So I finally got my thanks but no thanks letter from BCU. Here are the reasons they are stating based on the Vantage 3.0:
- Credit Report Data
- Garnishment, attachment, foreclosure, collection action or judgement
- Other, poor credit performance
The key factors show as:
- Total of all balances on bankcard or revolving accounts is too high
- Unknown factor code (yeah it literally says unknown)
- The date that you opened your oldest account is too recent (oldest account was opened 28 years ago)
- The balances on your accounts are too high compared to loan limits (not sure if this is the utilization rate)
BCU advertises that they are here today for my tomorrow. I've sent an appeal letter to their underwriting department in hopes they will reconsider. I tried calling but seemingly got a run around being transfered from department to department.
@newzie wrote:Within the last 8 months BCU switched exclusively to Vantage 3 for their scores. Doesn’t matter what product you are applying for, they are no longer using FICO. Vantage is beginning to matter more and more.
Its always mattered, just not to the extent of fico. Fico 9 is the answer to VantageScore 3.0, but now there's Vantagescore 4.0. The biggest difference between 3 and 4 is while a lender had access to trended data with 3.0, 4.0 actually factors that trended data into the score. This is a huge change in how to evaluate a customer as it is a better gauge of the likelihood of default vs the snapshot that FICO uses. For example, if the trended data shows someone maxing out their cards at Christmas, but quickly paying them down, they would look much different to a lender than someone how maxes their card and pays the minimum all year. Until fico releases an answer to that scoring model, I wouldn't be surprised to see lenders moving more towards VS. But, I don't see any big changes coming soon because it takes time to implement use of a new scoring model. Lenders have to compare how accurate the new one is vs the ones they currently use. There are software and hardware costs associated with that research. Plus, they have to develop new plans of how and when to use the scores followed by training the analysts and deploying new software and hardware to do so.
So how do we as sonsumers get to see the Vantage 4? Most of the sites and tools I've seen are 3.0 or some non-descriptive version (for lack of a better term).
I'll also add my Fico 9 is nowhere near as low as my Vantage 3.0 by close to 100 points.
I'll also add my Fico 9 is nowhere near as low as my Vantage 3.0 by close to 100 points.
@newzie wrote:
So how do we as sonsumers get to see the Vantage 4? Most of the sites and tools I've seen are 3.0 or some non-descriptive version (for lack of a better term).
I'll also add my Fico 9 is nowhere near as low as my Vantage 3.0 by close to 100 points.
I haven't looked, but I'm assuming you can get it direct from vantagescore.
It's normal for VS and FICO to vary by close to 100 points depending on how clean your profile is. People with clean reports tend to have very similar VS and FICO scores. It's because of how things are weighted. For example, FICO 9 ignores medical collections under $100, but includes anything above that in scoring. VS 4.0 ignores all medical collections for 6 months after appearance to give insurance companies time to pay off the bill in case it shouldn't be in collections.
@Anonymous wrote:
@Brian_Earl_Spilner wrote:...Fico 9 is the answer to VantageScore 3.0, but now there's Vantagescore 4.0. The biggest difference between 3 and 4 is while a lender had access to trended data with 3.0, 4.0 actually factors that trended data into the score. This is a huge change in how to evaluate a customer as it is a better gauge of the likelihood of default vs the snapshot that FICO uses. For example, if the trended data shows someone maxing out their cards at Christmas, but quickly paying them down, they would look much different to a lender than someone how maxes their card and pays the minimum all year.
I just assumed that all lenders see the same 'historical account information' that I saw on all 3 reports in March from annualcreditreport.com.
At that point in time, I had only 2 statements reported for the only 2 cards that I have (or ever had). But for January and February, all 3 bureaus had the statement balance, high balance, and amount paid.
TU even had the exact date I made the payment each month - both were paid within a few days after receiving the statement. So TU even tracks - and records - how close to the due date I make a payment.
I understand that FICO scoring models don't use that data, but I suspect it must be available to every credit issuer doing a soft pull account review.
FICO is doing trended data as well. What you have to remember though is Vantagescore was created by the big 3 bureaus. I wouldn't be surprised if they were holding back some data for their use. Something like how close to the due date someone makes a payment could be very valuable. I would think that people who are tight on money tend to pay a bill pretty close to the due date, if not on the day it's due, pretty consistently, and the minimum payment at that. If the trended data showed that happening every month for 2 years, that could be a sign that someone may not be able to take on more debt and lenders could refuse limit increases or deny new apps.
You're also assuming that when a lender pulls someone's report, they're getting the whole thing. The deal the lender has with the bureau may not be for all the data, just the data they need to make a decision, in order to reduce the cost.