Alerts unrelated to provided score changes

[SouthJamaica]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Hello Cindy, just checking in again as it's been several more months and it doesn't appear anything has changed.  There are still a ton of confused members over the Fico scoring section of the forum that wrongfully believe that things like paying down utilization lowers their Fico scores due to the way the alerts are being presented by the MF product.  I've had to spend a good amount of time today posting to better inform them, something that should be fixed at the source. 

---

I agree wholeheartedly @Anonymous . I would really appreciate it if @Cindy_FICO  could get the powers that be to correct this error. So many people are misled and confused by the wording of the alerts. Not a day goes by without people asking why reducing their utilization caused a score decrease, or wondering at how a new inquiry caused their score to rise rather than fall. It's ridiculous.

[Anonymous]

^^^ agreed with both BBS and SJ. A fix is long overdue.

[Cindy_FICO]

We added a "learn more" link to direct users to our explanation - http://myfico.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/520

[GApeachy]

---

@Cindy_FICO wrote:

We added a "learn more" link to direct users to our explanation - http://myfico.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/520

---

LOl, where's the "learn more" link?

 ok, okay..jeez.

"dashboard" go to "more" go to "support" scroll down to 6 pages of questions.  Then just look for it, quite the long title........

Why not just put that very important link in the Alerts Header?  Don't bury it in with the other 6 pages of fyi links.

Edit: btw, as more fyi is added this useful link will be buried even further back.  page 2, then 3 and so on.

[Anonymous]

---

@Cindy_FICO wrote:

We added a "learn more" link to direct users to our explanation - http://myfico.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/520

---

The "learn more" link isn't serving its purpose, as there has been zero reduction in the amount of threads we're seeing in the scoring section from people confused still thinking that the alert and score change must be related.  The information should be easily seen, in your face at the time the alert/score is provided, not buried elsewhere where one must click something else to see the disclaimer.  It seems that members don't feel they need to "learn more" and aren't clicking the link.  I'm not understanding why this is being made more difficult than it needs to be... the disclaimer should be seen first thing when the alert and score are presented.

[GApeachy]

---

@Cindy_FICO wrote:

We added a "learn more" link to direct users to our explanation - http://myfico.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/520

---

I'm sending you a screenshot of something; hope you see this soon.

[Anonymous]

It should be literally right beneath the numerals of the score, not buried at a link inside a double layer of “self-help” menus. This truly is “front and center” info that people need.

MyFICO needs to understand that credit stresses people in general enough all on its own without them panicking because they think that paying off a balance cost them 15 points simply because the alert coincided. Most people don’t even know there’s a difference between FICO and VantageScore, let alone understand the scoring nuances and what does or doesn’t affect one’s score.

3B subscriptions aren’t cheap, and putting out a product that is in ways doing a disservice to people paying good money is something that should change for the benefit of all parties. It’s much easier for us, as heavy-traffic forum users, to recommend a product that serves its customers clearly and concisely.

[GApeachy]

---

@Cindy_FICO wrote:

We added a "learn more" link to direct users to our explanation - http://myfico.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/520

---

Can you throw this *question worded in different ways to IT?  Websites, like ppl,  need to be flexible to work.....

1. The link was unknown to all us REGULARS; think it needs more exposure?

2. If WE, the ones sitting here waiting for a resolution,  didn't know about this link; why would a newbie know to search high and yonder?

3. Why is searching for answers a good idea; why not embed to Alerts?

4. So who's gonna tell them where to look for the link AFTER they ask another "why" question?

*Don't you reckon that since you had to point out the "link" to us that perhaps a more obivous place is needed?

[GApeachy]

---

@GApeachy wrote:

---

@Cindy_FICO wrote:

We added a "learn more" link to direct users to our explanation - http://myfico.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/520

---

Can you throw this *question worded in different ways to IT?  Websites, like ppl,  need to be flexible to work.....

1. The link was unknown to all us REGULARS; think it needs more exposure?

2. If WE, the ones sitting here waiting for a resolution,  didn't know about this link; why would a newbie know to search high and yonder?

3. Why is searching for answers a good idea; why not embed to Alerts?

4. So who's gonna tell them where to look for the link AFTER they ask another "why" question?

*Don't you reckon that since you had to point out the "link" to us that perhaps a more obivous place is needed?

---

Kind of odd to separate the main question from the main idea isn't it?  That's how I feel about the link placement...it's in an odd place. Gotta read through a lot to find the answer.

[Anonymous]

Sometimes the question isn't "why not?" but rather "why?"

What I mean is all of us are talking about why there shouldn't be a link, that the disclaimer/notice should be presented front and center without having to dig.  I'm trying to see this from another angle/the other side and I honestly can't come up with one good reason "why" there would be a link or need to bury the answer in a more difficult place to find.

Cindy or anyone else that has a hand in this, can you tell me one good reason why one would make it more difficult to pass along the information that quite clearly needs to get disclosed?  I'm not asking to be argumentative, but rather truly trying to understand why this revision in its current state was even made?