No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
@Anonymous wrote:That is just how the Transunion alerts come in, without too much detail. The TU alerts I've received have either reflected a change in balances, or a score change with a list of factors. The alerts for the other bureaus are more detailed but sometimes the event triggering the alert is not the event that caused the score change. None of the detailed explanations of myFICO alerts that I have received from any of the bureau have related to the absence of an account, only to changes to accounts still on the file.
(It seems that the technology for generating the alerts is proprietary to the individual credit bureaus -- not myFICO -- and each one uses a different system.)
As other posters have suggested, a careful look at the whole TU credit file is the best way to pin down the cause. If you have an older TU report saved or in hardcopy you can do a before-and-after comparison. In addition to a free weekly TU report from creditkarma.com, you can get the TU report weekly from mybankrate.com at no charge. If you are a Capital One cardholder you can also access it weekly through their free CreditWise service... if you sign up for all three and stagger them throughout the week you can have a look at your TU report roughly every other day while you are in the application process. You can also pull the full disclosure for each bureau for free once a year at the government mandated site, annualcreditreport.com.
If this is inconvenient, or you are unable to readliy locate the needle in the haystack of credit data, you might be able to infer a bit by comparing the last TransUnion score alert to this one. The score alerts come with a list of the factors inhibiting your score, and by comparing these factors and the order they appear in the two alerts, you just might be able to deduce the type of change affecting the score.
Good luck with your scores.
That's a very good point you make about the list of factors inhibiting your score.
When I tried my little experiment of letting all revolving balances report at zero, I got a TU score decrease notice, and hidden away in the 'factors' is one I've never seen before: "No recent bank/national revolving balances".
"No recent revolving balances" is probably the most common reason for a sudden 15-20 point drop, but that term is sort of BS when you think about it...
It should read, "No CURRENT revolving balances..."
"Recent" is a subjective term, but I think most would consider a revolving balance any time in the last few weeks or even month to be "recent" by most standards. Since utilization is based on only a moment in time, one could have a revolving balance yesterday that was paid off and reports zero today, then the person pulls their scores today and gets the "no recent revolving balances" reason code because at this exact moment in time they don't have a reported revolving balance. Is 24 hours ago not "recent?" Sounds like BS to me, so IMO the reason code should replace the word "recent" with "current" because that's what it really means.
@Anonymous wrote:"No recent revolving balances" is probably the most common reason for a sudden 15-20 point drop, but that term is sort of BS when you think about it...
It should read, "No CURRENT revolving balances..."
"Recent" is a subjective term, but I think most would consider a revolving balance any time in the last few weeks or even month to be "recent" by most standards. Since utilization is based on only a moment in time, one could have a revolving balance yesterday that was paid off and reports zero today, then the person pulls their scores today and gets the "no recent revolving balances" reason code because at this exact moment in time they don't have a reported revolving balance. Is 24 hours ago not "recent?" Sounds like BS to me, so IMO the reason code should replace the word "recent" with "current" because that's what it really means.
I mean, it's only reflective of when it was last updated by your creditors. You may 'currently' have a balance, but the CRAs don't know that. You 'recently' had it reported as 0, though.
It doesn't say "reported" though. That's not part of the language.
It says, "No recent revolving credit card use" for example. "Reported" is not part of that. Furthermore, the vast majority of the population doesn't understand a reported balance verses a balance. I think most people that aren't credit-savvy would assume that whatever their balance is at that moment in time is what impacts their score and they don't even consider what is reported. Most probably don't even get that a balance is reported monthly. You could very well have had revolving credit card use, even 24 hours ago which is certainly "recent" but the reason codes don't suggest that.
I simply feel that the language needs to be cleared up / cleaned up a bit as to not confuse or misdirect people.
@Anonymous wrote:It doesn't say "reported" though. That's not part of the language.
It says, "No recent revolving credit card use" for example. "Reported" is not part of that. Furthermore, the vast majority of the population doesn't understand a reported balance verses a balance. I think most people that aren't credit-savvy would assume that whatever their balance is at that moment in time is what impacts their score and they don't even consider what is reported. Most probably don't even get that a balance is reported monthly. You could very well have had revolving credit card use, even 24 hours ago which is certainly "recent" but the reason codes don't suggest that.
I simply feel that the language needs to be cleared up / cleaned up a bit as to not confuse or misdirect people.
I was just disagreeing that 'current' is more correct than 'recent'. Agree that most of their reason codes need editing, though.
The true language should state "no current reported revolving balances." "Recent" is a completely meaningless term.