? ABOUT 7yr RULE,

Discussion in 'Credit Talk' started by Om, Aug 29, 2001.

  1. breeze

    breeze Well-Known Member

    Read the section in bold:

     
  2. KristyW

    KristyW Well-Known Member

    Breeze,

    I'm not sure what you are trying to tell me (the bold didn't come out in your last post.) So let me try and express my thoughts again. I was referring to the statement in which you said:

    Which is what I was disagreeing with. No matter what kind of payment you make, the credit reporting 7 year life does not get restarted. Collection agencies are always trying to pull that stuff. I think have proof of this opinion in that I have been able to help several people dispute this kind of thing. I also don't think that the new credit reporting act of 1997 effects this in any way: I've helped several people while doing their loans to get old collections off of their report which had tried to restart the clock this way, and I was in the mortgage business from 1993-1995.
     
  3. breeze

    breeze Well-Known Member

    The opinion letter supporting my statements:

    http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fcra/kosmerl.htm

     
  4. KristyW

    KristyW Well-Known Member

    Where are you seeing something that payment resets the clock? I am missing it.
     
  5. EdG

    EdG Well-Known Member

    Ok so lets say a debt becomes delinquent and is reported as so in 1994 but is later charged off in 1996, the seven years starts in 1996?

    Ed
     
  6. jmart

    jmart Well-Known Member

    Okay..

    My Citibank charge-off charged off in 98, and is still listed as charged off as of 98.. But I made my last payment towards it in 9/99... and this changed the DLA (date of last activity) on the report to 9/99. Experian now says that the account will remain until 9/06.. (If the clock isn't reset by a payment, it should remain only until 2005) Is Experian wrong, or is Citibank wrong?!?

    jmart
     
  7. breeze

    breeze Well-Known Member

    and the letter supporting that letter:

    http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fcra/kosmerl.htm

     
  8. jmart

    jmart Well-Known Member

    Does that mean Citibank is committing an illegal action when they update the DLA (Date of Last Activity) for payments received after they charged off the account? Thanks!

    jmart
     
  9. Tuit

    Tuit Well-Known Member

    So If I missed a pymt 8/99 and never paid after that and the creditor first reported to CRA's my delinquency from 8/99 the 7-years it will show on my Credit Report would end 2/07, right? Unless they charged it off earlier, then the 7-years to report would be from the charge-off, right?
    tml
     
  10. KristyW

    KristyW Well-Known Member

    Breeze, excuse me for being dense, but where is your proof that payment resets the clock? I am not trying to be difficult, I want to know your rationale.

    EdG: Your account will stay on for 7 years from 1994, or 2001.

    jmart: if your account was charged off in 1996, I still say it will come off in 2003. So what if the DLA was reset to 1998. This could happen for any reason. I've had cases where the collection agency merely makes contact with you and they restart the DLA clock.
     
  11. breeze

    breeze Well-Known Member

    Right.


     
  12. KristyW

    KristyW Well-Known Member

    tml,

    I don't think date of last activity has anything to do with how long the CRA's can report you. It's the date of last delinquency that matters.
     
  13. breeze

    breeze Well-Known Member

    Kristy, let me answer your question with a question: If a business has charged a debt to P&L, can they accept a payment? If they do, what happens to the write-off?

     
  14. jmart

    jmart Well-Known Member

    DLA

    My issue with the DLA is the following:

    On my Experian report, Experian has a notation saying that "This account will be reported until 9/2006", 7 years from the DLA, not the charge-off.. Should I dispute this with Experian? Or is this their policy...report 7 years after the DLA?

    jmart
     
  15. KristyW

    KristyW Well-Known Member

    Profit and Loss

    Breeze,

    I don't know the definitive IRS-sanctioned answer to your question about profit and loss; I do know that sometimes businesses will not accept payments on debts that they've already written off because they've already gotten the tax break for it. (The ones that do either have good accountants or unethical ones.)

    However, I don't see the relevancy of the question, though it is intriguing. What is your reason for asking it? How does this relate to the resetting of the Reporting time limit.

    Jmart:
    Experian says alot of things, and we all know how efficient they are. I would say the FTC would back you up. I would still dispute this delinquency in 2003 to come off.
     
  16. breeze

    breeze Well-Known Member

    Re: DLA

    Dispute it.
     
  17. jmart

    jmart Well-Known Member

    Re: DLA

    The thing is that Experian seems to report 7 years from the DLA on all of my accounts..
     
  18. KristyW

    KristyW Well-Known Member

    Re: DLA

    I'll bet they do. Dispute it.
     
  19. breeze

    breeze Well-Known Member

    Re: Profit and Loss

    Because the answer has to do with whether or not a payment can restart the clock on accounts wirtten off prior to the time limits stated in the FCRA attorney opinion letters.

    And you are right about Experian - practices do not equal laws, hehe.

    Is your brain feeling like a pretzel? Mine is.

     
  20. KristyW

    KristyW Well-Known Member

    Re: Profit and Loss

    Breeze,

    I'm so sorry, I still don't get it. If you can stand it, please go into more detail.

    Affectionately,
    PretzelHead
     

Share This Page