Re-aging an charged-off account

[Anonymous]

This is a great site! Very informative and explicit. Can anyone

suggest what I should do next? In May of 1996, I filed for

Chapter 7 BK. I went to court in June and the BK was

discharged in August. I did not check my credit report until

Feb. of this year. I have found that one of the accounts

discharged in the BK shows up as a charged off account and

has been turned over to a collection agency who reports me

as a non payer resulting, of course, in derogatory status. One

credit agency shows this with a date of 6/96 as the last

activity. Another shows this account as reported since 5/2001,

5 years after the original activity. I disputed this info and was

told the creditor affirms this as correct. Is this legal? Thanks

[Anonymous]

could it be that a new debt occured after bk?

[jam]

Reported since does not equal date of last activity...

It means just what it says, it was the date that this company first reported it to this CRA.

The date that they first notify that CRA doesn't affect the length that the listing should be listed until, as long as they report the DOLA correctly, its legal. If they try to list it by the PLACED date instead of the DOLA date, then it's re-aging...

[Anonymous]

This was not a new debt- I wasn't going THERE again! The

DOLA Experian lists is 5/96, BUT under the status details

section states that this account is scheduled to continue on

record until 5/2008. Still, It shouldn't be there at all; it was

included in the BK. I just checked it out by getting a copy of

the court record and this place was included.

Thanks for the thoughts though.