ShootingFor750

No Credit-Limit Visa Signature and FICO scores

Recommended Posts

I just recently received the Chase Freedom Visa Signature and was excited I got approved for that, but now I'm wondering how it'll effect my FICO scores. I do NOT want them to drop 100 points or anything. I only have 2 credit cards, a Bank of America Visa with a $500 credit limit and now this Chase Freedom Visa Signature with a "credit access line" of just over $5,000.

I've googled Signature Visas and see that some have NOT liked how these cards report to the credit agencies. I've been thinking this Signature card would help my score, increase it, but it seems that maybe the exact opposite might happen.

I'd really like to hear from others that have recently gone thru this situation or are dealing with it right now as I am.

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I just recently received the Chase Freedom Visa Signature and was excited I got approved for that, but now I'm wondering how it'll effect my FICO scores. I do NOT want them to drop 100 points or anything. I only have 2 credit cards, a Bank of America Visa with a $500 credit limit and now this Chase Freedom Visa Signature with a "credit access line" of just over $5,000.

I've googled Signature Visas and see that some have NOT liked how these cards report to the credit agencies. I've been thinking this Signature card would help my score, increase it, but it seems that maybe the exact opposite might happen.

I'd really like to hear from others that have recently gone thru this situation or are dealing with it right now as I am.

Thanks

If you don't have other high limit cards and/or you don't charge this card up near the limit and then pay it off in full, such that the reported "high balance" reads near your credit limit, then, yes, this will likely have an adverse effect on your FICO scores.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crap. I really don't have that much to charge every month.

You'd think FICO would make some kind of adjustment for this "no pre-set spending limit" things.

If you don't have other high limit cards and/or you don't charge this card up near the limit and then pay it off in full, such that the reported "high balance" reads near your credit limit, then, yes, this will likely have an adverse effect on your FICO scores.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just found this on another site. I'm not sure how accurate it is, but I intend on calling Chase sometime soon and asking them directly.

http://creditboards.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=451639

"The TU FICO report made available to consumers at this time is the TU98 version which can not differentiate between 'revolving' and 'open' accounts. However, I was told I shouldn't be all that concerned about it because the majority of lenders now pull TU04 which doesn't have this issue and reports 'open' accounts correctly."

If you don't have other high limit cards and/or you don't charge this card up near the limit and then pay it off in full, such that the reported "high balance" reads near your credit limit, then, yes, this will likely have an adverse effect on your FICO scores.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I called Chase today and talked and finally maybe got a straight answer from the last person. He put me on hold, did some research, and said that my Freedom Signature will be reported as a "revolving account" and will post my limit at $5,000, which is my "credit access limit."

While on hold I came upon this... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_history "Open debt - This is the least common type of debt. This is debt that must be paid in full each month. An example is any one of the variety of credit cards that are "pay in full" products. The American Express Green card is a common example. Open debt is treated like revolving credit card debt in older version of the FICO scoring system but is excluded from the revolving utilization calculation in newer versions."

I hope I'm not making this post too confusing by throwing that in there. I've just read that a "Signature" card is sometimes posted on reports as "open" and at other times "revolving." It sounds like a person won't be penalized by dropping their FICO scores if it's categorized as "open."

If you don't have other high limit cards and/or you don't charge this card up near the limit and then pay it off in full, such that the reported "high balance" reads near your credit limit, then, yes, this will likely have an adverse effect on your FICO scores.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, upon request, Chase will force report a limit to Equifax. Whether it gets reported correctly on the other two CRA is up in the air [and out of Chase's hands].

Crap. I really don't have that much to charge every month.

LOL, you'd only have to do it once, but I still wouldn't advocate charging $5,000 just to have your limit calculated correctly in a FICO algorithm.

While on hold I came upon this... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_history "Open debt - This is the least common type of debt. This is debt that must be paid in full each month. An example is any one of the variety of credit cards that are "pay in full" products. The American Express Green card is a common example. Open debt is treated like revolving credit card debt in older version of the FICO scoring system but is excluded from the revolving utilization calculation in newer versions."

I hope I'm not making this post too confusing by throwing that in there. I've just read that a "Signature" card is sometimes posted on reports as "open" and at other times "revolving." It sounds like a person won't be penalized by dropping their FICO scores if it's categorized as "open."

Apples : oranges :: open: NPSL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, I didn't mean charge $5,000 every month, but I meant in any month one month. "LOL, you'd only have to do it once, but I still wouldn't advocate charging $5,000 just to have your limit calculated correctly in a FICO algorithm."

If having a NPSL card drops a person's score because it's "revolving" I think them putting it as an "open" account would be better - it won't drop a person's score. "Apples : oranges :: open: NPSL"

Even though my scores are up there, averages around 738, I don't know much about all of this credit stuff. :) Meaning some of the terminology, so I could be using certain words/concepts wrong.

Yes, upon request, Chase will force report a limit to Equifax. Whether it gets reported correctly on the other two CRA is up in the air [and out of Chase's hands].

LOL, you'd only have to do it once, but I still wouldn't advocate charging $5,000 just to have your limit calculated correctly in a FICO algorithm.

Apples : oranges :: open: NPSL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This article is about that other link I posted yesterday.

I'll read up on this subject from time to time, but it seems like I won't get a definite answer until Chase finally posts this card to my credit report. The thing is that I hope to buy a house soon, so I'm just curious. It seems that Chase would help me post it the right way though if it was having a negative effect on my FICO scores. I at least got that impression from the last guy I talked with there yesterday.

Overall I tend to think that these cards are good. I mean otherwise why would so many people have them and people that have such excellent credit? If these Signature things wrecked peoples scores so bad they'd get rid of them.

So for now, I'm just enjoying seeing my name, "Shootingfor750" and then seeing "Visa Signature" on that little flat piece of shimmery blue plastic. Plus it feeding my ego. :oops:

http://bucks.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/01/be-wary-of-credit-cards-with-no-spending-limits/?partner=rss&emc=rss

December 1, 2010, 4:59 pm Be Wary of Credit Cards With No Spending Limits

By JENNIFER SARANOW SCHULTZ

Consumers may want to think twice before using credit cards cards without set spending limits.If you needed a reason to keep balances low on credit cards without set spending limits, here’s one.

The way certain issuers report the cards with no preset spending limit (like Visa Signature and World MasterCard cards) to the credit bureaus could have a negative effect on your credit score if you carry a high balance.

This is because of how the cards may affect the calculation of your credit utilization ratio, an important variable in calculating credit scores.

Here’s how a statement sent on behalf of FICO, which calculates credit scores, explained it. If one of these cards is reported as an open account, it will not be factored into the FICO’s calculation of credit utilization and, thus, wouldn’t affect a credit score.

On the other hand, if an issuer reports the card as a revolving account with a credit limit or the highest balance within a certain time period, the utilization ratio on the card could potentially be very high and have a negative impact on a consumer’s credit score – especially if the consumer spent more than the limit and or had a high balance on the card. In general, with FICO scores, the lower the utilization ratio, the better.

To determine how such cards from various issuers could potentially affect credit scores, the credit card comparison site CardHub.com recently contacted representatives from the major issuers and from FICO to find out how each card company reports the information about the no preset limit cards.

It then assigned ratings to the issuers based on how consumer-friendly their policies were, assuming that the most consumer-friendly practice (rated “good”) would be to report the cards in a way that excludes them from utilization ratio calculations and less consumer-friendly practices (rated “fair”) would be to report the cards in a way that includes them in such calculations. Here’s how the various issuers stacked up in CardHub.com’s recently released study.

American Express, Chase and Citibank received “good” ratings, while Bank of America, Capital One, Wells Fargo and USAA received “fair ratings.” The full results can be viewed on CardHub.com’s site.

“My advice is just don’t use” such cards, said Odysseas Papadimitriou, chief executive officer of CardHub.com. “There is just so much diversity” in how issuers report the information and “the issuers can change what they report and how they report it at any point in time and they don’t have to notify you.”

Plus, according to CardHub.com, many of the cards “encourage cardholders to spend more than their ‘limit,’ which leads to circumstances in which lenders see the consumer as having a very high utilization ratio on that account, often close to 100 percent.”

The FICO statement cautioned, however, against assuming that just because a card with no preset limit is included in utilization calculations, it will automatically have a negative impact on a credit score. The ultimate score, the statement said, depends on a particular person’s credit profile, including factors like how the utilization ratio of the card with no preset limit compares with that of the person’s other cards.

If, for instance, an individual has a low utilization ratio on the no preset limit card, then the FICO score could benefit from the card being included in the calculations. “The reverse scenario applies as well,” the statement said. There are cases where including the no preset limit card in the utilization calculation could increase the overall ratio, and have a negative impact on the credit score.

As a result, keeping balances on these cards low “is the best way to ensure that these cards will have a positive impact on a FICO score,” the FICO statement said.

Card issuers, meanwhile, said the study was misleading. “The CardHub report accurately describes how we report information on no preset spending limit cards; however, we disagree with the report’s conclusion that reporting a high balance or credit limit on a card necessarily has a negative impact on an individual’s credit score,” Betty Reiss, a Bank of America spokeswoman, wrote in an e-mail. “It can also have some positive effect such as showing the customer has handled higher credit exposures,” she said.

Spokeswomen for other issuers, meanwhile, including Capital One, USAA and Wells Fargo, said their reporting methods follow industry guidelines.

“Reporting credit limits on these accounts is a regulatory expectation,” Pam Girardo, a Capital One spokeswoman, wrote in an e-mail. “Our approach is supported by the industry standard reporting guidelines, which are published by a consortium of the credit bureaus,” she said, adding that “while we don’t control or necessarily even have insight into third party credit-scoring models, we don’t believe our reporting has a negative impact on the higher spend transactors that are the target audience for these cards.”

CardHub.com also rated the issuers for their degree of transparency. A spokeswoman for Chase, which received a “poor” transparency rating, said “the reason we didn’t respond is that we’re in the process of evaluating how we handle these very questions.”

What do you think about cards without a set spending limit?

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, here's a short course in credit scoring.

1. The only scores that matter comr directly from FICO. All others are FAKOs (CRA "best guess" as to what FICO would report) and nobody who'd going to lend you money looks at those.

2. FICO has like 17 different scoring models...covering everything from CCs to mortgages to insurance risks. The only one us consumer are allowed to see (The FICO Consumer Score) is closest to the FICO Bank Card score (what I call...the "sucker score").

3. Contrary to what the "do you know what your credit score is?" commercials would lead you to beleive, the sucker score isn't intended to identify people with "good credit"...it intended to identify folks that the CCs are likely to make money off of....and, they don't make money by lending it to you...they make money by charging you interest and occasional penalties. They call it "utilization".

4. So, if you want more credit cards...use the ones you've got up to about 20% of you available credit. Your sucker score will actually dip a bit, but that will attract more CCs who want to get in on the utilization action.

5. If you're looking to buy a house, your FICO mortgage score will be just fine with a $0 balance card. Your FICO New Car score won't care one way or the other.

Read my signature...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Willing,

Thanks for replying. Yes, I remember your signature from when I first started using this site. So my question... are you saying credit cards want a person to have a little debt, 20%, rather than none at all?

When you say they want people they can make money off it, do you mean with the credit card transaction fees OR the interest when a person carries a balance? I'm getting the feeling you mean carry a balance and if you DO mean that then why do my scores seem to be the highest with my credit cards at $0? I asked becase in Auguest 2010 my credit analyzer for my TransUnion FICO said my score might go to 770 if I paid off my BofA credit card and it did and actually went up to 776.

Well, here's a short course in credit scoring.

1. The only scores that matter comr directly from FICO. All others are FAKOs (CRA "best guess" as to what FICO would report) and nobody who'd going to lend you money looks at those.

2. FICO has like 17 different scoring models...covering everything from CCs to mortgages to insurance risks. The only one us consumer are allowed to see (The FICO Consumer Score) is closest to the FICO Bank Card score (what I call...the "sucker score").

3. Contrary to what the "do you know what your credit score is?" commercials would lead you to beleive, the sucker score isn't intended to identify people with "good credit"...it intended to identify folks that the CCs are likely to make money off of....and, they don't make money by lending it to you...they make money by charging you interest and occasional penalties. They call it "utilization".

4. So, if you want more credit cards...use the ones you've got up to about 20% of you available credit. Your sucker score will actually dip a bit, but that will attract more CCs who want to get in on the utilization action.

5. If you're looking to buy a house, your FICO mortgage score will be just fine with a $0 balance card. Your FICO New Car score won't care one way or the other.

Read my signature...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
are you saying credit cards want a person to have a little debt, 20%, rather than none at all?
Exactly. In fact they'd rather have people on THEIR card with 80-90% utilization. It improves their odds of collecting over limit fees.
When you say they want people they can make money off it, do you mean with the credit card transaction fees OR the interest when a person carries a balance?
Both. That way they make money off both ends. The merchant pays them a processing fee every time you use the card, and you pay interest on any balance.
I'm getting the feeling you mean carry a balance and if you DO mean that then why do my scores seem to be the highest with my credit cards at $0?
FICO see's a $0 balance as a good thing....although some utlization (maybe 9%?) is even better. This leads you to beleive that a high sucker score is a worthwhile goal. In truth, a high sucker score gets you more credit cards...is that a good thing?

The CC companies actually want customers with sucker scores in the 650 range (with no recent BKs). Those are the people that they are certain to make the most money from.

I asked becase in Auguest 2010 my credit analyzer for my TransUnion FICO said my score might go to 770 if I paid off my BofA credit card and it did and actually went up to 776.
Well, first off the TU Credit Analyser is using a FAKO calculation to estimate your true FICO...and secondly, its the sucker score they're estimating...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Willing....

Ok, I get better what you were trying to say. Yes, I know they'd love for people to be at their limit, because often a person will go over and then have to pay those over-the-limit fees.

Yes, I know they get that merchant fee. I was thinking you were trying to say that the only way a credit card made money was when a person carried a balance. I know they make a LOT more money with a balance though.

I think getting a lot of credit card offers means, for the most part, that you're doing well with you credit credit, but I don't think having a lot of cards are a good thing... or at least carrying a balance on them.

Why do the companies want people in the 650 most of all? I'm guessing because their credit is in the middle, not bad/horrible and not excellent? I think that most with mid 700s probably pay most of their things off and not carry a balance or not a large balance usually. And of course someone will low 600s probably has... "issues." :)

No, the credit analyzer score I was talking about came from the FICO website. I think they call it their "credit simulator." I just got my words mixed-up during my original post. I totally know that the TransUnion score off their site is worthless. I've had some free-trials from the TU site and their scoring is SO outta wack. They've tried to sell me their stuff but I basically told them, "the vast majority of lenders look at the FICO score... that's the only scoring I'm concerned with." They didnt like that, but I L O V E TransUnion because they took absolutely EVERY negative thing I disputed off of my credit days after I sent the disputes to them online. AND they are the agency that Chase used to award me the Freedom Visa Signature card with the $5,000+ limit. So... much love goes out to TransUnion. A year ago my TU score was under 500 and now... BAM, 776! :)

Thanks

Exactly. In fact they'd rather have people on THEIR card with 80-90% utilization. It improves their odds of collecting over limit fees.

Both. That way they make money off both ends. The merchant pays them a processing fee every time you use the card, and you pay interest on any balance.

FICO see's a $0 balance as a good thing....although some utlization (maybe 9%?) is even better. This leads you to beleive that a high sucker score is a worthwhile goal. In truth, a high sucker score gets you more credit cards...is that a good thing?

The CC companies actually want customers with sucker scores in the 650 range (with no recent BKs). Those are the people that they are certain to make the most money from.

Well, first off the TU Credit Analyser is using a FAKO calculation to estimate your true FICO...and secondly, its the sucker score they're estimating...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think getting a lot of credit card offers means, for the most part, that you're doing well with you credit credit

no, I think it just means you haven't jumped into the CC quicksand yet, but the buzzards are betting that you will.
No, the credit analyzer score I was talking about came from the FICO website. I think they call it their "credit simulator."
See, here's the thing. Credit reports and credit scores are the products that CRAs and FICO sell. Credit reports lose value as they get older and therfore, the CRAs sell old reports for a cheaper price. Anything over 15 days is considered "out of date"...anything over 30 days is worthless.

When a CRA sells you your "true FICO" score, its probably based on 15-30 day old data...almost worthless.

When FICO "simulates" your sucker score, they buy the cheapest data they can from the CRAs...again, almost worthless.

My suggestion is that you take whatever money you were going to spend on credit scores, or 3-in-1 credit reports, or credit monitoring...and buy lottery tickets. That way you stand some chance of getting a return on yoour investment .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, I'm lost. Can you tell me why a person would be getting a lot of credit card offers? I mean if a person's credit is bad I doubt they'd be getting many offers. Mine was bad a year ago and all I'd get would be letters from a few bill collectors, but now that my credit is over 700 it's a different story. I'm not getting a lot of offers, but the last several weeks I've been receiving a lot more and Chase is sending me "Freedom card" offers like twice a month now and I just got their card a couple weeks ago.

What exactly is an "old" report? You initially thought I was saying that I was paying for a TransUnion score, but I never have. The only score I've paid for has been the FICO TransUnion score.

How is a simulated score out of date if it simulates a score in the FUTURE if you pay off your debt? Again, my visa card was near it's limit and my FICO TransUnion said it would go to 770 if I paid off my credit card and that's exactly what happened.

I don't mean to insult you, but you seem bitter about credit scores. I mean if so, then why are you on this site? I mean to me it sounds as if you think a person trying to improve their scores is a waste of time or something... as if you're bashing having good scores. I don't think this is the case, but I'm just confused by how you sound.

I'm aware of what you line says about managing credit and not scores, but to me I think they kind of are connected. I mean I have a visa card that just went UNsecured and I owe $0 on it for this month and I just received the Chase Freedom Visa Signature and owe less than $20 on it and will pay it off before the due-date. I think that's pretty good. I opened that secured visa just over 2 years ago and have never missed a payment and have never gone over the limit. Again, I think that's pretty good. I can get 5 credit card offers a day, but I have 2 credit cards now and that's really all I need, but I plan on contacting American Express soon and paying the money I owe them and hopefully they'll open my credit back up with them. I'd like to have them back on my report to give my report more years. I hope to buy a house soon and all I know is that having scores in the mid 700s will give me the lowest interest rates. I have no interest or intention on going "card shopping" or whatever people call it on this. I have NO interest in getting some useless card from Fingerhut... they've been sending me pre-approved offers OR some First Premier card with a $500 limit with a couple hundred dollars in fees. All I plan on doing with those offers is keeping them in a stack to see how many I get for like a year or something.

Thanks

no, I think it just means you haven't jumped into the CC quicksand yet, but the buzzards are betting that you will.

See, here's the thing. Credit reports and credit scores are the products that CRAs and FICO sell. Credit reports lose value as they get older and therfore, the CRAs sell old reports for a cheaper price. Anything over 15 days is considered "out of date"...anything over 30 days is worthless.

When a CRA sells you your "true FICO" score, its probably based on 15-30 day old data...almost worthless.

When FICO "simulates" your sucker score, they buy the cheapest data they can from the CRAs...again, almost worthless.

My suggestion is that you take whatever money you were going to spend on credit scores, or 3-in-1 credit reports, or credit monitoring...and buy lottery tickets. That way you stand some chance of getting a return on yoour investment .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shootingfor750...who really knows why scores move the way they do? My FAKO and FICO's scores are in the 800's. My mortgage score is 680. My insurance score is 700.

My have 10 credit cards. They are all either paid off or below 12% I have no collections or negatives on my reports. NONE. All my credit limits are pretty good.

I recently paid off a 8000 car loan. 4 mths later my FICO scores raised 10 points. In truth, most FICO scores move very slow.

Somebody could get lots of cc offers for several different reasons. Some lending companies don't care if you have bad credit...heck, they even hope you do. They make a killing off late fees and defaults. And sometimes you get offers...AND don't get approved. You were just on a mailing list with that company.

Now lets talk about scores..especially FICO's and FAKO's. No matter which...they both sell your information. Just like you have to pay to see YOUR OWN SCORE , other companies also have to pay to see what your score is. The cards are stacked against you from the beginning.

I paid for my scores ONCE. After that, I quit. Waste of money. The only thing I do is get MY free credit reports once a year...and I space those out.

The truth is....cc's make more money by you defaulting on your payments. Not saying they don't want you to pay....but if your late once or twice...that's prefect to them. People with 600 range scores usually have a late 30 day or a small medical or another collection on their report.....or high utilization on their credit cards.

I've even seen people posting on here that just filed BK and their score is in the high 700's and they are getting slamed with cc offers.

You said you want to buy a house. I did 3 years ago so I'm not sure what they look for now. BUT what helped me.....I have 1 years worth of "reserve" money saved up. I had a few cc's with little charged on them. I had long term employment. Reserve money is very important.

Good luck. I think your on the right track. Don't stress so much about your score though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What exactly is an "old" report?

Anybody who's going to lend you money...house, car, insrance, job, APPROVED credit card...pulls your report THAT day. And, you'll find verbage in their fine print somewhere that says something like "this offer is only good for 30 days". Any report over 15 days old is considered suspect...over 30 is "old" and worthless.
How is a simulated score out of date if it simulates a score in the FUTURE if you pay off your debt? Again, my visa card was near it's limit and my FICO TransUnion said it would go to 770 if I paid off my credit card and that's exactly what happened.
Again, you need to read the fine print. In there somewhere it says, in effect, "this simulation is only based on the data used in the calculation, regardless of age, and assumes no other transactions occur that would affect the outcome."

Bitter? No, not really. I just think that people ought to know what they're paying for. I'm not bashing good scores...I'm simply saying that they don't mean what people are led to beleive. That's why I use the words I do. The FICO Bank Card score is a "here's a sucker that CC can make money from" score.

Credit and credit scores ARE connected. Just not the way the TV ads would have you beleive. You have to figure out WHAT credit. For example, I did a BK 7 about 6 yrs ago. Today, my FICO sucker scores are in the 680 range. I bought a house 2 years after the BK (no foreclosure). I bought a car 1 year after the BK and traded up 1 year later. I have only 2 CC with a total line of $1800. They're both maxed out. Today, I got approved for a $40,000 car loan.

(And...thanks jetscarbie...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jets,

Thanks for such a nice reply. Wow, 800! 1.5 years ago I use to dream of having 750 and really didn't think it would happen so fast, but it did. NOW, my goal is 800. I think my scores jump around more because my credit file has just become, just over 2 years old and up until a couple weeks ago I just had one credit card, so being near the limit had my TransUnion FICO around 700 and when I got it to $0 it jumped to 776. Utilization went from like 90% to 0%.

I've just never had my scores this high and I feel like a kid at Christmas and wanting to see every uptick of my scores.

Why'd you say your cards are below 12%? I've been thinking that 9% or less was ideal.

I can totally see why crecit card companies would focus on people in the mid 600s though. I tend to think they're the biggest money-makers for those companies.

I've paid for my reports but that was a LONG time ago. Most of this year I've been getting them for free. When I had bad on my credit and apply for something I'd get rejected and then order a free report. I'd then dispute online and call the credit agencies and order another free copy. The only think I've paid for was my FICO - once in August and once in November. That was money well-spent though in August because that's when TransUnion's FICO told me in their analyzer that my score might jump to 770 if I paid off my little credit. That motivated me to pay it off and now I have that nice Chase Freedom Visa Signature!

HOW THE HECK can someone just file for bankruptcy and have scores in the 700s!? Really... how is that possible? I thought mathematically it would drop their scores like 200 points.

Shootingfor750...who really knows why scores move the way they do? My FAKO and FICO's scores are in the 800's. My mortgage score is 680. My insurance score is 700.

My have 10 credit cards. They are all either paid off or below 12% I have no collections or negatives on my reports. NONE. All my credit limits are pretty good.

I recently paid off a 8000 car loan. 4 mths later my FICO scores raised 10 points. In truth, most FICO scores move very slow.

Somebody could get lots of cc offers for several different reasons. Some lending companies don't care if you have bad credit...heck, they even hope you do. They make a killing off late fees and defaults. And sometimes you get offers...AND don't get approved. You were just on a mailing list with that company.

Now lets talk about scores..especially FICO's and FAKO's. No matter which...they both sell your information. Just like you have to pay to see YOUR OWN SCORE , other companies also have to pay to see what your score is. The cards are stacked against you from the beginning.

I paid for my scores ONCE. After that, I quit. Waste of money. The only thing I do is get MY free credit reports once a year...and I space those out.

The truth is....cc's make more money by you defaulting on your payments. Not saying they don't want you to pay....but if your late once or twice...that's prefect to them. People with 600 range scores usually have a late 30 day or a small medical or another collection on their report.....or high utilization on their credit cards.

I've even seen people posting on here that just filed BK and their score is in the high 700's and they are getting slamed with cc offers.

You said you want to buy a house. I did 3 years ago so I'm not sure what they look for now. BUT what helped me.....I have 1 years worth of "reserve" money saved up. I had a few cc's with little charged on them. I had long term employment. Reserve money is very important.

Good luck. I think your on the right track. Don't stress so much about your score though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi. Ok, now I get what you mean about 15 days old is useless. I thought you meant the FICOs I paid for were useless. And you sounded like you were saying the FICO simulator was useless also or that you thought it was a FAKO. I learned, from this site, that those are useless and had a 30 minute "conversation" with some TransUnion person about why I didn't want or care about what my "TrueCredit" TransUnion score was. The FICO simulator said my score would be someone between 730 and 770 if I paid off my credit. Of course I was hoping it would be 770, but thought bare-minimum it would be 730, so I wouldn't be disappoined and to my surprise it was 776. I mean I just felt like I had gotten an A+ on a big test or something and that's why I keep going on and on about my scores. You have to remember that a year ago my TransUnion was like 500. The only way I got a credit card then was by getting a secured Visa and now... now Chase offered me the Freedom and they even gave me a Signature.

Ok, just to clear this up, you said your FICO sucker scores are in the 680 range. What exactly is the FICO "sucker score?" I mean is that the FICO score that you get from myFICO or something else? If so, why exactly would they call a person a "sucker" if the person's scores are in the mid 700s or higher? I mean, I think someone with score that high are making all the right moves... or right enough at least. I think the "suckers" would more so be in the mid 600s.

What interest rate did you get on your $40,000 car loan?

Anybody who's going to lend you money...house, car, insrance, job, APPROVED credit card...pulls your report THAT day. And, you'll find verbage in their fine print somewhere that says something like "this offer is only good for 30 days". Any report over 15 days old is considered suspect...over 30 is "old" and worthless.

Again, you need to read the fine print. In there somewhere it says, in effect, "this simulation is only based on the data used in the calculation, regardless of age, and assumes no other transactions occur that would affect the outcome."

Bitter? No, not really. I just think that people ought to know what they're paying for. I'm not bashing good scores...I'm simply saying that they don't mean what people are led to beleive. That's why I use the words I do. The FICO Bank Card score is a "here's a sucker that CC can make money from" score.

Credit and credit scores ARE connected. Just not the way the TV ads would have you beleive. You have to figure out WHAT credit. For example, I did a BK 7 about 6 yrs ago. Today, my FICO sucker scores are in the 680 range. I bought a house 2 years after the BK (no foreclosure). I bought a car 1 year after the BK and traded up 1 year later. I have only 2 CC with a total line of $1800. They're both maxed out. Today, I got approved for a $40,000 car loan.

(And...thanks jetscarbie...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HOW THE HECK can someone just file for bankruptcy and have scores in the 700s!? Really... how is that possible? I thought mathematically it would drop their scores like 200 points.

Because the risk is gone. I think some cc companies look at it like this...."I can give them money b/c they are not going to be able to file for bk for another 10 yrs" So a person that just got discharged from BK is easy pickings. If they happen to fall behind a little...the cc company is able to tack on tons and tons of fees and they don't have to worry that person is gonna run to BK court and file...b/c they can't.

That's exactly why after they file BK....their score jumps up so high. They no longer have debt.

I applied for a cc a couple of months ago and asked the person on the phone what my FICO's were. She said 805.

1 mth ago I was shopping on cars and asked and was told my credit score was 640. Yesterday my insurance agency told me my score was 700. When I was checking on refinancing my house, my score was 680. So I was curious last night after I posted that post to you. I called my cc company to get an increase. I asked what my score was. She said 808.

See, there are tons of different variations of "credit scores"

It has also been my experience...paying off bills doesn't drastically make your score jump up. I've heard of some people paying off bills and their score falls down.

IMO...I think "sucker" scores means ... You can buy your score from thousands of different places.....and most will tell you a different score. AND none will tell you how you got that score. myfico may tell you that if you pay off this...it will boost your score by 70. So you pay it off and it does boost your score on myfico. BUT if you paid for your score with another company....it may not show any change at all.....or may even show a lower score.

That could explain why 100's post on here saying "I just don't understand. Truecredit or myfico or Equifax says my score is 740 but when I tried to get a american express card they said my score was 6something."

Nothing wrong with people wanting to know their score.

Why'd you say your cards are below 12%? I've been thinking that 9% or less was ideal.

Your probably right. I just try to keep them below 12% or 0 balance. IMO...a mixed credit report is the best kind. By mixed I mean....different types of loans. My best credit boost probably came when I got a small loan from my credit union.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you pay myFICO for your credit score, what you are given is the FICO Consumer Score...when a CC company buys your score, they are given the FICO Bank Card score. The two are close, but not identical. For example, "inquiries" lower the consumer score more than the bank card score (hence your 20 pt drop after they pulled your reports to decide if they wanted to give you another card).

I call the Bank Card score the FICO sucker score because rather than predicting "credit worthiness" or "credit responsibility", it really predicts suckers that CCs are likely to make money from. And, contrary to what we're led to beleive, CCs are more interested in people in the 680 range than they are people in the 800 range. People in the 800 range don't "utilize" their credit cards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi. No, I've read over and over that people can get credit because they can't file for bankruptcy again, but my question was how could a person's score be in the mid 700s if they just filed for bankruptcy?

I've read, this this site, that there's different FICO scores for different things, so it makes since that those people quoted you different scores.

All I know if my score went exactly where FICO said it would go if I paid off my credit card. And right around that time I got that Chase Freedom card offer. It actually came BEFORE I paid off my credit card. So they sent it to me when I was at like 90% utilization. I submitted my application online and thankfully I paid off my card a few days later, so I think they made them give me a Signature card instead of a plain one.

American Express. As far as with me, they checked my Experian and that's the one that has a tax lien on it. :roll: TU and EQ are spotless. I also owe them several hundred dollars from an old account, so I don't think they'll be giving me any love until I pay that off. At least it's off my credit though. :)

Yes, I'm aware of having a good mix of credit. I've been thinking about applying for a personal loan to help mine as well.

Because the risk is gone. I think some cc companies look at it like this...."I can give them money b/c they are not going to be able to file for bk for another 10 yrs" So a person that just got discharged from BK is easy pickings. If they happen to fall behind a little...the cc company is able to tack on tons and tons of fees and they don't have to worry that person is gonna run to BK court and file...b/c they can't.

That's exactly why after they file BK....their score jumps up so high. They no longer have debt.

I applied for a cc a couple of months ago and asked the person on the phone what my FICO's were. She said 805.

1 mth ago I was shopping on cars and asked and was told my credit score was 640. Yesterday my insurance agency told me my score was 700. When I was checking on refinancing my house, my score was 680. So I was curious last night after I posted that post to you. I called my cc company to get an increase. I asked what my score was. She said 808.

See, there are tons of different variations of "credit scores"

It has also been my experience...paying off bills doesn't drastically make your score jump up. I've heard of some people paying off bills and their score falls down.

IMO...I think "sucker" scores means ... You can buy your score from thousands of different places.....and most will tell you a different score. AND none will tell you how you got that score. myfico may tell you that if you pay off this...it will boost your score by 70. So you pay it off and it does boost your score on myfico. BUT if you paid for your score with another company....it may not show any change at all.....or may even show a lower score.

That could explain why 100's post on here saying "I just don't understand. Truecredit or myfico or Equifax says my score is 740 but when I tried to get a american express card they said my score was 6something."

Nothing wrong with people wanting to know their score.

Your probably right. I just try to keep them below 12% or 0 balance. IMO...a mixed credit report is the best kind. By mixed I mean....different types of loans. My best credit boost probably came when I got a small loan from my credit union.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, now this post made a lot of sense to me. I've been thinking that maybe the "sucker score" was the one that FICO sold me, but you say that's the "consumer score."

Is it possible that the 20 point drop was because Chase looked at my score? I mean their card isn't appearing on my report yet. Is that because my first due date isn't until January 2011? I guess it can't show up on my report UNTIL I have an actual bill. lol 20 points is just a big drop it seems though.

I couldn't agree with you more there. Of COURSE you're not going to see some big guy from BofA or Chase saying that they want people with blemishes on their credit because they typically aren't as disciplined and will probably go over their limit more. Whereas as some smart guy... OR GIRL :)... in the 800s will more knowledge, wisdom, and not fall into the trap of carrying large utilization %.

I have NO clue about how to quote people on this site.

When you pay myFICO for your credit score, what you are given is the FICO Consumer Score...when a CC company buys your score, they are given the FICO Bank Card score. The two are close, but not identical. For example, "inquiries" lower the consumer score more than the bank card score (hence your 20 pt drop after they pulled your reports to decide if they wanted to give you another card).

I call the Bank Card score the FICO sucker score because rather than predicting "credit worthiness" or "credit responsibility", it really predicts suckers that CCs are likely to make money from. And, contrary to what we're led to beleive, CCs are more interested in people in the 680 range than they are people in the 800 range. People in the 800 range don't "utilize" their credit cards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should have explained a little more...

The FICO Consumer Score and the FICO Bank Card score do use identical calculations in arriving at a number...the difference is in the age of the data they use for performing those calculations. Remember, they have to pay the CRAs for access to their records. Since the CCs pay THEM for CURRENT data, they go pull the latest info. Since the consumer doesn't pay quite so much (CCs buy in bulk), FICO uses not quite current data for the consumer score.

They're both "sucker" scores.

Its all a shell game...none of these people are your friends, nor do they haveyour best interest at heart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And, contrary to what we're led to beleive, CCs are more interested in people in the 680 range than they are people in the 800 range. People in the 800 range don't "utilize" their credit cards.

This is an abjectly false statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.