ColSandurz

Members
  • Content Count

    16
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by ColSandurz

  1. I filed a BK back in February of 2013 and it was discharged in June of 2013.  I am now in the process of trying to clean up my credit reports.  At the time of my filing, I hired a BK attorney and he had me include all of my creditors in my BK (including those that I knew would not be discharged, such as student loans).  I am not sure, but it's possible that I might legally be required to include all of my creditors in a BK (at least in my state of NJ).  Anyway, as expected, the student loans were not discharged (even though the discharge order from the court makes no mention one way or another, I believe from my research that some sort of adversarial court proceeding must take place before any student loans can be discharged). 

     

    Unfortunately, despite those student loans not being discharged, they show up on my credit reports as IIB.  I thought that if they weren't discharged, they shouldn't really be associated with the BK in the first place, although maybe I'm wrong.

     

    It's possible that the above is the expected way all of this happens (i.e. being required to include all creditors in BK filing, and then having non-discharged creditors show up as IIB on credit reports), but it just seems incredibly unfair that I'm being penalized twice basically with respect to my student loans - once because they weren't discharged, and again on my credit reports where it shows them as IIB.  

     

    If the above is not the way it's supposed to happen, and those student loans shouldn't show as IIB on my credit reports, any information or help is greatly appreciated.  I just got off the phone with someone at one of the student loan companies, and he basically told me there was nothing they could do, and the IIB status for that student loan would remain on my credit reports for the appropriate time frame.  Specifically, if the student loans aren't supposed to show as IIB, and someone could refer me to some laws or regulations that specify this, it would be extremely helpful since I could then pass this information back to the student loan companies.

     

    Any help is, as always, appreciated.  Thanks!

  2. If this was not a BK debt, then the 60 days and charge off status would matter. However, the IBB status trumps those so most scoring models and credit funishers will not look at the 60 day or charge off thing. In other words, once you nuke your credit report, the collateral damage does not matter.

    Now, since this was probably a chapter 7, the actual case stays on your report for 10 years but the individual tradelines stay on for 7 years. The reality is though, once you start to rebuild slowly, the older tradelines will not matter.

    I think you are spending too much time on what is really a non-issue. You will not raise your score too much by removing these tradelines (or much that matters) and technically, the are reporting correctly which is all they are required to do.

     

    I guess my issue here is that everyone tells me something different about whether they are reporting correctly or not.  I've posted this question on a few forums, as well as done as much research online as I could, and there doesn't seem to be any clear consensus about whether creditors/furnishers can report things like late or charged-off after a BK filing.  Some places say they can, some say they can't.  It'd be great if there was some rule or law or regulation that addressed this specifically, but I'm guessing at this point that such a thing doesn't actually exist, since if it did the answer would be very clear cut.  Oh well - thanks for your input though, it is greatly appreciated.

  3. DOFD = Date of first delinquency. Trade lines stay on you reports for 7 yrs from that date.

    And again, IIB trumps everything. Lates, COs, etc don't matter. As long as the tradeline says IIB, nothing else matters.

     

    Thanks for the information.  While I get that the account will still show IIB and this trumps everything else, I'd still like to get the history accurately noted, if thats even possible.

     

    This is the latest response from the creditor: "please be advised that we have reported the account properly in accordance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act §623 Responsibilities Of Furnishers Of Information To Consumer Reporting Agencies [15 U.S.C. §1681s-2] (a) Duty of Furnishers of Information to Provide Accurate Information.  This section generally states that the "furnisher of information", <CREDITOR NAME REDACTED BY ME>, must not furnish inaccurate information to the consumer reporting agency.  Therefore, as the above noted account was past due in payment, you did file for bankruptcy protection and we did charge off the account, we are reporting the account properly to the credit bureaus."

     

    However, as previously stated in one of my responses to my initial post, they definitely didn't report this information until well after the BK was discharged.  While they might have charged it off, I still thought that negative reporting (which certainly the 60 days late is and I think the charge off is also) was not allowed after a BK was filed??

     

    Any thoughts or advice?  Thanks!

  4. Also realize that for individual tradelines, the DOFD is the one that rules when it comes off your report, not the BK date and it is 7 years for the tradelines themselves. The only tradeline that stays on for 10 years of the actual Ch. 7 BK filing.

     

    Sorry - I have no idea what you mean by this (including what a DOFD is)?

     

    Also, while the listing on the Experian report does show as IIB and a $0 balance, I'd still rather just get it fully correct - does that make sense?  It seems that this is an issue that has come up before (per the Lovern and McCorkell letters).  Am I in the right here in that the creditor should not be listed it as further late or charged off after the filing date, and if so, how can I get them to fix it?

     

    Thanks!

  5. Sorry, after a bit more research, I thought that it was the filing date that prevents further activity (i.e. automatic stay).  From what I can tell, a charge-off after the filing date shouldn't be allowed, should it?  

     

    Additionally, I just looked, and I have a credit report that I ran for Experian on 8/6/2013 (well after my discharge date) that shows 30 days late in February, and then closed in March and April (and no data beyond that) - but a more recent credit report from Experian shows 30 days late in Feb, 60 days late in March, No Data in April, and Charged Off in May.  Obviously, it would appear that Valley National and/or Experian made changes after the discharge date, so what can I do?

  6. I'm just wondering what obligation (legally speaking) the credit bureaus have in removing incorrect/inaccurate information - specifically when the information is incorrect or inaccurate, and yet after disputing this with the credit bureaus they still keep it on the credit reports (either because they stated they received confirmation from the creditor it was accurate or for some other reason).  

     

    And is there any recourse aside from a lawsuit?  Or is a lawsuit against the credit bureaus even allowed when they won't remove incorrect/inaccurate information, or do you have to sue (or otherwise contest) the creditor themselves that is reporting this inaccurate/incorrect information?

     

    Thanks.

     

  7. Wait a minute guys.

    The BK Reform Act of 05 put private student loans on the same footing as federally backed student loans.

    They are not discharged by filing bk unless, you file an adversary proceeding and, properly notice the lender so they can object to the discharge. Just like federally backed loans.

     

    So I guess that the private loans can't be discharged easily - which means that the collections agency is OK to come after me - still, it would have been nice if my attorney had bothered to inform me this could happen instead of being blindsided by it months after my BK.

  8. Any post-discharge negative entry on a credit report (such as charge off) violates the discharge injunction as an impermissible collection action.

     

    How do I see when they added the negative entry though?  I'm assuming if after the June discharge they went back and adjusted it to show it charged off in May, that would be a violation, but how can I tell?  And then what can I do about it?

  9. Private loans that are not guaranteed ARE dischargable.  I would be calling the BK attorney and/or the trustee and informing them that the insurer is coming after you in violation of the law.

     

    Clydesmom - thanks for all the info.  Would you be able to provide some reference to bankruptcy law (or other documentation) that I could use when contacting the attorney or trustee?  I just want to make sure I have something to back up my argument when contacting them.  Thanks again.

  10. THIS.  If the loan was private which it sounds like it was because federally backed loans do not have insurance then it can be BKd and the insurer coming after you for a loan IIB is a violation of the federal BK laws.

     

    I was under the impression that all student loans couldn't be discharged through Chapter 7 unless you went through a lot of hoops and could demonstrate significant hardship.  

     

    Prior to the BK I had a federal consolidation loan, a state loan, and two private loans (being serviced by the same company).  After the BK, I still have the federal loan and the state loan, and one of the private loans is still being serviced by that same company and I'm still making monthly payments on it, but the other private loan was apparently paid in full by the insurer of it, and then they sent a collections firm after me for the full amount.  

     

    So am I to understand that the private loans are discharged through the Chapter 7 BK, or just IIB (is there a difference?)?  And either way, what would the recommendation be for me to do now?

     

    Thanks!

  11. If the CO was 5/13, no problem.  Its the date of discharge that governs.

     

    And besides, as long as the STATUS is IIB, that trumps everything anyway.

     

    Sorry - not sure what you mean by "no problem" - do you mean that there's nothing I can do?  I thought that once I file for BK, they can't really do anything like list my account as past due or charged off (i.e. automatic stay) and then after the BK is discharged that automatic stay turns into an permanent injunction (or something along those lines) ?

  12. The attorney did not mislead you.  You cannot pick and choose which accounts to include in BK.  You are required to disclose all creditors even if they have a zero balance.  

     

    As for the student loans those are a debt as well and even though they cannot be discharged you do have to list them as a debt.  Failing to do so could also throw off the debt to income ratio so that you did not qualify.  The responsibility to find out what clauses would be triggered if you did BK them is yours not the attorneys.  His job is to file the case and make sure it is done correctly for the BK court and to protect you from the creditors during the process and he did this.  You as a client are supposed to ask ALL the questions you need to in order to understand the process.  He cannot anticipate what you do or do not know if you don't speak up.

     

    The one thing you can do with regards to the student loans is enter into a rehab program.  The program allows you to make payments for 9 months to a year and then erases all late payments and returns it to a pays as agreed status.  

     

    But are accounts with a $0 balance actually creditors since I don't owe them anything?  I included them in the BK filing per my attorney, but now they show up on my credit reports as "included in bankruptcy" (IIB) despite me not having owed anything on them, and I'm concerned that the more items that show as IIB on my credit report means a lower credit score when some of them might not have needed to be included.  For instance, couldn't I have just closed any accounts with a $0 balance before filing BK and then they wouldn't show as IIB?

     

    As far as the student loans go, while I agree I should be asking questions to understand the process (and I did), there was almost no way I could have anticipated this and therefore known to ask this question.  I knew that student loans wouldn't be discharged, and we talked about that, but I simply thought that I would just keep paying them through and after the BK and that would be that.  I would expect an attorney I hire to also provide advice and counsel throughout the process and to be familiar with "traps" such as these.  

     

    Thanks for the suggestion regarding a rehab program with the student loans - but I'm not sure it's applicable.  Those student loans that remained as actual loans (i.e. didn't trigger a clause that required full payment) - I just kept paying and am current with them.  And the loan that did trigger this clause - well, now I'm in collections with a company representing the insurer and they want full payment upfront.  Unfortunately, I do not have that kind of money to pay them, and I keep telling them that and they don't like that answer.  At this point, they've threatened legal action against me, and I've told them there's nothing more I can do since I don't have the money to pay even 2/3 of the full amount to settle it.  It just would have been nice if my attorney might have been aware of this ahead of time and informed me so I could have tried to deal with it before filing (maybe by contacting the student loan provider to see if there was a way they would just keep this loan instead of letting the insurer pay it and come after me).

  13. Notify the credit bureaus so that they can list the account as included in BK.  Sometimes creditors simply stop reporting once a consumer files.  

     

    Sorry, I should have mentioned that this account shows as "included in bankruptcy" (IIB), and yet it also shows as late and eventually charged off (after the bankruptcy was filed).  So I'm wondering if that's allowed?

  14. I've done a bit of reading, both on this forum (http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/242666-negative-reporting-on-discharged-debts-updated/) and elsewhere (specifically the Lovern and McCorkell letters referenced on this forum), but am still unsure as to whether a creditor can list a discharged debt as charged off.  

     

    I filed my bankruptcy on 2/28/13, and it was discharged on 6/14/13.  According to my most recent credit reports (pulled just a few days), one of my creditors shows me 30 days late as of February, 60 days late as of March, No Data in April, and then the debt Charged Off (CO) in May.  Is this allowed?  If not, what can I do to fix it?  Thanks!

  15. Last year I had to file for Chapter 7 personal bankruptcy. Having never done this before, I retained a bankruptcy attorney that I assumed would be an expert in doing this. While the bankruptcy was discharged without any real difficulty, it seems as if the instructions and assistance he provided had some serious flaws in them, including:

    - instructing me to include all accounts in my bankruptcy - I'm not sure if this was the correct thing to do, especially since now accounts that I had a $0 balance with and could have simply closed are showing on my credit reports as "included in bankruptcy" and possibly lowering my credit score

    - telling me to include all of my student loans in the bankruptcy (despite that fact that I don't think these can very easily be discharged by bankruptcy) - he then appeared very unsure of whether they were really discharged or not, and even worse, by including them in the bankruptcy, it triggered clauses in some of the contracts that allowed them to be paid by the loan insurers and then full payment was expected from me to the loan insurers. While it's very possible this might have happened anyway, at the least I would expect him to alert me of this ahead of time* so I could prepare or see if there was any way to mitigate these issues (since now I'm dealing with collection agencies)

    *And yes, I would expect that in today's day and age, a bankruptcy attorney would be aware of this caveat with respect to student loans - is that expecting too much?


    Anyway, I'm just wondering if I have any recourse against the attorney, or can do anything to try and fix some of the above problems? Any help is greatly appreciated! Thanks.