Credit Advice

Have a question? Have advice to share? The combined knowledge and experience of everyone in the Credit Karma community can help you. Enter your question or help others below to get started!

Question

Posted in Credit Cards
Profile Image

Question By
clasys

13 Contributions
86 People Helped
Not really my card
Credit Karma shows that Trans-Union lists an open card in good standing using about 2/3 of the line in use. However, I am merely a signature of the card, not the owner [my wife's card]. We are paying it down, that's not the issue, but why is it showing up here? When I last looked at a Trans-Union report, it correctly showed the true status, which I interpret as not my debt [just access to the card].

I only have the access [and a duplicate credit card, which they insisted on, I never use it] because they demanded this in order to speak with their customer service. [I am the "negotiator" in the family. Most of the debt she is paying down nicely; part of it is actually a really great long-term deal at 4.99 until paid off, with little actual incentive to pay that part faster; I actually calculate the two separately; when her part of newer higher-rate purchases is paid off, we will revert to more slowly paying it off; have much higher rate cards to deal with more aggressively, etc.]

What, if anything, can I do to raise my score? Or, is this just a limitation of Credit Karma!

Your Credit Scores Should Be Free. And Now They Are.

View your scores and reports anytime.

SIGN UP NOW
All Responses

Results 1-3 of 3Results per page: 5 | 10 | 25Page 1 of 1   Previous | Next
Top Contributor
3051 Contributions
2791 People Helped

Just to make sure I understand the question, you've pulled your complete TransUnion report and it is reporting "correctly".  Does that mean it shows you as an authorized user of the account or is it a joint account?  Either way it will show up on your credit report, but it should state whether joint or authorized user.  You can always pull your report from another bureau to compare (they aren't always alike) by going to www.annualcreditreport.com.  If  the issue is that TU is showing the status correctly but Credit Karma isn't, then I wouldn't give it any more thought.  Although CK gets their info from TU, I've found it isn't always up to date.  However, I still like this website as a way to monitor my overall credit health.  Hope this helps!

Top Contributor

Reply by
clasys

13 Contributions
86 People Helped

I haven't checked the three in a while, so I will get fresher copies of the credit reports.  But the last time we checked, all 3 agreed I am only an authorized user which is accurate.  Thus, I assume nothing has changed [I know, never assume' will get them, although most of the "action" problems I have had [not relevent to this] has revolved around experian, etc.

The problem, assuing it is only with CK is that it makes their advice on as a much too "poor" a grade as a result.  [My wife's is much worse than mine; we are repairing hers at a lower pace for a variety of reasons not relevant here, but it will self-correct; she had to create a hole to avoid going out of business and succeeded enough we are slowly closing that hole, etc.]

I do know my worthiness is better than they say because of this; I am confident of the reality, but it is disheartning slightly that CK is treating me more "shabbily" than I deserve.  I also still get a pretty good score [over 700] despite this [but I think I deserve better].  [An interesting observation:  I believe there is something "magic" about getting under 50% utilization, or so it appears to be; the falsely attributed debt makes me over 50% when included, less when reality leaves it out, etc.  I would say I am well into B territory [working on A] but on this point alone, that makes me a D.  Thus, CK's advice in that department isn't all that useful, etc.  Thus, is there any way to get the attention of someone in the CK world to show them a concrete example of a bug in the calculation?  [You can't have it both ways, yet this is exactly that.] And of course, I will get a fresh TU report before I pursue it [mainly I just want to know is there a mechanism of inquiry to CK somewhere on the website and/or anyone know if it isn't].

Hopefully this is just  a hopeless but not serious kind of thing, but I would assume CK wants its data not to be questioned; I have written a lot of code in my time; I can see this as a two-line source code bug.

Top Contributor
13 Contributions
86 People Helped

Some further info

Helpful to 0 out of 1 people

Just a little followup to refine the question.

My total line available as I calculate it comes to exactly $400 higher than CreditKarma is showing; I'm not gonna quibble about that small an amount [although I am mildly curious how they are off that little, or is it just the need for recent payments to be reflected?].

However, the percentage used shown DOES include the balance on that account; thus the obvious anomaly:

1) They are clearly not including the credit line on the account, and that of course is correct.

2) They are including the debt on this account, which is of course not correct.

Thus, the quesiton is:  Is this a quirk of CreditKarma, arguably one that needs to be fixed [I'm sure I'm not the only person in this particular situation] OR is this actually a problem with Trans-Union that needs to be attended to on my part?

Someone's wrong, and I don't think it's me.

Top Contributor
13 Contributions
86 People Helped

partly solved, only partyl

Helpful to 0 out of 1 people

I have solved the $400 discrepancy, but it reveals that my credit-worthiness is still not farly represented.

The card I am an authorized user for *IS* contributing [falsely] to by total line of credit and of course the amount outstanding as well.  However, if both the line and the balance were removed, it still doesn't present my creditworthiness for the following reason:

The math is $400 higher:  There are two lines of credit associated with my bang accounts, and in fact one is far larger than the other, and historically I was deep into the larger one a few years ago.  Currently they are both owed $0; their combined credit is $400 more than the one credit card I am only an authorized user on.

Thus, the true picture has three discrepancies:

1) Includes a card not mine both in adding to the total line and the total balance.

2) An available overdraft that is $100 less than the line on the card mentioned above in 1).

3) Another much smaller line that is $500 overdraft protection on a different checking account.

FICO is based on your creditworthiness, not what you can more easily borrow on a credit-card.  Moreover, one of the other accounts is not actually a credit card, it is in fact a revolving line of credit properly reported, but it *DOES* have its own account number that reads like a credit card, but the only transactions allowed involve writing large checks and the like, it has no purchasing products power like a credit or debit card would; merely because of the superficial resemblance to a credit card did that one get included correctly.  [The other two have account numbers derivative of checking account numbers with some internal bank prefix, and certainly do not look like credit card numbers, yet the three lines of credit are handled inconsistentl.]

This seems more and more like a CK problem; when I get my TU report confirming the card I am only an authorized user on is in fact shown correctly [it was about 15 months ago when I got the last TU report; been fighting unrelated battles with one creditor who is incompetent and has just about admitted it; all reports relevant to that are Experian, so I haven't focuses on TU, but then again, I just joined CK, thus the current situation].

Clearly, it is CK's problem if tthey don't use the lines of credit with a $0 balance in the score calculation.  They do show them at a zero balance, but do NOT show their credit line [which as I said is between them $400 larger than the card that should not be there; the larger only $100 less than my wife's card; confusion over that part now explained, numeric near-coincidence].

Thus, definitely some CK problem, and likely same for the other [only slightly it's TU, but I doubt it;will update it I have to deal with TU to fix something.]

Results 1-3 of 3Results per page: 5 | 10 | 25Page 1 of 1   Previous | Next

Your Credit Scores Should Be Free. And Now They Are.

View your scores and reports anytime.

SIGN UP NOW

Reply to this Question

Write your response:
Enter Your Comments

The Credit Advice pages of the Site may contain messages submitted by users over whom Credit Karma has no control. Credit Karma cannot guarantee the accuracy, integrity or quality of any such messages. Some users may post messages that are misleading, untrue or offensive. You must bear all risk associated with your use of the Credit Advice pages and should not rely on messages in making (or refraining from making) any specific financial or other decisions.