@Anonymous wrote:@Revelate wrote:
That's a handy bureau to not have it on as a lot of CU's are EQ only. How bad are your lates and from when?
Yup it's a big consolation. I have a 30 and a 60 back to back for the months of Aug and Sep 2015 on an installment auto loan that was PIF Jun 2016.
This remark is #1 for every FICO version on both TU and EX: "You have a serious delinquency (60 days past due or greater) or derogatory indicator on your credit report."
This other remark varies in position but it's also present on many versions on both TU and EX as well: "You recently missed a payment or had a derogatory indicator reported on your credit report."
The other remarks are AAoA and Util related, at which point does a new account stop triggering this remark? "You opened a new credit account relatively recently."
Thanks!
The first one is just the interpretation of one's report rather than reason codes... which infuriates the hell out of me but what can we do.
The second part aligns with mine and <2 years, would be interested to know if changes with time; I know I will be watching my own 10/15 late closely at the 2 year mark.
How long ago did you last open an account for the third one? Disccussion that it's 2 years but could be less than that as I don't know that we ever got a quorum of data... also which set of scores did you see that on?
@Anonymous wrote:Data points regarding comments about scores being held back due to higher lates. In 2013, I have a couple of 90 + 120 lates on my mortgage (dates strung out while we worked out a loan mod with Chase). All my scores are now 760 plus - these are Fico 08 scores. Fico 04's are less forgiving runnung 30 pts lower and my 09's are about the same.
There is hope your scroes can recover quite nicely before the 7 year mark.
For data purposes, what's your AAOA / oldest tradeline / inquiry count and if you're feeling up to it in addition installment utilization? 
I think I might've been able to hit near 760-765 back with a tax lien and 30/60 day late nearing the exclusion mark if the mortgage hadn't hosed my installment utilization and I were clean on inquiries, but sadly haven't been able to get above 740 as a result of short history combined with some awkwardness on my file in addition to the derogatory marks.
I got two mortgage scores to 730 during my mortgage app mid 2015, recently TU 04 jumped to 742, but that's as far as it's gotten: EQ 5 and now EX v2 / v3 all hate me currently.
I added 4 new accounts since Jan so my average is 7+yrs. It was around 10-11, I believe before the new accounts.
Oldest account is 17 yrs - will be 18 in July. Util is 9-11% depending on how items are reporting. Inq are 8-10 on each CR - half of those were from car shopping in 2015 and due to fall off in Aug.
BBS - Highest Fico 08 I have had since 2013 was 4/17 when my Eq hit 771. Will be interesting to see if it goes any higher.
@RobertEG wrote:Back in the day, when Fair Isaac was holding regular webinars staffed by their reps, it was stated numerous times that the FICO algorithm differentiates between major and minor delinquencies, with 90+ considered major.
Major delinquencies can be used to place a consumer in a less favorable scoring category ("bucket") in addition to having greater negative scoring impact.
While the specifics, such as whether the impact becomes nill for minor delinquencies after 1 or 2 years, have not been disclosed by Fair Isaac, years of anecdotal postings seem to confirm the general statement that indvidual 30-lates lose most of their impact after year, and that 60-lates lose most of their impact after approx 2 years.
Unstated, at least to my knowledge, is whether the presence of multiple minor delinquencies is considered as also triggering rebucketing of scoring to a less favorable scorecard. I would assume so, but have never seen an official pronouncement from Fair Isaac as to that proprietary scoring factor.
The key thing is whether even a minor deliquency late rebuckets you or not: my assertion based on a 6 year old 60D late and the associated reason codes and scores, is it does. I should sort of be able to hand-wave confirm that (well maybe, have to count inquiries up from that time vs. now) if I land north of 756 on EX FICO 8 when my tax lien is deleted in a couple of months... I'm expecting 780.
The FICO marketing arm doesn't have access to the precise algorithm and never did, and comparitively we've only recently gotten access to the reason codes, and a lot of data over time if not rigorously tracked is a bit suspect and aging factors are notoriously hard to pin down when people's files aren't held constant.
I don't know, I am all for conventional wisdom but when reason codes suggest otherwise I have a hard time supporting it, and there's been several such examples where the old information was unfortunately wrong or otherwise incomplete.