I have 2 reports within a couple months of each other. Both have 3 inq factoring in to my score.
Checking that second page on both reports..."Understanding your FICO Score":
1st report 8/16/09...score 683...NO mention of inq's hurting me.
2nd report 10/18/09...666...mentions recently seeking credit!
Why is this suddenly a factor in my FICO, when on that last reportit wasn't an issue???
GGRRRRRRRRRR...this ticks me off!!! 
Did your AAoA or longest history go up a year? Did your reports suddenly get cleaner? (last derog fell off, etc.)
It almost sounds like a rebucketing, where you're dinged for things because you're among more conservative credit peers.
TU seems to have stopped reporting lates that are over 2 years old, so they now think that I'm in the clean history, silly them. My score dropped as a result.
It's now listing "too many accounts paid as agreed" (24 total of all types, of which 15 are open.) I've never had that ding before. Before it was "missed payments" (1 account.)
And no, it's not "too many accounts with balances", it's "too many accounts paid as agreed."
As Roseanne Roseannadanna used to say, "It's always something!"
It almost sounds like a rebucketing, where you're dinged for things because you're among more conservative credit peers.
TU seems to have stopped reporting lates that are over 2 years old, so they now think that I'm in the clean history, silly them. My score dropped as a result.
It's now listing "too many accounts paid as agreed" (24 total of all types, of which 15 are open.) I've never had that ding before. Before it was "missed payments" (1 account.)And no, it's not "too many accounts with balances", it's "too many accounts paid as agreed."
As Roseanne Roseannadanna used to say, "It's always something!"
Well...here's the lowdown:
1st page...683 shows length of history "not good"----- 666 shows "good" (guess I didn't notice that part! 
)
I have 2 cc's that were opened in OCT of '05 & '06, so on the 666 report from october this year, those 2 accts went to ages of 4 and 3 years from 3 & 2 yrs on the 683 report from August.
I knew the 1 year mark made a difference, but does every consecutive year bump you a bit as well??
Page 2 ...on the 683 report, my history was 11 yrs 11 mos with AAoA being 3 years.
the 666 report shows history as 12 yrs 1 mo....aaoa is still 3 yrs
683 report shows most recent late...4 yrs 11 mos ago
666.....5 yrs 1 mo.
Would the age of lates & history bump me to the next bucket??
@MarineVietVet wrote:"too many accounts paid as agreed"
How DARE you pay all those accounts like you're supposed to!!!
I expect you to start skipping a few payments next month.
hehehe...no kidding! Get back into this lower bucket with the rest of us!!! 
BungalowMo wrote:
Well...here's the lowdown:
1st page...683 shows length of history "not good"----- 666 shows "good" (guess I didn't notice that part!
I have 2 cc's that were opened in OCT of '05 & '06, so on the 666 report from october this year, those 2 accts went to ages of 4 and 3 years from 3 & 2 yrs on the 683 report from August.
I knew the 1 year mark made a difference, but does every consecutive year bump you a bit as well??
Page 2 ...on the 683 report, my history was 11 yrs 11 mos with AAoA being 3 years.
the 666 report shows history as 12 yrs 1 mo....aaoa is still 3 yrs
683 report shows most recent late...4 yrs 11 mos ago
666.....5 yrs 1 mo.
Would the age of lates & history bump me to the next bucket??
I think that's what did it --longest history hitting 12 years. That's one of the age breaks that we * think * we have identified as a bucket change.
You're now compared to others who've had credit longer, and theirs is a bit cleaner on the average.
Cheer up, once you're in a new bucket, you can improve relatively quickly.
@haulingthescoreup wrote:
I think that's what did it --longest history hitting 12 years. That's one of the age breaks that we * think * we have identified as a bucket change.
You're now compared to others who've had credit longer, and theirs is a bit cleaner on the average.
Cheer up, once you're in a new bucket, you can improve relatively quickly.
I totally agree that the new bucket is a good thing! I just said the same thing to another member here. They lost the last collection & got a score drop...I told them to grab a buddy & have a cold one!
@AndySoCal wrote:The reason code you cite in your response And no, it's not "too many accounts with balances", it's "too many accounts paid as agreed." Did not make any sense so I did a little investigating. Does this happen to bee reason code 19 from Trans Union or 27 from Equifax? If so there is a type somewhere the reason should say "Too few accounts currently paid as agreed". The reason does not mean what you might think it does. So the link below is to article that helps explain it better than I can.
http://www.experian.com/ask_max/max041807d.html
I hope this helps
Andy....who was this response for?? I believe you got my comments & those of "hauling" mixed together. Mine shows too many accts w/balances & hauling had too many accts paid as agreed.
That link for Experian... a non issue since we can no longet purchase FICO reports for EX. Also, neither of our reports show "too few accts paid as agreed". We're both fine on that.