Scores so different in points

[Anonymous]

Is it normal to have my Fico scores so different.  The lender pulled my report and it shows

TU 630

EX 620

EQ 579

Why is my EQ score so much lower.  Also when I pulled my myfico.com my scores were :  TU 597 EX ? EQ 579  Why are my TU scores so much higher ? 

[Lel]

I think you'll find the answer to your questions in this detailed reply to a prior post of yours:

http://ficoforums.myfico.com/fico/board/message?board.id=ficoscoring&thread.id=41430

In a nutshell:

Different credit bureaus have different formulas to calculate FICO scores. 

With regard to TU, there are two different versions of TU being used.  Here, you get the TU 98 version.  Many (if not most) lenders use TU 04.

There may be differences in the content of your credit reports at each bureau.  Not every creditor reports to all 3 bureaus.

[haulingthescoreup]

---

Beth99 wrote:

Is it normal to have my Fico scores so different.  The lender pulled my report and it shows

TU 630

EX 620

EQ 579

Why is my EQ score so much lower.  Also when I pulled my myfico.com my scores were :  TU 597 EX ? EQ 579  Why are my TU scores so much higher ? 

---

Did your lender give you copies of your reports? If so, do they have negative scoring factors on them? Since these reports were used to pull FICO scores, these should be FICO scoring factors. Compare the negatives and the order in which they appear. It's very common to have these in different order, indicating the different ways that they affect the 3 FICO scores.

[Anonymous]

Along the same lines.  I paid for my scores both from MyFICO and directly from Experian and Equifax, as I wanted to be aware of any differences when I went looking for good interest rates to refi my home.  But it did no good, since the scores received by lenders were anywhere from 50-100 points less than all the ones I received (Irec'd all high 700s).  The information was all the same, nothing ever late, nothing negative.  I have a bunch of credit cards, though I had started closing old, unused ones, until I was told it was lowering my scores.  However, the comments on the lenders report (while they showed everything paid as agreed) were:

EQUIFAX/FACTA BEACON 5.0 - SCORE: 757
00010 - PROPORTION OF BALANCES TO CREDIT LIMITS IS TOO HIGH ON BANK REVOLVING OR OTHER REVOLVING ACCOUNTS
00030 - TIME SINCE MOST RECENT ACCOUNT OPENING IS TOO SHORT – Most recent opening was last year, but have some 20 years old
00009 - TOO MANY ACCOUNTS RECENTLY OPENED  - I’ve only opened 1 LOC, 1 credit card in the last year.  
00023 - NUMBER OF BANK OR NATIONAL REVOLVING ACCOUNTS WITH BALANCES  There’s only my Line of Credit and a credit card I haven’t paid off yet because it has 0% apr.

TRANSUNION/FICO CLASSIC (04) -SCORE: 672
040 - DEROGATORY PUBLIC RECORD OR COLLECTION FILED  -  This is only a $65 error by AAA that they won’t discuss and the collection agency won’t remove, even if paid.  And it shows as “in dispute” on all my reports.

010 - PROPORTION OF BALANCES TO CREDIT LIMITS IS TOO HIGH ON BANK REVOLVING OR OTHER REVOLVING ACCOUNTS – The LOC has a $17Kbal. on $20K limit, and credit card is 6K bal on 10K limit.  I haven't paid off CC because it has 0 interest.

 020 - LENGTH OF TIME SINCE DEROGATORY PUBLIC RECORD OR COLLECTION IS TOO SHORT – it will be there forever.  This agency is just wants to be ugly.  But it's only $65 and the only derogatory in a 30 year history.
008 - TOO MANY INQUIRIES LAST 12 MONTHS  - I have no control over this, and how many is TOO many? My report shows 5 each at two agencies and 8 at another, however 2 at each are me inquiring about me.  Once at each last year and once at each today.  Others are banks where I currently have accounts, who check regularly. 
FA - INQUIRIES IMPACTED THE CREDIT SCORE  - Same as above

EXPERIAN/FAIR, ISAAC (VER. 2) - SCORE: 726
10 - PROPORTION OF BALANCE TO HIGH CREDIT ON BANK REVOLVING OR ALL REVOLVING ACCOUNTS
08 - TOO MANY INQUIRIES LAST 12 MONTHS  I have no control over inquiries.  Same as above.
09 - TOO MANY ACCOUNTS RECENTLY OPENED  - I’ve only opened one this year.

06 - TOO MANY CONSUMER FINANCE COMPANY ACCOUNTS  -  Does this mean my mortgage?  I haven’t financed anything else in years.  My car was paid off 6 years ago.

What can I do to change these seemingly arbitrary factors used by banks to judge.  I have 40 pages of accounts over 30 years, all show paid, on time.  What do they want?

Message Edited by llecs on 09-24-2009 12:20 PM

[llecs]

---

droog wrote:

Along the same lines.  I paid for my scores both from MyFICO and directly from Experian and Equifax, as I wanted to be aware of any differences when I went looking for good interest rates to refi my home.  But it did no good, since the scores received by lenders were anywhere from 50-100 points less than all the ones I received (Irec'd all high 700s).  The information was all the same, nothing ever late, nothing negative.  I have a bunch of credit cards, though I had started closing old, unused ones, until I was told it was lowering my scores.

---

The score pulled directly from Equifax, myFICO, and your lender should have matched perfectly, if you pulled all 3 on the same day. All 3 use FICO's Beacon 5.0. FICO scores can change daily, so if you pulled on different days, then they may not match.

The TU scores would not have matched. You lender pulled a newer version of your TU FICO score called TU04. MyFICO offers TU98. TU's website does sell scores, but they are not FICO scores.

Unfortunately as of last February, it is impossible to pull your own EX FICO score and you can't pull your EX FICO score from anywhere. You can and did receive it from your lender though. The score sold on Experian's website is not a FICO score.

Per the reason codes, lenders and FICO don't like to see new accounts. Anything opened within the past year will continue to hurt your score, though it lessens with time. Despite having a 0% offer, utilization plays a big part in scoring, though it looks like it isn't too bad since it is listed as #4. To improve your score, get all but one CC and your LOC to report $0, with the remaing one to report a balance of less than 9%. Per the collection, ask this in the Rebuilding Your Credit section. They can give specific advice on how to take care of it and get it removed. Per the inquiries, ideally 1 or 2 max are ideal. Typically, opening a new bank account will result in an inquiry. PEr the consumer finance account, ignore it. There's nothing you can do and the score impact is super tiny at best. Lenders score consumer finance loans on equal par with payday loans. While you may not have one, accounts from lenders like CitiFinancial, Wells Fargo Financial, and others will continue to produce that message even after the account is closed and paid.

[Anonymous]

Thank you for the information.  I now distrust credit bureaus even more and financial institutions for making them all powerful.  I paid a fee to Experian to get my "FICO" score, not just the report, so I don't know how they can take the money and send you something else.  As for your advice to "get all but one CC and your LOC to report $0..." I only have one CC with a balance and my LOC.  I had to have foundation work last year and those companies don't let you pay on a plan.  They will refer you to a bank they have a relationship with, but the interest will be more than if you find one on your own.  I will often have one new CC a year, as when I have a large purchase (like furnace, new fence, home repair) that I know I will not be able to pay off for a year or more, I open an account offering 0% interest.  If I can't pay it all off before that interest jumps to 21% I simply open another one and transfer the balance.  The 3% fee is always much less than the new inflated interest would be.  So, how can they judge me negatively for saving interest. 

Also, why do these same derogatory factors not impact the score I get as a consumer, and why can't I get the same score a potential lender will get for me.  I would not apply for something if I knew they would have a lower score, thus raising the interest I would have to pay, and would not now have yet another inquiry on my report.  It's like the government is letting the financial world stack the deck against the consumer, regardless of your ability to pay.

I have 30 years of flawless paying history, never late, never delinquent, yet I get lower scores than I'd like to qualify for better interest.  My scores are no better than people with occasional late payments and a judgment or two.  So frustrating that lenders are so impersonal and go only by some obscure formula.

[llecs]

---

droog wrote:

Thank you for the information.  I now distrust credit bureaus even more and financial institutions for making them all powerful.  I paid a fee to Experian to get my "FICO" score, not just the report, so I don't know how they can take the money and send you something else.  As for your advice to "get all but one CC and your LOC to report $0..." I only have one CC with a balance and my LOC.  I had to have foundation work last year and those companies don't let you pay on a plan.  They will refer you to a bank they have a relationship with, but the interest will be more than if you find one on your own.  I will often have one new CC a year, as when I have a large purchase (like furnace, new fence, home repair) that I know I will not be able to pay off for a year or more, I open an account offering 0% interest.  If I can't pay it all off before that interest jumps to 21% I simply open another one and transfer the balance.  The 3% fee is always much less than the new inflated interest would be.  So, how can they judge me negatively for saving interest. 

Also, why do these same derogatory factors not impact the score I get as a consumer, and why can't I get the same score a potential lender will get for me.  I would not apply for something if I knew they would have a lower score, thus raising the interest I would have to pay, and would not now have yet another inquiry on my report.  It's like the government is letting the financial world stack the deck against the consumer, regardless of your ability to pay.

I have 30 years of flawless paying history, never late, never delinquent, yet I get lower scores than I'd like to qualify for better interest.  My scores are no better than people with occasional late payments and a judgment or two.  So frustrating that lenders are so impersonal and go only by some obscure formula.

---

Experian sells credit scores, but their own branded score, VantageScore or PLUS. These scores are generally not used by lenders due to being an unstable predictor of credit risk. Experian won't touch a FICO score because they spent so much time, money, and energy into creating the VantageScore. They are trying to compete with and capture business away from FICO. In fact, myFICO.com used to sell the Experian FICO score. They ended the contract with FICO and disallowed consumers to purchase their FICO score ever again. Despite that, lenders still use a FICO score w/ Experian at application time. Check the source for your scores. While you can't get your EX FICO score from Experian, there are some lender-type companies out there that allow you to see your EX FICO score at the cost of an inquiry.

Utilization is a big part of FICO scoring (about one-third). Lenders like to see how much credit you are using in relation to the total credit limit available. Lenders also factor in your Debt-to-income ratio. This isn't a part of FICO scoring, but lenders like to see how much money is committed monthly out of your budget to paying off debt. The higher the balances (even w/ 0% offers), the higher the financial burden and the less likely a borrower can repay a major debt, like a home mortgage. Now FICO isn't everything. I also have some 0% deals I'm paying on too. You always have to weigh the risk of a higher interest rate for a home in relation to the amount of savings you have for your 0% deal that you would have had to pay out if your rate was 15%, 20%, 25%, etc. for that deal. Since interest is deductible on a home and the interest you would have paid on the 0% had it not been at 0% is not deductible, then it become a no-brainer. At least my thoughts anyway.

As mentioned, the Equifax score you have from the lender is the same score pulled from here. Scores can change daily and that could be the source of difference. Unfortunately, we can't pull our TU04 score from anywhere. It would be great if FICO sold that. I'd buy it. Finally, we can't buy our EX FICO, but that was Experian's decision.

That collection is really dragging your TU score down. I'd be you'd see 40-70 points if removed. Lenders get jittery with collections reporting. They think that there's a possibility you can do that to them too. Talk to your lender. BTW, lenders factor in the mid-score, not all 3. Your mid-score is in the 720s, and that will qualify you for a great score. They may ask you to take care of the collection, though.

[Anonymous]

Thank you.  Once again, your information is very helpful.  Unfortunately, the collection will not go away for however many years it's allowed to be there, even if I paid it, which I'm not inclined to do.  I sold an 18 year old car and the guy who bought it found an old AAA card, which had expired a couple months earlier.  He called a locksmith and used my number, name, and phone number.  AAA did not call me, did not get renewal payment, and did not ask for ID when service was provided.  They did send me a bill for $65 because my membership was expired at the time of service, and they called it a "courtesy".  I contacted them for months, sent proof that the car had been sold to someone else, and suggested that they were liable for not doing their due diligence in either asking for credit card at time of call or ID at time of service.  In my mind, if the membership is expired, I am not liable for the incompetence in letting a thief use it.  I let it expire for a reason.  I never used AAA and didn't want to.  They never responded and suddenly I was contacted by a collection agency.  I sent them everything I had sent AAA and explained the situation, but they did not respond either, except to continue demanding payment.   AAA says they can do nothing once it is in the hands of the collection agency, and when I called the agency to discuss it, they were loud, rude and insulting and told me they would ruin my credit if I didn't do what they said.  I didn't think 30 years and hundreds of thousands of dollars of excellent credit cold be ruined over $65.  Sane people would know it was some minor dispute.  They said if I didn't pay them then, plus additional fees they added, then they would NEVER remove it, even if I decided to pay.  I didn't whip out my credit card for them and when I spoke to them recently, they said they didn't care if I paid or not, it would follow me forever!  Consequently, I don't see the point in paying it.     That's the kind of thing that I think lenders should use their common sense about.  If I have $200,000 worth of credit available, and have always paid on time, as agreed, why would I default on a mere $65.  If I'm going to stiff someone, it's going to be for bigger bucks than that.  However, they seem to give more credence to that than all the other bills I pay each month, anyone of which is more than that.   Anyway, long story to let you know the kind of shyster agencies that are out there, and how they can affect an honest person, because the financial industry lets them.  Thanks, again for your insights. 

[RobertEG]

While credit REPORTING is strongly regulated by the FCRA, credit SCORING is virtually unregulated.

Each CRA does two basic things.  First, they purchase the rights to use a scoring algorithm generated by Fair Isaac Corp, and scores they generate from that licensed algoithm can then be labeled as a FICO score.  But each CRA licenses its own, custom version from Fair Isac, so even with identical credit data at each CRA, which is rare, you will still get a different FICO score from each.  The CRAs have also produced their own algorithms, which they market, but cannot market as FICO scores.  Some call these FAKO scores.

Even if you are getting a true FICO score, FICO also produces and licenses different algorithms to each CRA that are industry-specfic.  In addition to the standard version, they market algorithms that are, for example, auto-industry focused and mortgage-industry specific.  A lendor can then, when requesting a FICO score from the CRA, ask for the version that they think is the most predictive for their specific lending industry.

Fair Isaac has stated that they market around a dozen different algorithms, and these update.  Add to that the non-FICO scoring schemes, and you have dozens of different algorithms floating around.

You would have to know what scoring algorithm a lendor has used before you can make ANY comparison of credit scores.  And they dont tell you that, other than whether or not it was a FICO based score, which still does not tell you a lot.

Bottom line, the consumer is out in the cold, and consistency between scores you get is virtually non-existent.