EX -10, EQ -13 for 1 revolver going > 50% Util.

[Anonymous]

I pulled my scores from CCT tonight and was surprised to see my EX dropped 10 points and my EQ 13 points.  Nothing should have changed.  In looking through all of my accounts, I see the issue was that Citi reported mid-cycle (on the 16th) and I had a balance of $4030 on a $7300 limit, or 56% utilization.  This morning I paid that $4030 balance down to $1.00, so next week when I re-pull my scores from CCT no doubt they'll return to where they were. 

I've been working with the Citi EO on getting my account to report to TU (which it still hasn't) and no doubt them trying to get it report resulted in them reporting to EX/EQ mid-cycle.  Clearly, they still aren't able to get it to show up on my TU report.  It was interesting to get this scoring data point out of the deal, though.

Oh, and aggregate utilization wise I went from 2% to 4% with that Citi balance reporting so high, so the only reason for the score decrease was based on that individual trade line above 50%.  I kind of wish it did report to TU, though, as it would have been interesting to see what kind of score drop I got there since it's the only bureau I'm dirty on.

And, for comparison purposes, my EQ VS 3.0 score dropped 23 points, so 10 more than my EQ FICO 08.

[jbh]

How long have you had this card that refuses to report to T.U? 

[Anonymous]

About 5 months.  I already know what the issue is.  It's the suffix on my name.  "V" isn't all that common and it seems to give some creditors issues.  I had the same problem with Amex where my account didn't show up from them until they dropped the suffix off of my name, then it reported the next cycle.  I imagine that's the same thing Citi is going to have to do.  What I don't get, though, is that my name is represented BOTH ways on my credit reports... both with and without the suffix.  You'd think based on that it wouldn't matter how the creditor represents my name, but for some reason with some creditors it does. 

[jbh]

I think this is a classic case of CRA law #1 - make the customer miserable.

if you have a positive tradeline, we'll take our sweet time to report it. If you have an identify theif steal your social, update the report with a Klingon name and max out a card on your behalf, don't you worry, that shiny chargeoff will be waiting for you the next day.

[Anonymous]

Hi BBS.  Do you have any similar test data for individual util of 29%?

I.e. going from all cards at < 8.9% to exactly one card at > 30%?  (But with a very low total util in both cases.)

[Anonymous]

Unfortunately no.  If it weren't for Citi doing a surprise mid-cycle reporting this month I would have never had the unique opportunity to get this one data point, as I never let any single card report over 5% utilization or so.  I was going to play around with a low limit card as you and I discussed probably back in late 2016, but the card in question actually ended up getting a CLI to $10k.  Had it stayed at $4k I was going to CLD it to $500, but the creditor gave me a more comfortable limit resulting in me giving up on that idea.