If only it were this easy

[DaYooper]

I though this was a bit strange because this screenshot depicts the inquiry made the credit score go up 51 points. Where in reality, there were a number of late payments removed that caused this.

Of course I could not have said anything and let you scratch your head over this one.

[Anonymous]

---

@DaYooper wrote:

I though this was a bit strange because this screenshot depicts the inquiry made the credit score go up 51 points. Where in reality, there were a number of late payments removed that caused this.

Of course I could not have said anything and let you scratch your head over this one.

---

Yeah, CMS love to trick you. They aren't very smart. They just comine whatever change they have in front of them as the cause of a coinciding score change. Then in a few days you will get "lates removed" and 0 score change lol

[OmarGB9]

Yea it's not the inquiry itself that gave you points, it's just the inquiry that triggered an update which promptly pulled a higher score due to lates being removed. Same would happen with FICO, though probably not nearly as many points. lol

[DaYooper]

---

@OmarGB9 wrote:

Yea it's not the inquiry itself that gave you points, it's just the inquiry that triggered an update which promptly pulled a higher score due to lates being removed. Same would happen with FICO, though probably not nearly as many points. lol

---

The lates being removed only brought the FICO up 16pts. Perhaps it's because I have one very old derog (6.5 years) that CK is not picking up.

[OmarGB9]

---

@DaYooper wrote:

---

@OmarGB9 wrote:

Yea it's not the inquiry itself that gave you points, it's just the inquiry that triggered an update which promptly pulled a higher score due to lates being removed. Same would happen with FICO, though probably not nearly as many points. lol

---

The lates being removed only brought the FICO up 16pts. Perhaps it's because I have one very old derog (6.5 years) that CK is not picking up.

---

Yea that'll hold you back, especially if it's still unpaid/updating monthly.

[daveg38]

CK is marketing. The reports they pull are often factually incorrect by leaps and bounds.

They show I have 26 inquiries on EQ, even after an update due to an inquiry on TU. I, in fact, have 0.

They show I have an AAoA on TU of 4 months. I, in fact, have an AAoA of 4.6 years.

It's insane.

[Anonymous]

---

@daveg38 wrote:

CK is marketing. The reports they pull are often factually incorrect by leaps and bounds.

They show I have 26 inquiries on EQ, even after an update due to an inquiry on TU. I, in fact, have 0.

They show I have an AAoA on TU of 4 months. I, in fact, have an AAoA of 4.6 years.

It's insane.

---

Well, Vantage scores are calculated mych different than Fico Scores.

My Fico AAoA is like 7-8 years, but Vantage is only 8 months. Both are correct. Vantage only factors in open accounts, which is why they often recommend closing umwanted accounts. This does nothing for Fico scores, though, as Fico considers both open and closed accounts.

Not sure about the inquiries issue and I vould be totally wrong about your situation, but that is how it played out for me.

[OmarGB9]

---

@daveg38 wrote:

CK is marketing. The reports they pull are often factually incorrect by leaps and bounds.

They show I have 26 inquiries on EQ, even after an update due to an inquiry on TU. I, in fact, have 0.

They show I have an AAoA on TU of 4 months. I, in fact, have an AAoA of 4.6 years.

It's insane.

---

Their reports aren't usually incorrect, at least as far as the info on them. The reason your AAoA is different is because CK doesn't consider closed accounts while FICO does.

Not sure why the inquiries are wrong though. I'd double check that.