TU Dispute CC Credit Limit - Success?

[Anonymous]

Hi everyone!

I disputed a missing credit limit with TU and EQ for one of my credit cards on about March 11 via USPS. I got responses back pretty quickly (maybe 2 weeks) from both saying they updated my file with the correct credit limit (which is correctly displayed on the partial report that each returned with their response letters).

However, I pulled my 3 credit reports the other day (April 6) via PrivacyGuard, and TU it still showing "NA" for the credit limit!?!?! EQ has the correct limit on this report. Just to double-check (and since myFico is having a sale and also to compare privacyguard's FAKO to real FICO), I also pulled my TU from myfico.com on April 7. It too lists "Not Reported" for the credit limit on this card.

Is this normal? What can/should I do at this point? Having this credit limit not reported is seriously screwing up both this card's utilization and my overall utilization, since it is my primary card that I use frequently and has a rather high credit limit. TU also has the lowest FICO/FAKO scores of all 3 CRAs.

Looking at some of the different reports from different sources, it appears that TU classifies this account as an "installment account" or "flexible spending CC" rather than a plain old CC. (This description/classification comes from TU's "truecredit.com" report) For myfico.com reports, the account has the little bag-o-money symbol next to it, not a credit card symbol. "Loan type" is listed as "not reported".

Thanks!
Bob

03/03/2008 FICO: TU 661 / EQ 671 / EX 691
03/10/2008 FAKO: TU 715 / EQ 733 / EX 738 (privacyguard.com)
04/06/2008 FAKO: TU 719 / EQ 737 / EX 740 (privacyguard.com)
04/07/2008 FAKO: TU 767 (truecredit.com)
04/07/2008 FICO: TU 676

[edited sig to fix one score and dates]

Message Edited by BobSki778 on 04-10-2008 06:33 PM

[Anonymous]

Which card is it?  There are several CCs that don't report a CL, mainly those that have a "no preset spending limit" feature.  The only way around this is to do a product change to a different card that does report a CL, and lose the "no preset spending limit" feature in the process.

Some have reported success getting the issuer to update their reports with the CL, only to have the CL disappear again the next time the card does its regular monthly update.

[haulingthescoreup]

Is this a World MC or a Signature Visa? If so, they don't report the CL (although they could if they would get their act together.) I think I've only heard of two solutions: charge it up as high as they'll let you, and pay it off quick-like-a-bunny, so that this one-time high limit will report, or give up and swap out to a similar card that reports. Solution one is only for the brave. You would have to pay it off before the crazy-high balance reported on your statement and thence to the credit bureaus, or else expect some bad responses from your other CCC's.

There have been quite a few members fighting this battle. Sometimes the card will report properly for one month, and then it reverts back to the non-reporting.

[Anonymous]

To clarify, this is a Juniper / Barclay's Midwest Airlines MasterCard.

Both EQ and EX report a credit limit (in addition to high balance) for this card. I don't think it's the card's fault. As I said above , both TU and EQ returned positive responses to my "missing credit limit" dispute. I'm just confused why TU doesn't show a credit limit even *after* they sent me a letter saying that this was corrected (and showing the TL with the credit limit correctly included). Would calling TU or CCC help? Does it just take some time for this change to fully propagate through TU's system to services like myFICO and truecredit? I got the dispute resolution letter over a week ago, but credit reports pulled even yesterday still don't show a credit limit for the account with TU!

Frustrated...
Bob

[haulingthescoreup]

Sorry, I should have read more closely. I think the majority of members here have frequent problems with TU updating. Is TU behind on any of your other accounts? A week late is nothing unusual for them, I'm afraid.

[Anonymous]

There's nothing else I can see on my CR that TU is behind on, except that the payment status for each account seems to be about 1 month behind EQ and EX (in 3-in-1 reports from privacyguard.com). If it's just that they're slow, I can deal with that, I guess.

I just was worried that they "changed their mind" about including the credit limit in their records. I suppose it's possible that they put a higher priority on responding to disputes than to actually putting the disputed information into their records, since there is a legal requirement on the former, but apparently not on the latter.

[Anonymous]

Okay, now I'm even more confused.

I've been monitoring my TU CR daily using the free trial of TC. The TL in question recently updated coinciding with latest statement for the credit card (and extra month of "OK" activity is shown, the "reported/updated" date changed to April, and the balance changed to the balance from the latest statement), but it *still* does not include the credit limit.

Looking back over TU's dispute resolution letter, I noticed that they list a URL from which to get an updated/corrected CR for free. So, I went to their website and got it. The format of the CR directly from TU is a little different than the format of the CR from TC, but the information contained is identical (including the parts that are incorrect, such as the missing balance). The only time this TL has had the correct information was in TU's dispute resolution letter.

The primary problem seems to be the classification of the account. The CR from TU says the "Account Type" is "Open Account" as opposed to other credit cards accounts on this report that are listed as "Revolving Account". On the CR from TC, the "Type" is "Flexible Spending Credit Card" as opposed to just "Credit Card" for my other credit card accounts. Also, on the TC report, this TL is in a section for "installment accounts". The latest CR I have from myFICO.com (about a month older than the TU and TC CRs) lists the "Account Type" as "Open Account" just like TU CR.

On the dispute resolution letter that included the revised/corrected TL for this account, the "Type" is simply "credit card". Is the problem simply that the account is mis-classified by the CCC? If so, and it is not being considered with my CCs, does that mean that the lack of a balance doesn't hurt me? Does that mean that it doesn't impact revolving utilization and/or that the individual account utilization doesn't impact my FICO score (or impacts it differently)?

I plan on calling TU to see if they can shed any light on the situation, especially why the "correct" information occurred only on the dispute resolution letter, and not anywhere else.

[haulingthescoreup]

Now that this has focused down to a question of getting this type of CC to report properly, I'm moving this over to the Credit Cards forum, where we have some veterans who have fought this war in the past (with mixed results, I'm afraid.) It does sound as though it might be the way that Juniper/Barclay's has coded the card, although why this only happens on TU is beyond me.

Thanks for including the details about the way the card is named on the various reports! That might help.

[Anonymous]

I actually had a similar problem - a card that doesn't report CL. As others mentioned, I got them to report the limit, just to have it disappear at the next update. Finally, I did something crazy. It hurt for a month, but it is an option.

*NOTE: This is not for the faint of heart. It will HURT.

1. I opened a Paypal account. Went through the Full enrollment, including bank account verification.

2. After Paypal was all verified, I sent myself an email to a temporary yahoo account requesting money (as if it was somebody who owed me)

3. "Paid" the amount due to paypal. In my case, I did $10k.

4. Transferred the money from Paypal into my bank, and then to a savings account. Here is where it really hurt:

5. Let the charge hit my reports.

6. Paid the cc in full.

After the next update, my utilization was back down where it should be, and my scores jumped over my original numbers - because the card was reporting $10k high at 0% util. Something to remember: This isn't a free transaction, paypal charges fees for receiving that money

Message Edited by meauho on 04-16-2008 11:48 AM

[athensguy]

If it's not reporting as revolving, but rather Open or Flexible, then it's not going to be factored into utilization anyway. That is the way that it should be reporting, like an Amex charge.