I am working in a clients table and something just autoupdated and ran 50k+ credits but I am not sure where or how this happend
This likely happened due to auto-update being enabled on your table or specific columns. Auto-update automatically runs enrichments when new rows are added or data changes, which can consume large amounts of credits unexpectedly.
To prevent this in the future:
• Turn off table auto-update: Click the three dots next to your table name, then click "Auto-Update Columns" to disable it
• Disable column auto-update: Go to "Edit Column" > "Run Settings" and turn off auto-update for individual columns
To investigate what happened:
Navigate to Settings → Credit Usage to see detailed logs of your credit consumption and identify which specific enrichments ran.
Was that helpful?
May I speak with someone about this please. Is it possible to get the credits back?
I understand your concern and will connect you to a human agent who can assist you further with this issue.
Our support team has got your message and we'll get back to you soon!
If you’re dealing with a specific table, drop the URL below so we can help you quicker. Otherwise, someone from our team will be in touch soon!

I think this is the table because it suddenly has double the contacts in it: https://app.clay.com/workspaces/449365/workbooks/wb_0t4562tjuWsFbd3ugzy/tables/t_0t5bvoue3A8Az8k5oUV/views/gv_0t5bvouS3DafCwjSdsP
for some reason my find people search ran a second time and gave me a bunch of names an numbers that are not at all relevant to my client
Hi Joel, Looking into this now, thank you for sharing the link
Hi Joel,
Jumping in for Kashif here. Can you give me examples of contacts that are not relevant to your client here?
Both the "Scored ICP People Search" and Scored ICP with phone numbers" tables doubled in size when I ran a second people search on the "Scored ICP" table. Thepurpose of running a second people search is the criteria of the first people search was too broad. I didn't realize it would update the previous search as well. Is this normal?
Hi Joel,
I brought this up internally, and really the best that we can do is a 50% refund of credits here. In order to administer the refund, I need you to write to me using the email on the account that belongs to that table. As soon as I have that response I can go ahead and refresh those credits. I look forward to your response.
Hi Munnawar, Is there any way to recover more of a refund? It is really not intuitive or clear to me why the first search triggered again. Is that normal? If so, why weren't those results included in the first search to begin with?
This feels more like a bug than a feature. Can you do a 75% refund?
