score Watch subscriptions in past years, and was always able to cancel them online. Now it tells me to call. I think Myfico is abusing its monopoly power by arbitrarily imposing inconveniences on customers knowing they can't switch companies. I'm wondering why FICO and Myfico haven't been sued for antitrust. It's not just that one inconvenience, but a lot of things that would make people want to find a better company than Myfico. Such as telling me the reasons my score went down suddenly are things that happened in the past which did not cause my score to go down when they happened. And being way too secretive about how the scores are actually calculated and how to predict what changes will cause what score changes. Pretending to give clues which are actually just generic stuff that doesn't help much in individual cases. I think Myfico should be required by law to disclose the exact reasons why a particular score went down when it did. And should be required by law to not renew subscriptions unless authorized by the customer at the time of renewal. Those laws are needed because Myfico is a monopoly.
12-09-2012 06:09 AM
......Myfico is a monopoly.
I'll offer a different viewpoint and will try to demonstrate that it is far from a monopoly. Lenders can choose whatever score they want, or even skip a score all together. There are dozens of other scores out there that can be used by lenders like VantageScore, ScoreX, CreditXpert score, and so on. Then there are other consumer credit scores in use like PLUS, TransRisk, Equifax Credit Score, CE Score, and many others. On this alone, FICO is just a small cog in the machine. What sets FICO above all the rest is the quality. Their analytics is years beyond everyone else and a better predictor of risk, otherwise lenders would use VantageScore or something else.
Choosing whether or not to use a credit score is up to the lender. Choosing a FICO or a FAKO is up to the lender too. If a vast majority of the consumers out there want to buy Toyotas and drive Toyotas, it doesn't make Toyota a monopoly. It was the consumer's choice. Likewise with a credit score, if a vast majority of lenders picked FICO above all others due to their accuracy, it doesn't mean FICO is a monopoly and it doesn't mean lenders are engaged in monopolizing FICO.
SW isn't designed to give specific reasons, only generic reasons to a score change. We (meaning fellow forum users) always recommend to subscribe to a CMS outside of any myFICO product so you can see the exact changes. They aren't required by any law to provide more info within their product. It's how it is designed. Quite frankly they should charge a bit more and add more reports, but that's me. And SW will tell you very specific reasons why a score changed like balance increases, added inquiries, added accounts, added baddies, account stati changes, etc.
I'll agree though on the cancellation issue, if true. I never needed to cancel anything; I just re-subscribe when my CC info changes. But folks should be able to cancel online if they cannot now.
Disclaimer: myFICO mods are all volunteers here. Someone one here might read the above and think that I/we work for myFICO. Other than access to a corporate jet and a rubber tree plant, I don't get paid peanuts. j/k. I subscribe just like everyone else.
12-10-2012 01:33 PM
When I say FICO is a monopoly, I mean, for example, that I can't tell a creditor what score I subscribe to and have them use that score. I'm stuck with whatever scores creditors decide to use. So I have to pay for those scores even if I don't like them. Monopoly is a complicated concept. You can be a monopoly by tying things together in such a way that it's difficult for competitors to compete because they would have to break in to those ties. Creditors use FICO because other creditors use FICO. Consumers don't have any choice in the matter.
In any case, regardless of monopoly status, consumers should have the right to know exactly what will happen to their credit score if they take a particular action. They should be able to ask, if I open this bank account, how many points is my score going to drop?
A country where people are judged by numbers calculated in secret is more like a communist dictatorship than a free country. People who love freedom should be fighting hard against that. It might not seem like a big deal compared to what happens in totalitarian countries, but it is, because freedom is lost one step at a time, over a long period, when apathy causes people to let it happen.
My score watch score went down 12 points over the past year, while my overall credit situation was actually improving so much that it would be more appropriate for me to have a 100 point increase than a 12 point decrease.. The information I get from score watch does not give any clue at all of why it happened. It just gives me ridiculous nonsense, such as to tell me one of the main reasons it went down now is because of something that happened years ago.
I think people should demand a right to know the exact real reasons for score changes, and should contact their representatives in Congress about the possibility of such a law, because FICO is not likely to ever make such changes on their own initiative for the benefit of consumers, since their whole purpose is to find negative stuff about consumers, not to do anything to help them.