grounds for dispute?

[troubledconsumer]

I have an account listed on my CR from experian was verified and updated twice after 2 different diputes. it was listed as paid as agreed account closed, but had 20 90 days late reported.

they verified and updated too transferred to other lender, written off

and late payments still listed

but under the online report in the "Status Details:" field it says

"This account is scheduled to continue on record until 2-2013."

"This item was verified and updated on 2-2003."

is this grounds for dispute and request to delete?

specifically the

"This account is scheduled to continue on record until 2-2013." part

[Edit by troubledconsumer on Saturday, March 29, 2003 @ 06:40 PM]

[troubledconsumer]

bump

[kb9tbq]

What was this tradeline with the creditor suppose to reflect on the credit report?

Was it actually charged off?

[troubledconsumer]

If it is indeed mine then it was charged off before 1998, but since then all my credit crads were paid in full.

[kb9tbq]

That is wrong - should report to only 2005.

Do you have any documentation proving the charge off date or the last payment you had made either statement or past credit report?

Would move on to dispute the last activity date on this one.

[troubledconsumer]

thats whats weird,

it still lists it as charge off as of 11-98 last activity 5-98 but then shows:

"This account is scheduled to continue on record until 2-2013"

thats why I asked if this is dusputable... like can i delete this account because of the "This account is scheduled to continue on record until 2-2013" even though it says same charge off as before?

[kb9tbq]

What is the last activity showing? Maybe they are re-aging that way.

Try to dispute one more time; pointing this error out. Then if the verify again with this showing - send them a demand letter for deletion since they are continueing to report incorrect information.

[troubledconsumer]

well with experian online report it doesnt specify date of last activity, but it shows 1st 30 day befor charge off was 5-98

[kb9tbq]

No that is right 5/98 + 6 months = 11/98

So for no reason that we can determine; they just threw in that extended date for reporting.

[jasen]

On this same topic, the last activity date will be the date that the account was charged off or last paid on? Collection attempts and account buy-outs to other CA's cannot alter this date after this, correct?

[kb9tbq]

Very important that you keep documentation all statements; checks; and letters acquired over the years. If you did not this is what DV is for. To acquire payment history; to determine the facts regarding payments / credits and the time line.

Last Activity don't necessarily mean the last time payment was posted to account; could also mean last time charge was made on account. Just means last activity (but most times it just happens to reflect payment).

The problem is the collection agency's reporting:

Usually when the OC charges off within a months time they will turn over the CA and within another month they will add to the tapes for the CRA to pick up. So usual will be a 1 to 2 month deviation from the charge off date to the collection agency showing when the account was opened with them.

But there are cases where the OC waited months or in rare cases years before turning over to CA. So now the open date is re-aged not reflecting correctly (unless the collection agency happens to show else where in the tradeline a charge off date) I have seen this few times.

You really start to have problems when the OC tradeline was never reported to begin with - then it becomes your word against theirs unless you can find documentation from the OC to prove they are wrong.

Another thing; when the OC expires off the credit report all collection agencies collecting on this same debt have to be removed also so be sure to keep all past credit reports obtained from the CRAs should you have to pull it up and show them the fact of the matter.

So when you go through more than one collection agency working a debt; you will really see messed up open dates and reporting of the charge off date. Also you will start to see the Balance increase that is owed. I am not to sure what to say on this part to follow and caculate reason for the increase. No specifics when the collections agencies have their own fees from one another.

[Anonymous]

Is this the same scenario? I have three bad trade lines that have dropped off all the bureaus with the exception of Equifax due to reaging. Two are to come off by the end of this year and the other is stating it will remain for another year. Can I assume this is a

re-aging tactic with Equifax since the other two were dropped off the other two reporting agencies the end of last year?

[kb9tbq]

Do you have prior credit reports from TransUnion & Experian last year before they dropped off?

Compare all the last activity dates; or if you have past billing statements that will help you determine when final payment had been made.

I know Equifax would not consider it proof by sending them a copy of these other two credit reporting agencies; but I would be very tempted to do so - to show them re-aging by this company.

First dispute the tradeline should have expired - and needs to be removed; if they verify then send them copies of what ever you have proving the last activity date or expiration of this tradeline.

[jasen]

I guess what I'm asking is if it's illegal for any CA or etc to reage an old account by suddenly adding a new charge to it. or selling it to a new CA who then adds their own charge to it.

I would think so, because then they could keep a record going perpetually by simply adding new fees every couple years.

[kb9tbq]

Ok - adding fees or payment does not reset the reporting time; they should still be removed when the OC tradeline would have expired no matter when they where added or what they are showing for the open date. The hard part is catching them & proving it.

Yes they can be sued for this; be sure that you can dig up all evidence to sink them but good on this matter; and have the section in the Fair Credit Reporting Act quoting this fact about the period of time for reporting.

Also would want to check back on loans applied for that would of been affected by the difference in time on the reporting that injured your credit. Damages for having been given higher interest rates and such.

[C Whitney]

Kb9tbq

Are you saying that an account being reported by a CA, no matter what they may change the date of last activity to, must be removed from the CR at the same time the OC falls of the CR due to age of debt?

OC LDA 7/98 CA LDA 7/2000

Thanks for your clarification of this matter

Also how would you go about proving re-aging. I have CR from 4/2002 that show OC and not this CA at all, CR from 12/2002 showing showing OC 7/97 and this CA 7/2000. This debt is so old I no longer have any documentation from OC

Thanks again!

[Edit by C Whitney on Sunday, April 13, 2003 @ 01:33 PM]

[kb9tbq]

Yes you should be able to use this prior credit report showing the original date of last activity on the OC. Plus show them the recent report with the CA showing their information. (CA should have noted the OC relating the accounts for the CRA to see).

They have to come off; you can only serve a 7 year period from the Original Creditors reporting - they can show multiple companies working the account; but once the 7 years are up - they all have to come off of the credit report.

The problem gets to be establishing the relationship - so that it is beyond a doubt to the CRA on what has happened and what needs to be done.

[Sky Warner]

the reporting date is the FIRST DATE OF DELINQUINCY.

Lets say your CC was delinquint on 1/98 .the seven year reporting date starts from that point. That is what TransUnion rep and Experian rep told me and I believe that is how it is written in the FCRA.

I think.. dont swear to it

[kb9tbq]

Yes; sorry to clear that:

1st delinquency; add 180 days for charge off then add 7 years.

The credit report is not always reflecting the correct information; so you have to keep a mental note and hope if a creditor messes this up you can catch them on it with some form of documenation from the OC.

[C Whitney]

Should not be a problem establishing relationship of twwo items. When I sent DV letter to the CA they responded to it with poor copies of copies of the original contract (this is a car loan) as it was assigned to OC from cardealer. OC has always reported LDA as 7/1997. The OC is not reporting on EX, has been deleted by TU still shows on EQ. EQ asked if I wanted it (OC) deleted and I said no, not at this time. Should I change my mind on that issue? SOL on the original contract expired in April of 2002 (5 yrs after last payment, according to Florida state law) I'm not sure when the OC purchased the bad debt but according to EX they first started reporting it in 7/2002, which is after the SOL had expired. Did they change the LDA to avoid that and can I prove it? :ooh:

Thanks,

[kb9tbq]

In some cases the open (asign date) can also be the charge off date.

But many factors change on collection agencies picking up the debt at a much later date then the charge off. So the assign date no longer reflects the charge off date.

Some times you will see the asign date in the note section - and a totally forign date in the open section.

And then you really run into problems when the original creditor was a medical bill and never on the credit report to begain with. Then it is a matter of digging up a past statement; or if you get them to validate on the debt (with payment history) they will provide you with the dates reflecting service for you to use against them.

But yes you can have them delete the OC if it is time for it to expire. Just be sure to keep copy of that credit report - so you can go back & use it should other collection agnecies pick up and think that they are going to also report on this past date.

[C Whitney]

<blockquote>Originally posted by kb9tbq

In some cases the open (asign date) can also be the charge off date.

But many factors change on collection agencies picking up the debt at a much later date then the charge off. So the assign date no longer reflects the charge off date.

Some times you will see the asign date in the note section - and a totally forign date in the open section.

And then you really run into problems when the original creditor was a medical bill and never on the credit report to begain with. Then it is a matter of digging up a past statement; or if you get them to validate on the debt (with payment history) they will provide you with the dates reflecting service for you to use against them.

But yes you can have them delete the OC if it is time for it to expire. Just be sure to keep copy of that credit report - so you can go back & use it should other collection agnecies pick up and think that they are going to also report on this past date.

</blockquote>

I jusy got confused!

Can any of this legally change the last date of activity? I have been banging my head against the wall disputing this thing and one item that I have strongly disputed was the LDA. It was my understanding that the seven year reporting period began no later than the 180 days after the delinquency and that the CA could not change that date reported by the OC. Have I been wrong in this? :confused:

[kb9tbq]

No they can't re-age; but they sure give it every possible effort to do so. If you don't have your paper work of some sort proving that they did this; then they will get away with it.

The collection accounts are the hardest to catch; when the OC is not on the credit report. You have to watch out; and not nessasarily go by what the credit report says if you know it to be wrong.

You have to show the CRA other documentation; proving that they re-aged.

Know that it gets complicated.