Jump to content

CitiBank Charge Off


Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, Harry Seaward said:

That may be, but you're leaving out the part that 5x is still only 5x of 0.5% chance.

Who cares if they give you a reason or not?  They asked the question and stated their goal.

Not true.  620 is a pretty well established "classification" for several sub-prime lenders.  And 640 is yet another for mid-prime lenders.  I said 40-50 points was a reasonable expectation for reducing extreme utilization to zero.

Two things.  CRAs often discredit AU accounts when the user and primary so not share the same physical address.  Second, putting your credit in the hands of someone you don't know is a horrible idea.  So if OP has a family member they live with that has good credit that would be willing to do this, fine.  Otherwise, this is horrible advice.

This won't give an accurate result.  There is no option on there for "pay a charge-off to $0".  Also, it doesn't predict the effects in 3, 6 or more months down the road.

1. Again, more speculations with absolutely zero basis. 

2. There is a HUGE difference with wanting to improve your credit within 1-2 months or improve your credit period. Once you pay that CO then it's nearly impossible to remove.

3. I`ll refer the OP to you when he pays off a $1800 CO and doesn't get a 40-50pts increase and comes back asking how to improve his credit. 

4. Who in their right mind would ask to be placed as an AU on someone with irresponsible expending habits? NO ONE. That is a horrible assumption that the OP won't be able to properly vet who they'd ask? Seriously? Also, have you forgotten you can remove yourself if the information happens to turn negative? I mean, come on, that is so obvious. The fact that you want to turn my advice into a "horrible advice" based on such a extreme outcome just lets me know that you are in no way looking to have a clear, educating and mature discussion about this.

5. They`ll give a more accurate result than your pretentious FICO score modeling. If this is the only negative the OP has, the results would be far more accurate than anything you can predict. IF the OP has other negative tradelines then the effects would be minimum and your predicted 40-50 pts will fall flat on its face. The score simulator has an area where it lists derogatory balances, you know, like for example, a charge off? That's consider derogatory and covers collections as well in case you were not aware. Doesn't have to say "Please insert Shiva's charge-off from Citi balance here". SMH.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Boisvert said:

Again, more speculations with absolutely zero basis. 

My basis is having been a member of this community for 7 years, seeing the ebb and flow of various trends and a hundred know-it-alls just like you come and go. I'm protective of the reputation of this community and I'm not going to let bad advice go unchecked. Now, you've had two moderators confirm that your advice is horrible. It's time to let it go, and if you don't, you're going to find it very difficult to post going forward. Consider yourself warned. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Harry Seaward said:

My basis is having been a member of this community for 7 years, seeing the ebb and flow of various trends and a hundred know-it-alls just like you come and go. I'm protective of the reputation of this community and I'm not going to let bad advice go unchecked. Now, you've had two moderators confirm that your advice is horrible. It's time to let it go, and if you don't, you're going to find it very difficult to post going forward. Consider yourself warned. 

Threaten me all you want. I’m not going to be limited by a moderator that feels his personal feelings got hurt and is going to ban me when I haven’t violated any of the site rules or policies. If this is the community you are looking to build then go ahead and establish the precedent that if someone dares to go against a moderator and hurt their feelings they’ll get banned. 

You have been proven to be incorrect in multiples things that you have said but instead of acknowledging it, you take your rank and try to take the insults approach since you know you can get away with it because you are moderator. 

The one that thinks they know it all is you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Boisvert said:

Threaten me all you want. I’m not going to be limited by a moderator that feels his personal feelings got hurt and is going to ban me when I haven’t violated any of the site rules or policies. If this is the community you are looking to build then go ahead and establish the precedent that if someone dares to go against a moderator and hurt their feelings they’ll get banned. 

You have been proven to be incorrect in multiples things that you have said but instead of acknowledging it, you take your rank and try to take the insults approach since you know you can get away with it because you are moderator. 

The one that thinks they know it all is you. 

If a consumer has the means to pay an original creditor, it’s ridiculous to suggest he wait for a debt to be sold to a debt buyer before attempting a settlement.

First, you don’t know that the OC will not sue rather than sell the account.

Second, you don’t know that the JDB won’t sue as soon as it purchases the account.

Third, the consumer could end up with 2 negative tradelines rather than just one.

Fourth, when an OC sells an account, it has absolutely no reason to delete its entry.  The consumer has no leverage with an OC that no longer owns an account.

In regard to the “method of verification”, you have only your experience in regard to the outcome.  Considering you had also sent a letter electing arbitration, you really don’t know if it was the election of arbitration or the MOV request that made a difference. 

In addition, the MOV subsection of the FCRA only has some “teeth” if a consumer can prove inaccurate information is reported and that the inaccuracy is material in nature.  It holds no teeth if reported information is accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the point of continuing this argument?

A completely new poster comes in, and starts giving very dangerous advice.  This is someone who has never posted anything on this forum with useful advice.

All I will say is this:  

Every case is a little different.  What works for one person in a very particular situation may not work in other situations that are different.

For example, I beat both AmEx and Discover in arbitration.  Almost every post anyone will find will say you can't beat AmEx or Discover in arbitration.  

The thing is, I realize my situation in both cases was very unusual.  

Not long ago, I ran across a poster who had a similar (but not identical) situation to the one I had for Discover.  So I gave that person advice tailored to that particular unusual situation (the account was past the Delaware SOL but NOT past the SOL in the poster's home state).  That was fairly recent, and I have no idea how that case will turn out.  

The thing is, I don't ever expect that anyone whose situation is even slightly different from mine will have identical results.  

If AmEx hasn't done anything really horrible, they will win.  They did something amazingly bad, illegal and stupid for my wife's account, so they lost.

If Discover hasn't done anything stupid, and the account is within 3 years (the Delaware SOL), they will win.  They waited almost 6 years for my account, and there were a number of possible violations and accounting errors.  

 

As for the situation the OP is in:

If Citi keeps the account, our newbie's advice won't work.

If Citi sells the account to one of the vast majority of JDBs that refuse to deal with a PFD (for example, PRA), the newbie's advice won't work.

If Citi sells the account to one of the few JDBs that will do a PFD, and the OP somehow manages to get into exactly the same situation as the newbie, then the newbie's advice MIGHT work, Or it may not.

In effect, the newbie did the equivalent of drawing to an inside straight flush to win a big pot.  That doesn't happen very often.  It happens occasionally, but generally isn't the best plan.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, BackFromTheDebt said:

In effect, the newbie did the equivalent of drawing to an inside straight flush to win a big pot. 

If you take his word on this, then yes, this is what happened in his case. 

In any event, all of his posts are moderated from now on.

11 minutes ago, BackFromTheDebt said:

What is the point of continuing this argument?

This is my fault, first of all for engaging, and then not shutting it down earlier than I did, so I apologize to the OP for that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 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.