Removing Unpaid OC CO- Options Beyond Obsolete?

[creditreformer]

Has anyone found a way to remove unpaid OC COs besides trying to dispute as obsolete? i have 2 that will drop in 9/2010 and so don't think 'obsolete' will work just yet (maybe in 9/09 it will?). is it worth trying to dispute them as obsolete now?

do i have any grounds to dispute how the OC is reporting these COs?

#1

hsbc

bal 0

date updated 1/06

high balance 570 (is this ok for them to report 570? on the other TL (#2 below), it says 0

cl 0

pay status charged off as bad debt

acct type revolving

responsibility individual

date open 6/01

date closed 4/04 (*I think this is WRONG by 1+ yrs, but i don't have a way to prove it)

date paid 2/04 (*I think this is WRONG by 1+ yrs, but i don't have a way to prove it)

remarks purchased by another lender

date it will be removed 9/10

#2

hsbc

bal 0

date updated 7/04

high balance 0

cl 0

pay status charged off as bad debt

acct type revolving

responsibility individual

date open 8/02

date closed 4/04 (*I think this is WRONG by 1+ yrs, but i don't have a way to prove it)

date paid 2/04 (*I think this is WRONG by 1+ yrs, but i don't have a way to prove it)

remarks purchased by another lender

date it will be removed 9/10

[red1gtrubodsm]

Were these accounts indeed purchased by another CA? if so, were they ever reported by the purchasing CA? In general, If the account was indeed sold, and not just assigned, it should be able to be disputed off being as the OC does not have the legal right to update the TL if they dont currently own it

[Cookie]

I wish it were that easy, I have 2 accts with HSBC and had CA collecting and I can't get the OC off

My CR say purchased by another lender the same thing for 1st premier.

What would you dispute them as?

[valorman]

Were these accounts indeed purchased by another CA? if so, were they ever reported by the purchasing CA? In general, If the account was indeed sold, and not just assigned, it should be able to be disputed off being as the OC does not have the legal right to update the TL if they dont currently own it

you are right but can you please explain it little more by which law this TL Can be disputed?

[creditreformer]

both chargeoffs (both w/hsbc) are reported by CAs. i'm not sure what i can dispute other than on 1 of them, HSBC reports a high balance of '570' where on the other it reports a high balance of '0'. can OCs still report 'high balances' on chargedoff accts?

[valorman]

both chargeoffs (both w/hsbc) are reported by CAs. i'm not sure what i can dispute other than on 1 of them, HSBC reports a high balance of '570' where on the other it reports a high balance of '0'. can OCs still report 'high balances' on chargedoff accts?

If they assign the account to an attorney to collect the answer is yes .If they sell it to a debt collector the answer is no

[creditreformer]

If they assign the account to an attorney to collect the answer is yes .If they sell it to a debt collector the answer is no

1 was assigned to asset acceptance, ca

1 was assigned to a 'collection agency attorney'

hsbc stopped updating in '04 and '06, but still reports 'high balance' on 1 acct.

so can i dispute the OC tl that was assigned to a 'collection agency attorney'? if so, what can i dispute it as?

both debts are way out of sol for judgment

both collection agency + collection agency 'attorney' are ILLEGALLY REAGING the debts. any idea on what i can do about this? have challenged reaging w/credit bureaus and not gotten anywhere (see today's new thread).

[cap1kid]

both collection agency + collection agency 'attorney' are ILLEGALLY REAGING the debts. any idea on what i can do about this? have challenged reaging w/credit bureaus and not gotten anywhere (see today's new thread).

How are they 'reaging'? just because they update it doesn't mean its reaged- SOL and 7 yr time frame for reporting are entirely different.

[valorman]

(date open 8/02

date closed 4/04

date paid 2/04

estimated time to remove )

If they are changing any of these dates to further they are reaging account status if they are just updating the report date that has nothing to do with reaging.

you should wish if they do on any of these then its just like 123 to remove from your credit report.

what you should do is take all the three credit reports and match all the TL with each other (make a chart) then if they dont match you have a chance to get those deleted.under the FCRA all the data on your credit report should be accurate.I believe you will find some thing.If they does not match each other how come they are accurate.Also when you said SOL has expired did you check the SOL for you state.Collection agencies and credit bureaus are not going to take care of you.You have to prepare the big bullets on a big gun and aim it correctly and keep shooting until you hit the target.

[creditreformer]

(date open 8/02

date closed 4/04

date paid 2/04

estimated time to remove )

If they are changing any of these dates to further they are reaging account status if they are just updating the report date that has nothing to do with reaging.

you should wish if they do on any of these then its just like 123 to remove from your credit report.

what you should do is take all the three credit reports and match all the TL with each other (make a chart) then if they dont match you have a chance to get those deleted.under the FCRA all the data on your credit report should be accurate.I believe you will find some thing.If they does not match each other how come they are accurate.Also when you said SOL has expired did you check the SOL for you state.Collection agencies and credit bureaus are not going to take care of you.You have to prepare the big bullets on a big gun and aim it correctly and keep shooting until you hit the target.

Sol (judgment/suit) is expired- 4 yrs in calif and it passed in early 08.

By ‘reaging,’ I mean the CAs are reaging…e.g., on TU, it says OC chargeoffs come off in 9/10. for CA tls (related to the OC chargeoffs), it says CA TL comes off in 2/11. how can the OC chargeoff come off in 9/10 (7.5 yr mark) yet the CA TL come off in 2/11 (more like 8 yr mark)?

and no, tls don't match for all reports...ex., EQ DELETED one CA (asset) on my reports. The other CA is NOT on either EQ or EX. The HSBC balance is ZERO (versus 570) on EX and EQ, but TU has it as 570. so, how can i get the CRAs to @ least make the TLs match ea. other?

[valorman]

Sol (judgment/suit) is expired- 4 yrs in calif and it passed in early 08.

By ‘reaging,’ I mean the CAs are reaging…e.g., on TU, it says OC chargeoffs come off in 9/10. for CA tls (related to the OC chargeoffs), it says CA TL comes off in 2/11. how can the OC chargeoff come off in 9/10 (7.5 yr mark) yet the CA TL come off in 2/11 (more like 8 yr mark)?

and no, tls don't match for all reports...ex., EQ DELETED one CA (asset) on my reports. The other CA is NOT on either EQ or EX. The HSBC balance is ZERO (versus 570) on EX and EQ, but TU has it as 570. so, how can i get the CRAs to @ least make the TLs match ea. other?

Well the TL Falloff time limit is calculated from the first major delinquency occurred.lets say oc reported first delinquency in year Jan 2000 it will falloff in Dec 2006.now if the collection agency bought this account in year 2001 and reported in 2001 then it will falloff in year 2007.Collection agency and OC has different reporting time.

[creditreformer]

It was my understanding that CA cannot report after OC CO falls off, so thus the 7.5 yrs/time (based on DOFD w/OC, not when CA bought acct) it can ding your report should be the same. Is that incorrect?