So, back on 5/28 I paid my balances down to $53 out of $16,800, or 0.003% utilization. 0.086% if you include my charge off. All of my accounts were updated to the bureaus by that date.
I received an AA letter from Disco the other day from when I checked pre-qualification, and realized that it was no longer giving utilization reasons for the low score. I remembered I had just gotten some letters for CLI, prequal, and new accounts and they were still showing utilization reasons for low score. The scores on the letters were up to date showing that all of the accounts were reporting almost no balance. The dates of the letters were for the 25th or newer which is after some accounts were already updating a second time after payoff. This means there was about a 30 day delay for the reason codes given for my score.
Just today, Navy reported my EQ9 jumped 63 points and I realized that the last score wasn't reflecting the payoffs from May even though they were reported already. On top of that, you can see that the reason code of balance to limits is still being used even though I only had an increase of $116 on my balances while also adding $4700 to my credit lines.
Anyone else notice this?
The reason codes are instant in time just like scores.
Possible explanations:
- Your score was pulled some other time than it was displayed, Penfed for example has an offset.
- Your score was pulled from a secondary (or tertiary) dataset that isn't updated in real time: Transunion in particular is notorious for this.
There's a bunch of other idiosyncracies when it comes to inserting data, you can see that now with the Experian CMS where they've now started dating alerts from when the lender reported update is, vs. when it appears in the CMS with score and reason code changes which caused more than one post about "delays" here.
Frankly take timing with a big grain of salt unfortunately, the scores and data are accurate from the date and time they pulled but you need to see the representative data to make sense of the scores unfortunately. It sort of sucks frankly, and why I'm such a fan of the Experian CMS in particular as they give you both even with that annoying idiosyncracy on alert date now being different from when it changes things in the report / score data.
@Revelate wrote:The reason codes are instant in time just like scores.
Possible explanations:
- Your score was pulled some other time than it was displayed, Penfed for example has an offset.
- Your score was pulled from a secondary (or tertiary) dataset that isn't updated in real time: Transunion in particular is notorious for this.
There's a bunch of other idiosyncracies when it comes to inserting data, you can see that now with the Experian CMS where they've now started dating alerts from when the lender reported update is, vs. when it appears in the CMS with score and reason code changes which caused more than one post about "delays" here.
Frankly take timing with a big grain of salt unfortunately, the scores and data are accurate from the date and time they pulled but you need to see the representative data to make sense of the scores unfortunately. It sort of sucks frankly, and why I'm such a fan of the Experian CMS in particular as they give you both even with that annoying idiosyncracy on alert date now being different from when it changes things in the report / score data.
This isn't the same as the other threads. My letters show the scores at their highest which means the bureaus were reporting a $53 balance at the time of pull. If that's the case, I shouldn't have a reason code regarding utilization or balances.
@Brian_Earl_Spilner wrote:
@Revelate wrote:The reason codes are instant in time just like scores.
Possible explanations:
- Your score was pulled some other time than it was displayed, Penfed for example has an offset.
- Your score was pulled from a secondary (or tertiary) dataset that isn't updated in real time: Transunion in particular is notorious for this.
There's a bunch of other idiosyncracies when it comes to inserting data, you can see that now with the Experian CMS where they've now started dating alerts from when the lender reported update is, vs. when it appears in the CMS with score and reason code changes which caused more than one post about "delays" here.
Frankly take timing with a big grain of salt unfortunately, the scores and data are accurate from the date and time they pulled but you need to see the representative data to make sense of the scores unfortunately. It sort of sucks frankly, and why I'm such a fan of the Experian CMS in particular as they give you both even with that annoying idiosyncracy on alert date now being different from when it changes things in the report / score data.
This isn't the same as the other threads. My letters show the scores at their highest which means the bureaus were reporting a $53 balance at the time of pull. If that's the case, I shouldn't have a reason code regarding utilization or balances.
I don't know enough about the NFCU CMS but suffice to say I still stand 100% by what I stated earlier regarding timing idiosyncracies.
NFCU in particular in the past has had issues though that was prior to FICO 9 in their provided score IIRC. Something may not be right on theri side but it's not the algorithm: scores and reason codes are instant in time only. Transunion in particular for CMS's don't get updates necessarily at the same time, CK > others for some reason... and the pull taken by NFCU, might indeed have been on an older data set.
Judging by the score jump on the 7/3 report, I'd suggest that is indeed the case, the scores were from an out of date secondary data source.