Hey everyone! I am trying with everything I have to make a home purchase for my fiance, myself and our child. My rental lease is up in 4 months. I wanted to get pre-approved, as step #1 in buying a home so I mentioned it while making a deposit at my bank and since then I have been getting calls from the loan guy, but I have been dodging the calls until I can straighten out a thing or three... Please help me if anyone can think of or spot something that I can clear up before I apply. PLEASE anything will help. Before I post the details of the reports, let me say- yes there a 2 credit cards I defaulted on in March of 2007. Something happened in my life and I did not make my payments. When I got around to making the payments I was hit so hard with fees that I did not pay them. Please keep in mind- they were both secured cards, so they had my money on them for the credit limit, and, well, I guess that was my justification to just let them go- it was my money i deposited anyway. Not responsible, but that's the truth. And if I paid them now I would essentially lose the money I deposited (secured) for the credit limit, AND if I understand right it would also reset the 7 year period before it comes off my report as a late pay. Anyway, Here is my situation: Transunion: 654, Equifax: 601 On the Credit at a Glance Section 60 days+ delinquency: TU 1, EQ 2 Collections: TU 6, EQ 4 Only EQ says I have multiple accounts showing missed payments or derogatory descriptions (2). TU says I have "limited the use of available credit" (18%) EQ says I have "made heavy use of available revolving credit" (19%) Don't understand either of those as I pay my CC balances in full every month? Both say I have recently paid bills on time. On the "Accounts" Section: Transunion . Old CC.............. Opened 9/2005.......... Balance $162.......... Charged off as bad debt.......... Neg Indicator Current CC#1..... Opened 8/2012.......... Balance $0...............Paid or paying as agreed........ Not Neg Current CC#2..... Opened 12/2011.........Balance $0...............Paid or paying as agreed........ Not Neg Equifax . Old CC.............. Opened 9/2005.......... Balance $162.......... Charged off as bad debt.......... Neg Indicator Old CC#2........... Opened 10/2008........Balance $725.........120+ days past due................Neg Indicator Current CC#1..... Opened 8/2012.......... Balance $0...............Paid or paying as agreed........ Not Neg Current CC#2..... Opened 12/2011.........Balance $0...............Paid or paying as agreed........ Not Neg This (above) is what I am confused about. On the Transunion report- Old CC#2 is NOT listed in accounts section, but it IS listed in the "collections" section.... But on Equifax----------------Old CC#2 IS listed in accounts section (120+ days past due), but NOT in the collections section? Is that saying one of the reports says that the account is still open and the other says it is a closed account? Also, I defaulted on both of the old CC's on the same month (March 2007). Why does CC#2 say "Opened 10/2008"? Those are my main questions.... Beyond that: There are 3 Emergency Medical balances- the most recent one being May 2007. Cable Company- $380 - April 2010 (Had cable in my name, moved out, roomates continued to enjoy cable, forgot to turn off, Couldn't collect $ from them, no excuse though, my fault. That's all there is. I have provable, stable income of about $46,000 (decent for my area) and have been at the same job for over 12 years. With the magnitude of how important this is in mine and my family's life, I Thank You so much for any advice you can offer me!
Talk to your lender and find out if you have to pay off those collections. If you don't have to pay them off to get approved for your home loan. Then I would boost your credit with authorized user accounts. Ask a family member or trusted friend to add you as an authorized user to one of their existing credit card accounts. Just make sure they have perfect payment history (no 30 day lates) and they can maintain a low balance (10% or less of the credit limit). The longer the payment history and the higher the credit limit on the card the bigger the boost will be in your credit score. Thanks! Heather with BoostMyScore.NET
What are the Date of First Delinquencies listed as on EQ and Expected Date this will fall off on TU for both old CC's? That is the important date, not the open date necessarily although if you're saying it was charged off in '07, it sounds like its being re-aged on CC#2. If it is it's a violation of the FCRA. As far as the collections...you could start be disputing the accounts and sending DV letters to the CA's. Or if you're not comfortable with that you could try the PFD option. They're old, and likely out of SOL depending on the state you're in. That being the case there's a higher chance the CA will work with you. I do agree with Heather about getting added as an authorized user to perfect history/high CL accounts, however this really should be last on your list. Mortgage companies usually will not give you a loan with any open collection accounts and that's your first priority.
Heather_L : Thanks for the advice. Will talk to the lender. Unfortunately, I don't think being added as an authorized user will be an option for me though. mindcrime thanks for coming in! The dates have me confused... But the date of first delinquency in reality is March, 2007 for both credit cards, that is in fact the only time I was ever late on a payment. But it's hard to make sense of it on the reports. There are two sections on the TU and EQ reports, "accounts section" and "collections section". The "accounts section" gives you a lot of detailed dates such as: Status as of, Date opened, Date of last activity, Date closed.But the "collections section" only gives you "Date assigned"On TU, only one CC is in the "accounts section" (OldCC#1) and the other OldCC#2 is in the "collections section" But, on EQ, both OldCC's are in the "accounts section", neither in the "collections section" So, I am wondering why they are listed differently: TU OldCC#1 - "accounts section" $162 - Charged off as bad debt OldCC#2 - "collections section" $725 EQ OldCC#1 - "accounts section" $162 - Bad debt/ collection OldCC#2 - "accounts section" $725 - 120+ days past due Is that saying that the account is still active the way it's listed? It just doesn't make sense to me. It seems like to me that they should both be in "collections section" on all reports. And what is up with it being listed as a "factoring company?" Ok, I know I am not wording this very coherently, so here is a link that you can view a copy of the reports I have put up on Dropbox. dropbox.com/sh/zg7qy2nl5ifunjv/xJeD2pSpXl (you will have to copy and paste that into your browser because I don't have 25 posts here yet so I can't post links) Right now, I'm just trying to deal with the TU and EQ reports, so you might want to ignore the EX. I know the EX report is even worse, but just doing one thing at a time. Please look at it and let me know if it looks like it is listed wrong and/or re-aged etc.. I am more than appreciative of your time and assistance.
May I ask why adding authorized user accounts to your credit is not a option for you? It sound like you are working with a specific time frame and once the authorized user accounts report you see the results insistently. Thanks! Heather with BoostMyScore.NET
Where did you pull your reports from? I ask because with 3-in-1 reports and reports from third-parties have tendencies to shift items around on your reports....meaning (in my personal situation), I had a collection account on a 3-in-1 listed under Collection Accounts on 2 reports, and listed elsewhere on the other. I wouldn't be too concerned with that part. But there are other things that could be 'lost' on these reports that are a concern. In looking at your EQ and TU reports: First Premier, DofLA is different (March vs May, 2007)...and there is no Date of First delinquency date either....which is why I was curious about where you pulled these reports from. If not from the CRA, it's possible that the key date we are looking for here (DofFD) IS listed, but not showing on this report. Based on the reports you supplied, there's no way of determining the exact month this account should fall off. Jefferson CA - same issue. No DofFD, no "scheduled to continue on record until x/x/xxxx". No way of knowing for sure what month this account passes the 7YR mark. Have you gone to annualcreditreport.com recently? You can pull a copy of your report from each bureau once a year. I'd suggest doing that (it's free) to get a clearer picture of what is going on with each account. I don't feel comfortable suggesting disputing these accounts as inaccurate since it's possible that the required info really is there when looking at your reports direct from the CB's.
Hi Heather L, the only reason really is that I don't have anyone to help me with that. All of my family is on the other side of country and they all have their own problems. I do have one family member here with a decent credit line I am sure, but a year or so back he had some problems and was late on a few payments I imagine... would that be a problem? Hi thanks for replying. They are not 3-in-1 reports. I got the Transunion and the Equifax reports individually from myfico.com, where I thought you were supposed to get the version that banks pull and that has actual true credit score and the Experian report from experians site. I ordered the annualcreditreport.com reports a few months ago, they are at my office so I will check them for inaccuracies against these myfico reports. Good idea! Since it is past the SOL should I just send the collection agency a debt validation letter and see what they have? Or contact the credit bureaus and mention that the dates are conflicting and ask them to fix it or delete it, without supplying any further information..
It would. It's a negative account, even with just one 30 day late payment, and especially being under 2 years old it'll only hurt your score more. Check the annualcreditreport.com reports. That's what I used when I first stared, then reports direct from the CB's. There needs to be a date of first delinquency or an account is scheduled to be removed by x/x/xx date. 1681c (c): (c) Running of Reporting Period (1) In general. The 7-year period referred to in paragraphs (4) and (6)6 of subsection (a) shall begin, with respect to any delinquent account that is placed for collection (internally or by referral to a third party, whichever is earlier), charged to profit and loss, or subjected to any similar action, upon the expiration of the 180-day period beginning on the date of the commencement of the delinquency which immediately preceded the collection activity, charge to profit and loss, or similar action. There's no way to determine the date of commencement of the delinquency if its not reported....and as far as I can see on those reports, it's not. (if i'm going blind, someone please correct me!) If you're past the SOL, sending a DV letter is certainly an option to take. Even if that do validate, the CA should know there's nothing they can do to make you pay it, so you may want to try for a PFD at that point. If they don't, dispute the accounts. If you decide to dispute through the CB, dispute it as inaccurate, nothing more. Don't give them any details, it's the data furnishers job to make sure they're reporting accurately, not yours. You said these cards were secured....what was the security amount? Was it equal to the CL? Whatever you had given in security needs to be subtracted from the actual balance, be sure that's happening.
Yes, I agree with mindcrime. Do not add authorized user accounts that have late payments on them. That would only hurt your score instead of help it. There are companies out there that sell authorized user accounts, I actually work for one of them. Please contact me directly if you would like more information about purchasing authorized user accounts. Thanks! Heather with BoostMyScore.NET
Yeah, that's why I didn't think it would help me in my particular case. Anyone who knows me and is close to me would offer to surely but I don't think it would help me technically if they've had some trouble in the past, regardless of whether they pulled themselves out of it, which they did... It doesn't give exactly a "date of first delinquency" or an "account is scheduled to be removed by" item, but it does say this bit: Status Details: This account is scheduled to continue on record until March 2014." Close enough. So that is saying in so many ways the DOFD was March, 2007? Really it doesn't say either one of those two... Following is exactly how it is shown (Experian): [table="width: 600"] [tr] [td]Status: Account charged off. $161 written off. $162 past due as of Dec 2010.[/td] [td]Status Details:This account is scheduled to continue on record until Mar 2014.[/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]Date Opened: 09/2005[/td] [td]Type: Credit card[/td] [td]Credit Limit: $725[/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]Reported Since: 12/2008[/td] [td]Terms: 1 Months[/td] [td]High Balance: NA[/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]Date of Status: 12/2008[/td] [td]Monthly Payment: $0[/td] [td]Recent Balance: $725 as of 06/2012[/td] [/tr] [tr] [td]Last Reported: 06/2012[/td] [td]Responsibility: Individual[/td] [td]Recent Payment: $0[/td] [/tr] [tr] [td][/td] [td][/td] [td][/td] [/tr] [/table] All those damn dates and they can't just come out and say the account went delinquent on such-and-such a date?? I might need to take a ritalin pill to understand this long winded confusing language but thanks for posting it. It doesn't state it clearly. At least not to me. What I put up online in pdf were the myfico.com reports and the one I put into the table above is from annualcreditreport.com Guess I'm gonna give that a go. I'm sure there are sample letters and tips out there? Was another question of mine.. The $200 card was all security deposit and the $725 I think they gave me a CLI at one point but I think I deposited $500? I can't remember exactly. But, who is gonna help me with that information? It's not like I could call the original company or the collections agency and get them to volunteer the actual amounts.... And for that matter I can't recall honestly for the life of me what the balances were but they definitely weren't maxed out the exact dollar of the credit line! So, you're right huh, that should be subtracted, right? But again, who is going to volunteer that info... I definitely don't have those records... Thanks again for all your help!
Good to know. I believe the reason (or at least part of it) that Heather advocates that it is with a trusted family member/friend is more for your protection than theirs. AU's can't do much except use the account. Easy way to keep an AU from running up a tab is to just not give the AU a card. The trust is with you trusting them to not default on the card thereby making the reason for being an AU pointless. LOL, yes, March 2007. Technically it starts 180 days from the date of the commencement of the delinquency, but that doesn't seem to be followed from what I've seen. The annualcreditreport.com report is much clearer. Yes, there's a sample letter section right on the site. I wouldn't suggest using a letter though right out of the box. Modify it, you don't want the CA getting the same exact letter they've gotten from dozens if not hundreds of others. I realize this is a stretch, but do you remember if you paid those security deposits through your bank (are you still with that same bank?), if you believe you did, you may be able to get those records, maybe for a small fee, from your bank indicating the respective deposits to the OC's. You need a breakdown of what the $725 entails....of course this only will matter if you decide you'll have to pay them...chances are the CA's will screw up.
Heather L: Sent you a PM about buying authorized user accounts as you said to but not sure it went through because it's not in my sent box? Did you get it? OK thanks. Could you point me toward a good DV letter that I could tweak for myself? I did search the main site here and the forum but couldn't find... I like the way you think! I'll get on that!
They're in the Sample Letter section before you click on the Credit Talk forum. Here is the newer of the two: ----------------- <Your name> <Your address> <Your city, state, and ZIP> <CA's name> <CA's address> <CA's city, state, and ZIP> <Today's date> RE: <Account information, EXACTLY as provided by the CA> Dear <CA's name> I am disputing the alleged debt referenced above. Please validate this alleged debt and submit proof of validation to my address above. Sincerely <Your name - DO NOT SIGN> ----------------------------------- Obviously this is basic, but it's also straight to the point. I do suggest changing it up a little. But don't take out words like 'validate' and 'alleged'. Some people like to add sections from the FDCPA like....In accordance with 15 USC 1692g I am requesting validation of this alleged debt. ...and so on. It will needs to be tailored to your specific situation, so if you're receiving phone calls you could invoke your rights under 15 USC 1592c (a)(1) within the letter. ....and some don't like to add any of that believing and hoping that the CA will have a higher chance of screwing up. It's just an opinion...either way works. BTW, with private messages, unless you check the 'Save a copy of this message in your Sent Items folder' box at the bottom, it won't show up in the sent folder.
mindcrime, you're the man! I appreciate all your help and even more so, your time! Would it be advisable to start maybe with the simple DV letter and then if do not get satisfactory response, then send more detailed letter and assume a more threatening tone by invoking and mentioning specific FDCPA sections? And no, I'm not receiving any phone calls. Also, do I do the dispute with the CRA before the DV letter with the CA? Or do I do them both simultaneously? Or, in which order?
Starting simple is a good plan. I did that when I first came back to the forum, and increased the aggressiveness shortly thereafter. I suggest sending DV first, wait till you get green card (or check it online) and dispute 5 days later with CRA's. That gives the CA plenty of time to mark the account in dispute. This is section 623 (a) (3) of the FCRA: (3) Duty to provide notice of dispute. If the completeness or accuracy of any information furnished by any person to any consumer reporting agency is disputed to such person by a consumer, the person may not furnish the information to any consumer reporting agency without notice that such information is disputed by the consumer. It does not state a timeframe, just says that may not furnish the information to any CRA w/o notice that such info is disputed.... ... so therefore, once they receive your dispute, 5 days is PLENTY of time for them to submit notice to the CRA's. Good luck and keep us posted!
Back again, one more question... All the previous derogatory TL's are from when I lived at previous addresses. I have read that it is wise to attempt to have the CRA remove those old ("innacurate") addresses before sending DV's, because it makes it harder to verify. Should I attempt to have the old addresses removed first? EQ is the only one reporting accurate information. TU has them mixed up. EX has several altogether wrong addresses. So it shouldn't be too hard to get them removed (although I heard EX doesn't budge much). My only concern was that the CRA wouldn't take the disputes as seriously as they would have otherwise because: first I send address disputes, then immediately followed by disputes about the TL's listed. Haven't they seen that a thousand times?
I've had 100% success with deleting old addresses on all 3. I'm not sure how far deleting old addresses will go in creating more difficulty in verifying, though. A number of the basic disputes I went through came back verified (and this was after deletion of old addresses). It took DV and some other persuasions to get the job done, in my case. Personally, I just like the look of less addresses listed, looks cleaner, and IMO makes the consumer look more grounded, not having a half a dozen or more addresses in their file. Don't be concerned about the CB not taking you seriously. No one there is so overly concerned with your report that it would raise a flag.
Dolleprod, I still haven't heard from you. Please contact me directly. Thanks! Heather with BoostScore.NET
