Jump to content

Charge Offs


Denise72CT
 Share

Recommended Posts

I am new to this site

I'm from CT

Could you please help understand charge offs. I went through a ruff time back in 98 & 99. Car got repo and credit cards went into collections. Now it is about 6 to 7 years later on these debt. Even if a collection Agency sells debt to new Agency can they report it as brand new debt somewhat. Many of these charge off have sold over and over again. I just had my credit report pulled and it says I am 40K in debt but actucally if that orginal debt was added it would only add up to 15 - 20K and currently I only have 3 credit open and in good standing with 500 limit on each. I don't understand where this 40K is coming from. I feel since these charge off get purchased from other agencies it gets reported again as new debt but in truth it is the same old debt from 1999 or 98. Could I do something about this or am I at a lost.

I have heard that debt like this once it is 7 yrs old that it can't be reported any more time limit runs out but then someone else said that since it is getting re-purchased it can and will as long as it is purchased by those agencies. I never told any of those collection agencies that I will pay or agreed to pay. They call and get transferred to voicemail/their letters get tossed.

What can I do and is this legal. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am new to this site

I'm from CT

Could you please help understand charge offs. I went through a ruff time back in 98 & 99. Car got repo and credit cards went into collections. Now it is about 6 to 7 years later on these debt. Even if a collection Agency sells debt to new Agency can they report it as brand new debt somewhat. Many of these charge off have sold over and over again. I just had my credit report pulled and it says I am 40K in debt but actucally if that orginal debt was added it would only add up to 15 - 20K and currently I only have 3 credit open and in good standing with 500 limit on each. I don't understand where this 40K is coming from. I feel since these charge off get purchased from other agencies it gets reported again as new debt but in truth it is the same old debt from 1999 or 98. Could I do something about this or am I at a lost.

I have heard that debt like this once it is 7 yrs old that it can't be reported any more time limit runs out but then someone else said that since it is getting re-purchased it can and will as long as it is purchased by those agencies. I never told any of those collection agencies that I will pay or agreed to pay. They call and get transferred to voicemail/their letters get tossed.

What can I do and is this legal. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, Denise72CT, they are not allowed to change the DOLA, which is the "date of last activity", which is set BY LAW at 180 days (6months) after the last payment on the account. The JDB's (junk debt buyers, purchasers of defaulted debts, like the ones you have: i.e.-not paid off according to the contract you agreed to) are notorious for doing a "scam" called "re-aging":illegally re-setting the DOLA to a later date. Usually they pick the the date that THEY bought the account!

Since, according to you, these accounts have been sold and re-sold several times each, it is unlikely ANYONE has enough documentation to "prove" the debt exists, never mind whether you owe these "alleged debts"! Neither, at this point, would the OC's!! (The evidence (records) are probably destroyed or in "deep' (unaccessable) storage.)

Where the alleged amount owed comes from--$40 K--is from added interest and/or fees added after chargeoff by the OC and/or the JDB's. Whether this is legal or not depends on the terms of the contract with the OC (original creditor) AND, if the debt's been sold, whether the contract's provisions allow for such interest/fees to be assessed by the party in assignment (the one who acquires ownership rights to the account). If the contract is "silent" on the issue (it does not have a provision written in it to allow this to happen), or the original contract is unavailable and/or lost (in other words, there is no record of whether the contract DID contain the provision in question), or there is NO contract to begin with, they JDB likely CANNOT charge the "extra" money!

You will need to obtain copies of your credit reports (Opt-Out with the CRA's (credit reporting agencies) first so that these "bozo agencies" will be less likely to be able to obtain current information on your income, assets,or whereabouts! (Make it harder for them to track you down.) Then dispute, IN WRITING with the CRA's. Be prepared to be persistent--CRA's are notorious for "verifying" information that is disputed! Don't use a "form letter"; these are "flagged" as being from a "credit repair" service and tend to be thrown into the "circular file" (trash).

(A form letter ahould be used ONLY as a guide to write up one of your own.)

Since the JDB's HAVE re-aged, you MUST dispute the DOLA, or you will NOT have the debts "fall off" at the actual 7 yr mark; the re-aged date will push it up (make it later) by whatever amount of time the re-aging did!!

It's good that you never reaffirmed the debt! That will work in your favor, for the ONLY WAY to re-age an old debt legitimately is to pay on it and/or agree to a new contract with whomever has it when the reaffirmation takes place. It's also good you're screening the calls (record and transcribe your voice mail messages, for they can serve as evidence in a FDCPA/CUTPA* (the CT law that has provisions that mirror the Federal law (FDCPA). DO keep the letters, though (that includes the envelopes (which are often marked with codes--and have the postmark date on them)). These will also serve as evidence in a Court action, if you should be so unfortunate (or fortunate, if YOU are the Plaintiff!!) )to end up there!

The CT SOL (statute of limitations for collection actions) is 6 years from default. You are likely past the SOL, which, IF you DO GET SUED, is an affirmative defense in your favor! DO ANSWER THE COMPLAINT if you are served and FILE it on time--you DO NOT want a default judgement!!

Although, if you defend yourself properly (or hire a lawyer) in the event of lawsuit, you will avoid a judgment, the sad thing is that in CT--as in all but a relatively few states in the US--the SOL may be run (time has run out to sue), BUT these "cockroaches of cash" CAN LEGALLY COLLECT FROM YOU FOREVER!! (They just can't legally SUE you!) THEY CAN CONTINUE WITH THE CALLS AND LETTERS!!

That is, unless you send them what is referred to in the "credit repair" world as a FULL C & D--a "true" "CEASE and DESIST" letter. That means that they, once they receive it, ARE NOT PERMITTED TO CALL OR WRITE YOU AGAIN once they receive it with the exception of ONE letter or call, if they wish, to inform you of whatever actions they intend to take in the future. Any more communication? You've got an FDCPA/CUPTA violation!! In other words, they BROKE THE LAW and you can SUE them for damages,if you want to!!! (You have only one year to do it, in general, from the date of the violation, though!) What is ususally referred to as a "Limited C & D"--a "phone-communication-is-always-inconvenient-so-don't-call-me" letter--is not needed in your case, since your debts are SOL--and so are they!! :lol:

It is certainly LEGAL to deal with this--it is your right to do so!! :)

Sorry for the LONG post! There is a lot to say!! :)

Just keep searching for information and DO ASK QUESTIONS!! WE ARE HERE TO HELP!!

P.S.: I'm also from Connecticut!! Hello fellow Nutmegger!! :D

(**"CUTPA" is: Title 42, Chapter 735 of the CT General Statutes; also see:

Title 36 for statutes dealing with collections.)

Edited on 3/17/2005 to correct information given: CUTPA (CT Unfair Trade Practices Act (NOT "CUPTA" !) Also added information on CT Gen. Statutes references.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, Denise72CT, they are not allowed to change the DOLA, which is the "date of last activity", which is set BY LAW at 180 days (6months) after the last payment on the account. The JDB's (junk debt buyers, purchasers of defaulted debts, like the ones you have: i.e.-not paid off according to the contract you agreed to) are notorious for doing a "scam" called "re-aging":illegally re-setting the DOLA to a later date. Usually they pick the the date that THEY bought the account!

Since, according to you, these accounts have been sold and re-sold several times each, it is unlikely ANYONE has enough documentation to "prove" the debt exists, never mind whether you owe these "alleged debts"! Neither, at this point, would the OC's!! (The evidence (records) are probably destroyed or in "deep' (unaccessable) storage.)

Where the alleged amount owed comes from--$40 K--is from added interest and/or fees added after chargeoff by the OC and/or the JDB's. Whether this is legal or not depends on the terms of the contract with the OC (original creditor) AND, if the debt's been sold, whether the contract's provisions allow for such interest/fees to be assessed by the party in assignment (the one who acquires ownership rights to the account). If the contract is "silent" on the issue (it does not have a provision written in it to allow this to happen), or the original contract is unavailable and/or lost (in other words, there is no record of whether the contract DID contain the provision in question), or there is NO contract to begin with, they JDB likely CANNOT charge the "extra" money!

You will need to obtain copies of your credit reports (Opt-Out with the CRA's (credit reporting agencies) first so that these "bozo agencies" will be less likely to be able to obtain current information on your income, assets,or whereabouts! (Make it harder for them to track you down.) Then dispute, IN WRITING with the CRA's. Be prepared to be persistent--CRA's are notorious for "verifying" information that is disputed! Don't use a "form letter"; these are "flagged" as being from a "credit repair" service and tend to be thrown into the "circular file" (trash).

(A form letter ahould be used ONLY as a guide to write up one of your own.)

Since the JDB's HAVE re-aged, you MUST dispute the DOLA, or you will NOT have the debts "fall off" at the actual 7 yr mark; the re-aged date will push it up (make it later) by whatever amount of time the re-aging did!!

It's good that you never reaffirmed the debt! That will work in your favor, for the ONLY WAY to re-age an old debt legitimately is to pay on it and/or agree to a new contract with whomever has it when the reaffirmation takes place. It's also good you're screening the calls (record and transcribe your voice mail messages, for they can serve as evidence in a FDCPA/CUTPA* (the CT law that has provisions that mirror the Federal law (FDCPA). DO keep the letters, though (that includes the envelopes (which are often marked with codes--and have the postmark date on them)). These will also serve as evidence in a Court action, if you should be so unfortunate (or fortunate, if YOU are the Plaintiff!!) )to end up there!

The CT SOL (statute of limitations for collection actions) is 6 years from default. You are likely past the SOL, which, IF you DO GET SUED, is an affirmative defense in your favor! DO ANSWER THE COMPLAINT if you are served and FILE it on time--you DO NOT want a default judgement!!

Although, if you defend yourself properly (or hire a lawyer) in the event of lawsuit, you will avoid a judgment, the sad thing is that in CT--as in all but a relatively few states in the US--the SOL may be run (time has run out to sue), BUT these "cockroaches of cash" CAN LEGALLY COLLECT FROM YOU FOREVER!! (They just can't legally SUE you!) THEY CAN CONTINUE WITH THE CALLS AND LETTERS!!

That is, unless you send them what is referred to in the "credit repair" world as a FULL C & D--a "true" "CEASE and DESIST" letter. That means that they, once they receive it, ARE NOT PERMITTED TO CALL OR WRITE YOU AGAIN once they receive it with the exception of ONE letter or call, if they wish, to inform you of whatever actions they intend to take in the future. Any more communication? You've got an FDCPA/CUPTA violation!! In other words, they BROKE THE LAW and you can SUE them for damages,if you want to!!! (You have only one year to do it, in general, from the date of the violation, though!) What is ususally referred to as a "Limited C & D"--a "phone-communication-is-always-inconvenient-so-don't-call-me" letter--is not needed in your case, since your debts are SOL--and so are they!! :lol:

It is certainly LEGAL to deal with this--it is your right to do so!! :)

Sorry for the LONG post! There is a lot to say!! :)

Just keep searching for information and DO ASK QUESTIONS!! WE ARE HERE TO HELP!!

P.S.: I'm also from Connecticut!! Hello fellow Nutmegger!! :D

(**"CUTPA" is: Title 42, Chapter 735 of the CT General Statutes; also see:

Title 36 for statutes dealing with collections.)

Edited on 3/17/2005 to correct information given: CUTPA (CT Unfair Trade Practices Act (NOT "CUPTA" !) Also added information on CT Gen. Statutes references.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your accounts may or may not be being reaged. The date open wont tell you when an account will be removed.

It's not unusual for CA's not to remove accounts from your CR when they sell it. Dispute them with the CRA's as "not mine" or "no knowlege of account" and see what drops off. Anything that is close to the 7 year mark you may want to wait out. Another option is DV, you can send letters disputing the debts to the CA's. You may want to go this route if they aren't removed when you dispute them with the CRA's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your accounts may or may not be being reaged. The date open wont tell you when an account will be removed.

It's not unusual for CA's not to remove accounts from your CR when they sell it. Dispute them with the CRA's as "not mine" or "no knowlege of account" and see what drops off. Anything that is close to the 7 year mark you may want to wait out. Another option is DV, you can send letters disputing the debts to the CA's. You may want to go this route if they aren't removed when you dispute them with the CRA's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, Denise72CT, they are not allowed to change the DOLA, which is the "date of last activity", which is set BY LAW at 180 days (6months) after the last payment on the account. The JDB's (junk debt buyers, purchasers of defaulted debts, like the ones you have: i.e.-not paid off according to the contract you agreed to) are notorious for doing a "scam" called "re-aging":illegally re-setting the DOLA to a later date. Usually they pick the the date that THEY bought the account!

I'm sorry, but that is just flat out WRONG.

What it ACTUALLY says in the FCRA is that creditors must report the delinquency date that immediately preceeds placement for collections or charge-off. That delinquency date is what Congress decided to use to measure the 7-1/2 year reporting period for negative information and it is THAT date that can NEVER be changed. The DOLA should not change either, but the DOLA is NOT the 'date certain' specified in the FCRA for the reporting period.

The reporting period runs for 7 years + 180 days from that DELINQUENCY DATE - NOT the charge-off date. Charge-off can be done well before the 180 day mark.

The date that any junk debt buyer (JDB) or CA bought your account has NOTHING to do with the ORIGINAL DOLA or the "date certain", what they report as 'date opened' is when they bought the account and it means very little in terms of reporting-- and that date does NOT constitute illegal re-aging either.

Collections, no matter how many, can NOT survive the obsolesence of the ORIGINAL DEBT. So it doesn't matter how many clowns in the chain, things cannot legally stay on your reports for more than the specified 7-1/2 years. Some WILL try illegal re-aging, its called 'running the statute' and it IS illegal, you can sue the scumbags for it, but you have keep an eye on the RIGHT DATE.

In order to find out what the EXACT delinquency date is that is used to calculate the reporting period, you have to call the CRA's, I don't think any of them report THAT date - although they should to stop the confusion. Once you find out what that date is, from the ORIGINAL CREDITOR trade-line, then you know what you're dealing with.

In general, the DOLA is the last time you made a payment or a charge, and the delinquency date SHOULD be the date the next payment went unpaid, so you DO need to watch the DOLA. The fun becomes trying to keep the collection tied to the original, after a while the waters get pretty muddied.

To specifically answer your question, a charge-off is nothing more than an accounting function. When your account goes unpaid for a period of time (typically 180 days but can be less), the creditor writes the account off as a bad debt and moves it from the performing (paying) side of their legders, to the NON-performing side, then write it off as a loss. For this they get a tax break AND they make money by selling the account to junk debt buyers or collection agencies.

Charge-off does NOT mean you don't owe it any more, it just means that the original creditor has washed their hands of it and gotten rid of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, Denise72CT, they are not allowed to change the DOLA, which is the "date of last activity", which is set BY LAW at 180 days (6months) after the last payment on the account. The JDB's (junk debt buyers, purchasers of defaulted debts, like the ones you have: i.e.-not paid off according to the contract you agreed to) are notorious for doing a "scam" called "re-aging":illegally re-setting the DOLA to a later date. Usually they pick the the date that THEY bought the account!

I'm sorry, but that is just flat out WRONG.

What it ACTUALLY says in the FCRA is that creditors must report the delinquency date that immediately preceeds placement for collections or charge-off. That delinquency date is what Congress decided to use to measure the 7-1/2 year reporting period for negative information and it is THAT date that can NEVER be changed. The DOLA should not change either, but the DOLA is NOT the 'date certain' specified in the FCRA for the reporting period.

The reporting period runs for 7 years + 180 days from that DELINQUENCY DATE - NOT the charge-off date. Charge-off can be done well before the 180 day mark.

The date that any junk debt buyer (JDB) or CA bought your account has NOTHING to do with the ORIGINAL DOLA or the "date certain", what they report as 'date opened' is when they bought the account and it means very little in terms of reporting-- and that date does NOT constitute illegal re-aging either.

Collections, no matter how many, can NOT survive the obsolesence of the ORIGINAL DEBT. So it doesn't matter how many clowns in the chain, things cannot legally stay on your reports for more than the specified 7-1/2 years. Some WILL try illegal re-aging, its called 'running the statute' and it IS illegal, you can sue the scumbags for it, but you have keep an eye on the RIGHT DATE.

In order to find out what the EXACT delinquency date is that is used to calculate the reporting period, you have to call the CRA's, I don't think any of them report THAT date - although they should to stop the confusion. Once you find out what that date is, from the ORIGINAL CREDITOR trade-line, then you know what you're dealing with.

In general, the DOLA is the last time you made a payment or a charge, and the delinquency date SHOULD be the date the next payment went unpaid, so you DO need to watch the DOLA. The fun becomes trying to keep the collection tied to the original, after a while the waters get pretty muddied.

To specifically answer your question, a charge-off is nothing more than an accounting function. When your account goes unpaid for a period of time (typically 180 days but can be less), the creditor writes the account off as a bad debt and moves it from the performing (paying) side of their legders, to the NON-performing side, then write it off as a loss. For this they get a tax break AND they make money by selling the account to junk debt buyers or collection agencies.

Charge-off does NOT mean you don't owe it any more, it just means that the original creditor has washed their hands of it and gotten rid of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you so much for your answer and knowlegde.

From my credit report it shows to me like they are re-aging most of these accounts. One Agency in part has purchased like 3 accounts. Could you please guide me to a website where I could view my rights in CT regarding these issues/federal and maybe sample letters.

If I wanted to dispute these debts I would have do it through the Trans Union/Equifax places or the Agency or both. Since I am not familiar with my rights regarding my problem, I'm not sure the what some abbreviations mean. But starting today I want to learn all I can.

What would you recommended my first steps should be in solving my issue.

Thank You Again

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FIRST TO DENISE....THEN LADY...IF you have a moment :D

Denise, here are the links for what you are looking for..

Abbreviations: http://www.debt-consolidation-credit-repair-service.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3838

For state laws and resources you will have to check more here:

http://www.debt-consolidation-credit-repair-service.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=574

Sample Letters (Also glance through this part of this site for a lot of quick general information)

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/forms/

Denise, the search function can also be very helpfull, and I would recommend you search for key words that may pertain to you current situations, read through the new posts as well, you may run across a similar situation with someone else and others are responding, understand the DV process, the dispute process for the CRA's, AND WHATEVER YOU DO, UNLESS YOU HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO CHOICE DO NOT PAY FOR A COLLECION OR DEROG WITHOUT GETTING A LETTER OF DELETION FIRST.

Hello Lady, I have a question about the Charge-off part, I completely understand that it is just that specif accounting funtion, but do you know whether or not there is a law that stops the OC (Especially if never turned over to a CA) from continuing to report the account 90+ days late.

I ask because I had a car loan back in Sept. 2000, 9 months later an accident totalled the car, I didnt know at the time insurance only pays the book value, so it left about $1000, I had since moved and didnt know I owed anything until I pulled my reports recently, but it is now showing as a CO, and it has 90+ days lates showing as recent as 10/2002, and it also says below 6 additional 90+ day lates. Here is the debt below. Is it typical for a loan to show this many 90+ day lates, I am currently still doing a little research to find the best course of action on this debt, this is the most detrimental listing, as you can see my EQ report on MYFICO in Jan. is way lower than the others. Another very odd thing about the account is the High Balance, where it shows it was $249 (The loan was $15,000), and then the balance also shows $249, but past due $1,333??

Equifax:

Account Number: 18XXXX

Acct Type: Installment

Acct Status: Open

Monthly Payment: $344

Date Open: Sep, 2000

Balance: $249

Terms: N/A

High Balance: $249

Limit: N/A

Past Due: $1,333

Remarks: CHARGED OFF ACCOUNT AUTO

Payment Status: Bad debt& placed for collection& skip

DOLA was 2/2001

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Denise - I find it very doubtful that all of your accounts are being re-aged. I'm sure you're looking at the wrong dates as there are plenty of places that tell you to look at the wrong date. Re-aging is a serious violation of the FCRA, and even though some CA's DO attempt it, most creditors don't cross that line.

The source you need for how things are reported and how to dispute it is the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and there's a link to it at the top of this page. Print it out, and read thru it, its lengthy, but its not all that hard to get thru and find what you need to know. You will have to do your disputes with Equifax, Experian and TransUnion, you do NOT dispute with any collection agencies.

Champion - It sounds to me like the creditor is being lazy. While a charge-off of a car loan would likely happen at 120 days of non-payment, they can do it sooner. When you think about it, the loan is 90+ days late - WAY late and it seems that the creditor keeps reiterating the same data rather than changing it to 120 days late, etc. It IS correctly showing the charge-off status. Do they report every month still or is the 2002 date the last time they actually reported it ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This data I provided comes straight from MY FICO report, which for some reason in the section that list the recent payment history does not have a section for 120 day lates, only 30, 60 and then 90+.

The last date they indicate is 10/2002 for the LAST DATED 90+ day late, but then like I had said in the previous posts, it says an additional 6 90+ day lates. My PG report indicates the first CO listing under 12/2004, up till that date, it was filled with OK. So I am not sure if they are just now reporting the CO, this one has me stumped a little because like I said, the huge amount of 90+ day lates effect your credit the most, which is clear in my score. I am going to first DV the account, and see what I can get out of it, if they send me the contract, that will be ok, but under the law, if I request the payment information made by the insurance company, do they have to provide it, because based on the original balance amount, and the payments I made, it looks like they were paid about $12,000. And if they cannot provide this documentation, do I have any leverage.

I have been rather successful on pay for deletes in the last couple months and feel confident I may get one, but I at the same time feel I do not have an obligation to pay the debt, but considering the debt is now only past the SOL for court action, it will remain if I cannot get a deletion. I also do not want them to sell the debt to a CA because then, the OC would still have the negative listing, and if I had to negotiate a pay for delete with the new CA, the original negative would remain, which would not be good. I may be mis-informed on this but I am not sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, Denise72CT, they are not allowed to change the DOLA, which is the "date of last activity", which is set BY LAW at 180 days (6months) after the last payment on the account. The JDB's (junk debt buyers, purchasers of defaulted debts, like the ones you have: i.e.-not paid off according to the contract you agreed to) are notorious for doing a "scam" called "re-aging":illegally re-setting the DOLA to a later date. Usually they pick the the date that THEY bought the account!

I'm sorry, but that is just flat out WRONG.

What it ACTUALLY says in the FCRA is that creditors must report the delinquency date that immediately preceeds placement for collections or charge-off. That delinquency date is what Congress decided to use to measure the 7-1/2 year reporting period for negative information and it is THAT date that can NEVER be changed. The DOLA should not change either, but the DOLA is NOT the 'date certain' specified in the FCRA for the reporting period.

The reporting period runs for 7 years + 180 days from that DELINQUENCY DATE - NOT the charge-off date. Charge-off can be done well before the 180 day mark.

The date that any junk debt buyer (JDB) or CA bought your account has NOTHING to do with the ORIGINAL DOLA or the "date certain", what they report as 'date opened' is when they bought the account and it means very little in terms of reporting-- and that date does NOT constitute illegal re-aging either.

Collections, no matter how many, can NOT survive the obsolesence of the ORIGINAL DEBT. So it doesn't matter how many clowns in the chain, things cannot legally stay on your reports for more than the specified 7-1/2 years. Some WILL try illegal re-aging, its called 'running the statute' and it IS illegal, you can sue the scumbags for it, but you have keep an eye on the RIGHT DATE.

In order to find out what the EXACT delinquency date is that is used to calculate the reporting period, you have to call the CRA's, I don't think any of them report THAT date - although they should to stop the confusion. Once you find out what that date is, from the ORIGINAL CREDITOR trade-line, then you know what you're dealing with.

In general, the DOLA is the last time you made a payment or a charge, and the delinquency date SHOULD be the date the next payment went unpaid, so you DO need to watch the DOLA. The fun becomes trying to keep the collection tied to the original, after a while the waters get pretty muddied.

To specifically answer your question, a charge-off is nothing more than an accounting function. When your account goes unpaid for a period of time (typically 180 days but can be less), the creditor writes the account off as a bad debt and moves it from the performing (paying) side of their legders, to the NON-performing side, then write it off as a loss. For this they get a tax break AND they make money by selling the account to junk debt buyers or collection agencies.

Charge-off does NOT mean you don't owe it any more, it just means that the original creditor has washed their hands of it and gotten rid of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What it ACTUALLY says in the FCRA is that creditors must report the delinquency date that immediately preceeds placement for collections or charge-off. That delinquency date is what Congress decided to use to measure the 7-1/2 year reporting period for negative information and it is THAT date that can NEVER be changed. The DOLA should not change either, but the DOLA is NOT the 'date certain' specified in the FCRA for the reporting period.

The reporting period runs for 7 years + 180 days from that DELINQUENCY DATE - NOT the charge-off date. Charge-off can be done well before the 180 day mark.

Thanks, Ladyn'Red! That's often misunderstood...and I misunderstood it!! :oops:

The date that any junk debt buyer (JDB) or CA bought your account has NOTHING to do with the ORIGINAL DOLA or the "date certain", what they report as 'date opened' is when they bought the account ... and that date does NOT constitute illegal re-aging either.

That seems to be a point of confusion, too. I'm glad you pointed this out.

Collections, no matter how many, can NOT survive the obsolesence of the ORIGINAL DEBT. So it doesn't matter how many clowns in the chain, things cannot legally stay on your reports for more than the specified 7-1/2 years.

Yet, they can still TRY to collect in most states--it is just an affirmative defense if you DO get sued!!

I think I've got THAT right! :lol:

Also, they are not allowed to LEGALLY report the information to the CRA's on such a "zombie" account. ... Have I, Lady, gotten this through my thick head, now?? :(

Some WILL try illegal re-aging, its called 'running the statute' and it IS illegal, you can sue the scumbags for it, but you have keep an eye on the RIGHT DATE.

And, it seems, that's the trick here! (Keeping an eye on the "right" date.)

In order to find out what the EXACT delinquency date is that is used to calculate the reporting period, you have to call the CRA's...

Once you find out what that date is, from the ORIGINAL CREDITOR trade-line, then you know what you're dealing with.

Got it, Lady!

In general, the DOLA is the last time you made a payment or a charge, and the delinquency date SHOULD be the date the next payment went unpaid, so you DO need to watch the DOLA. The fun becomes trying to keep the collection tied to the original, after a while the waters get pretty muddied.

All too true, Lady! And, it doesn't take too long for the"waters" to "get muddied", either! :lol:

To specifically answer your question, a charge-off is nothing more than an accounting function. When your account goes unpaid for a period of time (typically 180 days but can be less), the creditor writes the account off as a bad debt and moves it from the performing (paying) side of their legders, to the NON-performing side, then write it off as a loss. For this they get a tax break AND they make money by selling the account to junk debt buyers or collection agencies.

Charge-off does NOT mean you don't owe it any more, it just means that the original creditor has washed their hands of it and gotten rid of it.

I DID understand that!! I'm sorry I did not even mention this point.

I certainly did not want to mislead the OP by not bringing up the definition of "charge-off" !! My apologies if I did. :oops: ...again!

Well...uh... for me to be able to take my foot out of my mouth, my foot...uh... needed to be put in there...uh... first!! Ouch!! :(

Live and learn, I guess! :oops:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.