Forum
|
|
Forum
|
     | Monday, June 12, 2000 - 12:43 pm  8 years after a chapter 7 bankruptcy my credit worthiness has seem to come back to life. I began to receive the glut of unsolicited, unsecured credit card offers and have been accepted for a number of low rate, high balance platinum cards. I have obtained copies of credit reports and they contain a fair amount of inaccuracies. I could use some general pointers on further improving my credit worthiness and on removing innaccurant data on my reports 1) Although I have a number of revolving credit lines, I have no Department store cards. I had read that even if you own major credit cards, having a department store card can futher boost your score. Is that right? 2) I have an old revolving account that was discharged with the bankruptcy that still shows up as a charge-off on one cra but not the other two. should I attempt to remove it? 3) There are other accounts that were discharged in the bankruptcy that are listed as inactive on some reports, active or current or in good standing on other reports, and one card that is listed as being reported as stolen on one report. are these hurting my score and should I attempt to correct them. 4) Some of the new accounts haven't been listed yet. Should I pursue and get them listed or would the flurry of new accounts showing up (less then 12 months old) hurt more then help. I would like to apply for a mortgage in the next 4-6 months and want to try to improve the available credit ratio. 5) Finally, I have a checking account but no savings account. Would a savings account boost my score. P.S. If I do pursue any of these, about how long after the corrections/improvements are made until they show up on the reports and effect the score?
|
| | Monday, June 12, 2000 - 01:00 pm #2: Yes. It was discharged in BK, and must be over the SOL if the BK was 8 years ago, so I'd definately dispute that. #3: Yes. Sounds like you're on top of it there. #4: If they're current, I don't see how they could hurt you, perhaps Christine can comment more on this. I'd say if they're not reporting, close them and get accounts with people who report.
|
| | Monday, June 12, 2000 - 09:08 pm On 1) I really don't know. Just don't get any accounts that are FINANCE company accounts. And I'd say you probably have enough open accounts anyway. On 4) Call the creditors and ask why it's not on the credit. Some just don't report (Citibank), or they report only to one or two of the 3 CRAs. On 5) It makes no difference for Credit Scores what bank accounts you have, as they are NOT reported on your credit. However, a mortgage underwriter *might* appreciate seeing a savings account. Dispute all the inaccurate derogatory info, leave the good accounts alone. How long it takes depends on the CRAs. By law they have 30 days, sometimes they're much faster, sometimes much slower.
|
| | Tuesday, June 13, 2000 - 12:50 am I would like to respond to Morty's questions. You should close all department store accounts. Make sure that the Bureau tradeline subsequently reads "closed at consumer's request" not "closed by credit grantor." Consider this: there're no department stores that won't take a bank card. Store cards charge 19-23% interest and, as such, represent a tremendously profitable stream of income to the store. Don't fall for 'em--pay and close all revolving store cards. Many subprime post-BK lenders don't report to the bureaus. They don't want their competition to know that you're recovering and lure you away by offering better rates! Bogus, huh? I agree with Scott: if an account doesn't report to the bureaus, pay them off and do business only with companies who report. Dispute all BKs over 7 years old as a matter of course. On any home loan application, you need not acknowledge a BK over 7 years old. The loan app question is: "Have you been declared bankrupt within the past 7 years?" So if your BK is 8 years old, the correct answer is "no."
|
| | Tuesday, June 13, 2000 - 10:44 am I agree with Catherine in general, but want to make sure that people with FEW accounts don't close their department store accounts prematurely. Especially with short credit histories on just one or two credit cards a 5 or 7 year history for an open Sears or Mervyns account can really help the Credit Scores.
|
| | Wednesday, June 14, 2000 - 01:20 pm Christine, I wanted to follow up on your response pertaining to the accounts discharged in the bankruptcy that are still listed as good accounts. You said to remove the derogatory accounts and leave the good accounts. To be specific, there are two accounts that are listed on all three reports. They are listed as being in good standing, one opened in 1987 the other 1990. However, they both are listed as being inactive or as the last date of activity being 1992. The fact that they establish my credit history from 1987 is good but I understand that an account that is inactive for a long period could lower my score.
|
| | Wednesday, June 14, 2000 - 01:42 pm I don't have any documentation to base this on, but here's how I think it works, based mainly on using common sense which doesn't always apply to Credit Scoring: In general: the Score is HIGHER than if the accounts weren't listed at all, but the Score is LOWER than if the accounts were listed as currently active. In your case I don't know WHY the accounts are still there, since it's over 7 years and I also don't know if scoring takes these old ratings into account. I do NOT think that the *inactive* notation in itself lowers the credit scores. Does anyone have more info on this?
|
| | Thursday, June 15, 2000 - 10:46 am This is a related topic. When you buy a car, is the credit report pulled supposed to be listed with the CRA as "auto" so that reports done within 14 days are coded as one "12 point ding" or if they are unspecified do I have to call and get them changed. This is a real pain in the @## if so and I can guarantee what my answer will be.
|
| | Thursday, June 15, 2000 - 11:31 am Good question, I don't know that you CAN get them changed. All I know is that often those inquiries are NOT coded for auto.
|
| | Friday, June 16, 2000 - 01:34 am I've looked at all three cr and in the last two years it looks like noone is coding the purpose as opposed to earlier reports where it was sometimes listed. Could it be asking too much for the cra? I also noticed in the "guide" that comes along for the consumer that there is no code explanation for mortgage or auto like there is for "prm" or "ar"--promotion or account review. Seems to me like they are providing a 14 day window for doing some competitive shopping but in reality are dinging the consumer every single time that baby is run. I'm going to call them and find out not that I will get the truth.
|
| | Friday, June 16, 2000 - 08:27 am Can anyone provide info on raising scores. I've corrected all of the old and negative information on my report, but now need to begin working on my husband's. 1. Does anyone have an idea of how many points an unpaid delinquent student loan may be? 2. Please confirm -- We purchased a car 8 yrs ago had 1 30d late. When we traded the car in and purchased another, this late was not reported on the report we saw afterwards. Does this assist the FICO score if wanting to get rid of a 30d late? Also, does having a new car loan that's current bring your score down if < 6months old or not effect the score or raise the score -- any comments. 3. We're trying desperately to get into a construction loan for purchasing a new home and need to add approximately 30 points to our score to be considered for merely any loan available. Can anyone give some advice on what avenues to pursue to get the score up a bit? Thanks.
|
| | Friday, June 16, 2000 - 09:47 am Well, I've certainly gained alot of useful advice from this thread. I would like to return to something Catherine wrote earlier. She said to dispute any bk's over 7 years old. Do you mean to say dispute it with the cra and try to get them to prove it or remove it?
|
| | Friday, June 16, 2000 - 11:28 am As with all disputes, you have a 50/50 chance of getting the derogatory item removed each time you dispute it. It's no different for a bankruptcy (BK). The bureau must verify the alleged BK with the Public Record (wherever the hell that is). As the data entry processors at the Public Record are poorly paid entry level workers with stacks and stacks of data to key in every day, therein lies your 50/50 chance. After you submit your initial dispute, and if the item is "verified," then go to Step Two and make 'em prove it. The bureau (Trans Union is the keeper of the Public Record) must produce the documents upon which they are relying to report that BK. Since retaining any BK over seven years old is discretionary at the bureau level, they probably (but nothing is guaranteed in the world of credit reporting, remember?) will simply remove it.
|
| | Friday, June 16, 2000 - 11:33 am KellyAnn, the scope of your question can fill a large book. If you live in Southern California, I invite you to attend my Credit Repair Workshop held on the 1st Saturday of every month at my office in LaPalma. The workshop is free and you can attend month after month until your mission is accomplished.
|
| | Friday, June 16, 2000 - 11:36 am By the way, KellyAnn, any loan consultant worth his or her salt should have a handle on how to help you gain a lousy 30 points so that you can at least be considered for a construction loan. Why not engage the services of a competent and resourceful loan broker (such as myself if you're in Southern California) and have them coach you through the process of credit repair. Granted, they'll only be able to tell you how to do it, not do it for you, but at least you'll have someone standing by for questions, etc. That's how a good broker earns a living.
|
| | Friday, June 16, 2000 - 12:14 pm Got a few comments. While it would be nice if all loan brokers knew how to raise scores, the reality is that most don't have a clue. However, even the most experienced readers have been unable to tell me why Scores vary so dramatically from one day to the next as documented at http://www.bayhouse.com/FICOisFRAUD.html Sean suggested that the DAY the Score is obtained is so critical that you could have a 24 point drop from the 30th to the 31st. Considering that I did NOT have thousands of reports with Scores on a daily basis to pick out the worst example (the published reports are the ONLY reports with daily Scores I've ever seen), I think that it's likely to have even larger changes in the Scores for no apparently reason. KellyAnn's situation "3. We're trying desperately to get into a construction loan" is as bad as it can be. I recommend she forgets about the loan and takes the time to read the forum and attend workshops like Catherine's. Or, she can have her Scores checked again, resulting in more inquiries and most likely lowering the Scores. The Scores might just be 30 points higher on a better FICO day. Avoid the 31st? Try the 30th? One would think removing late payments would always increase Scores, but that's not true due to the complicated formulas and models used by Fair Isaac. No person on this planet can calculate how many points a particular item raises or lowers the Scores. The only way to find out is by having access to Fair Isaac's software while being able to manipulate the underlying credit report.
|
| | Friday, June 16, 2000 - 02:11 pm Maybe I just haven't seen the posts yet, but has no one commented on Score Factor Codes? They are the gravamen of the credit reporting system, the whole enchilada. One must impact the Score Factor Codes to improve the score itself. This is what I concentrate on in my Credit Repair Workshop and why my participants get such good results. The Score Factor Codes are listed in order of importance (or weight) on any preliminary credit profile offered by a "reseller" such as myself, a mortgage broker. The lack of transparency in the profiles provided by the bureaus is why attempting to work with the information contained on the reports issued by the bureaus themselves is often (but not always) so fruitless. If anyone would like a copy of a report that explains the nature of inquiries, Score Factor Codes, statistical biases, etc., please email me and I'll do my best to get it out to you via snail mail. Sorry, don't have it on my hard drive (although I'm trying to obtain a copy that way) so as to email it as an attachment.
|
| | Friday, June 16, 2000 - 07:51 pm Are you talking about those 4 main reasons for not having perfect Scores? They've been discussed quite a bit. I myself remember being declined for "too much available credit" and promptly closed some accounts. The next time my debt to available credit ratio was too high. Then I had too many inquiries. Those were the credit card scores in the 80s, but the same thing really. I really haven't found them that helpful because eliminating the most important factor will probably cause a different model to be used to Score next time. I would REALLY like to know which MODEL was used for the score. That's how people who have a foreclosure removed can end up with LOWER Scores after the removal: New model, new factors, new low score. I just tried to find what we have posted, but got too many hits. Can you think of a fairly unique word in the factors? 3,700+ postings.... If you got something I haven't seen yet, I'd definitely like to have it. I did see one of the funniest scoring topics, check out Sean's Dating Score and tell us what you think of his idea!
|
| | Friday, June 16, 2000 - 07:55 pm Just found the topic, but it had only a link to Sean's page and it's gone. I'm sure they're somewhere on the web!????
|
| | Monday, June 19, 2000 - 07:29 am Thank you all for your notes. Unfortunately, I do not reside in California, but Texas. I and my husband have changed avenues instead of building on land that we've purchased, we will be building in a planned community. The broker stated we could get 3% down on a first time loan. So, we're headed in that direction. She was also able to lend a few hints to what to change. No guarantees of course, but we hope that it should get better. Thank you all again. I'll continue to pipe in occassionally to gather info and look forward to chatting with each of you.
|
Credit Forum CreditCourt Forum 2003 Credit Suit CreditFactors Order Credit Reports |