Charge off Still updating

Thanks kittiecat3. I think you summed it up. Dimples1 just make sure that they aren't practicing this same underhanded tactic with you.

Btw, based on what I've been reading(I may be wrong ) I thought the clock started for reporting beginning at the 1st delinquency(30,60,90 day late) for negative accounts. And then the 7 yr clock for collecting the debt starts when you make a payment after the delinquency. So basically 2 different sol's. One for reporting and one for collecting. Any comments?

 

7 year reporting clock starts 180 days prior to charge-off date, assuming the account went delinquent and was never brough current.

 

Where did you come up with the 7 year clock for collecting? The reporting clock starts with the lates that led to the chargeoff. If you had a 30 day late in June of 97 and then caught up but became late again in Sept 97 and never caught up, the date of last activity would be Sept. 97.

The sol for suing on a bad debt differs from state to state. There is no set 7 year rule on that. Also, even though the sol for suing may have passed, a collector can still attempt to get you to pay.

 

Section 623(a)(5) requires a creditor that reports a chargeoff to a CRA to notify the agency (within 90 days of reporting the account) of "the month and year of the commencement of the delinquency that immediately preceded" the chargeoff. Section 605(a)(4) provides that the credit bureau may report the chargeoff for seven years. Section 605(c)(1) provides that seven year period begins 180 days from that date. In the scenario your reported, it is our view that the delinquency that led to the charge-off "commenced" in January 1997, the month the first payment was missed. Thus, that is the month and year that the creditor must report to the CRA, and that the CRA must use to calculate the time period dictated by Section 605.


The 7 year reporting period begins 180 days after the delinquency that led to the chargeoff.

 

LKH....Good call. My bad - I misread exactly what you posted.

 

Thanks! Well I told you that I may be wrong-lol! I think this sol confuses many people. But thanks again.