I received a copy of my credit report from EQUIFAX. The following information was included concerning how long charge-offs remain on my report... "On accounts charged to profit and loss or placed for collection PRIOR to 01/01/98 seven years from the date of last activity. "On accounts charged to profit and loss or placed for collection AFTER to 01/01/98 seven years from the beginning of the delinquency that lead to the charge-off or lead to the collection" This sounds like if I pay an account charged-off in 1995 I will be re-starting the 7 year clock! Or is paying the balance not considered the date of last activity?
RE: Confused!!!...The Infamous Equifax, As usual has their heads elsewhere. When they write it like that, it confuses people. A payment does not restart the clock and in addition, I have yet to see any of the bureaus follow the pre ammended guidelines. Last activity is last delinquent, last written off. It means basically the same. Justine wrote: ------------------------------- I received a copy of my credit report from EQUIFAX. The following information was included concerning how long charge-offs remain on my report... "On accounts charged to profit and loss or placed for collection PRIOR to 01/01/98 seven years from the date of last activity. "On accounts charged to profit and loss or placed for collection AFTER to 01/01/98 seven years from the beginning of the delinquency that lead to the charge-off or lead to the collection" This sounds like if I pay an account charged-off in 1995 I will be re-starting the 7 year clock! Or is paying the balance not considered the date of last activity?
RE: Confused!!!...The Infamous what about accounts that may have been included in bankruptcy. What if they were delinquent before the bankruptcy? should it show the original delinquency BEFORE the bankruptcy? or should it show, just the BANKRUPTCY discharge date?
RE: To Kristi! Kristi So no matter what Equifax says if I pay the balance on a charged-off account from 2/1/96 the 7 years end in 2003? Are sure before I go and do this!!!
RE: To Kristi! Just to ease yoyr mind, ask a few other credit specialists. A debt cannot be re-aged from date of payment to reflect 7 years from that time. However, the bureaus have been known to do it an I have had to advice them many a times that they re aged it incorrectly. Any time you are dealing with the bureaus you are going to have problems because getting through to them can be difficult. Last activity for debts prior to 1998 does not include paying it off. What can happen however is if you pay it with no restrictive offer then it will go from charge off to paid charge off which really looks no better. To ease your mind ask credit sense or barry, or any one else. I can tell you that as far as the law goes, you can NOT report a bad debt for 7 years from time paid. All that will happen is the status will change for the remaining time. If you got an acceptance for a better rating, I say, great but if not, why pay it unless negotiation is completely out of the question. Also when oy say 2003, its actually 2003 plus 180 days. Killer wrote: ------------------------------- Kristi So no matter what Equifax says if I pay the balance on a charged-off account from 2/1/96 the 7 years end in 2003? Are sure before I go and do this!!!
RE: Confused!!!...The Infamous Sandra: It can be listed like this: Was 90 days 10-98 Included in BK. Was charged off now inlcuded in BK. They can report the previous history along with the BK statement. Kristi CarreonandAssociates.com sandra wrote: ------------------------------- what about accounts that may have been included in bankruptcy. What if they were delinquent before the bankruptcy? should it show the original delinquency BEFORE the bankruptcy? or should it show, just the BANKRUPTCY discharge date?
RE: Confused!!!...The Infamous Sorry Kristi, I guess I was a little unclear in my question. So in a situation with a bankruptcy, (which is say before 1997) what date is used in determining the date of last activity?
RE: Confused!!!...The Infamous Sorry Kristi, I guess I was a little unclear in my question. So in a situation with a bankruptcy, (which is say before 1997) what date is used in determining the date of last activity? Wouldnt the previous history be before the Bankruptcy? So would the previous history or the included in bankruptcy date be used as the date of last activity or original delinquency?
RE: Confused!!!...The Infamous Sandra: The last activity prior to 1998 would still be last closed, last delinquent or written off. The BK is not the last activity because it was simply an action against an already past due debt. The BK is merely a statement of the ending status but the account should have the last activity as whatever happened last by the creditor not a last action you did such as a payment or a BK. On a personal note, and I have said this before, This last activity stuff prior to 1998 never really holds up. I have clients with debts charged off in 1994 0r 1995 and whenever they have disputed them, the bureaus always end up calculating 7 years from profit and loss, or last serious delinquency (charge off). It is one of those ammendments everyone talks about and thinks is specific but actually it isn't. Besides once a debt is a few years old you can bet that half the reps working for the bureaus are not even aware of the changes after 1998. They only know what they picked up in their training course while have asleep and that is 7 years from charge off. Most do not even realize when it's a debt before them that would be subject to the provisions before the ammendment. So a little persistance by you ends up confusing the **** out of them anyway. sandra wrote: ------------------------------- Sorry Kristi, I guess I was a little unclear in my question. So in a situation with a bankruptcy, (which is say before 1997) what date is used in determining the date of last activity? Wouldnt the previous history be before the Bankruptcy? So would the previous history or the included in bankruptcy date be used as the date of last activity or original delinquency?
RE: To Kristi! Thanks a millionn Kristi! I clearly understand and believe you! Now can you advise me? This debt is $400 and charges-off in 1995. The creditor never did turn it over to a collection agency until this month! I guess my dispute last month angered them! Anyway, the collection agency contacted me and offered to settle for 50%. However, they refused to give me a letter stating that they would remove from my Credit Report. I eveen offered to pay in full in exchange for removal. The rep allowed me to talk to the supervisor but supervisor said no too. Now I have the original account and the collection account on my Credit Report. The collector says it's illegal for them to remove it. I even told them that a former creditor removed in exchange for payment but they still said no! Should I now pay a credit repair person?
RE: To Kristi! No, don't give up and pay anyone just yet. See, your dealing with Collectors and they really know little about bureau tactics. Most staff believe that it is in deed illegal to remove it. Nonsense! There is no law that says they must report anything at all, only how long they are allowed to report it. Why are you in a hurry to settle this? Are you trying to buy a house? If not, play hardball with the agency and blow them off. Tell them you wan't no contact from them at all and if they try to persue legal remedy,you will show the debt is expired under the SOL unless your sol is longer then 5 years (and I do not know what state you are in) but you can check the sol at our site under "Resources". If you want it to appear that you are paying this for home buying purposes, then have a friend write up a letter for you as your proxy (anyone you asign your financial issue to) and have them send a letter to your potential lender that you are in the process of settling the debt but that at this point it is still in dispute and the creditor has been unable to validate it. This should satisfy the lender especially if they believe you are being represented by a proxy. Let the collection agency stew. Send them a letter that says to cease and desist and that the debt is expired and to take your offer or get nothing! Best of Luck! Kristi CarreonandAssociates.com Killer wrote: ------------------------------- Thanks a millionn Kristi! I clearly understand and believe you! Now can you advise me? This debt is $400 and charges-off in 1995. The creditor never did turn it over to a collection agency until this month! I guess my dispute last month angered them! Anyway, the collection agency contacted me and offered to settle for 50%. However, they refused to give me a letter stating that they would remove from my Credit Report. I eveen offered to pay in full in exchange for removal. The rep allowed me to talk to the supervisor but supervisor said no too. Now I have the original account and the collection account on my Credit Report. The collector says it's illegal for them to remove it. I even told them that a former creditor removed in exchange for payment but they still said no! Should I now pay a credit repair person?
RE: To Kristi! THX!....not trying to buy a house but get a better credit score so my next car loan wont' have an eye-popping apr...so i will just let them stew!
RE: To Kristi! I would just wait it out. The debt can also be explained to the next car lender as a disputed debt especially if the rest of your credit is good. Go for a loan at a Credit Union, you can join one through any chamber of commerce and get a good rate just because you are a member. Most CU give 7.4% for good credit and 9.5% for impaired. It's worth the effort. Killer wrote: ------------------------------- THX!....not trying to buy a house but get a better credit score so my next car loan wont' have an eye-popping apr...so i will just let them stew!
RE: To Kristi! Kristi is correct about the 7 years for pre 1998 debts. By the way, Equifax correctly shows my dates of last activity pre chargeoff. I disagree that charged off, paid is not much better than merely charged off. I also suggest asking the colection agency if they will take 50% of the debt. Charged off, settled is bettr than merely charged off, too.
RE: To Kristi! My theory on a charge off is this. A charge off is an R9 (R1 being best and R9 being worst) If you take a charge off to a paid charge off, it still remains an R-8-9. Nothing was accomplished for you but the creditor got his money and you are still stuck with a negative entry. Lenders will think, so what,you paid it, it was still a charge off and that shows that you let it get to a no return status before you decided to do anything about it. Why do that when there is little motivation for you. Always, ALWAYS try to negotiate the rating for deleted first, paid was DQ second and settled third. I can tell you when I see a paid charge off I look at it just as I did a charge off.
RE: The truth about paying cha EXACTLY EXACTLY! Otherwise known as the BIG LIE of the credit industry. Credit boards such as this have been great for dissemnating the true reality that paying a charge-off without an agreement for deletion gains you ABSOLUTELY, POSITIVELY, NOTHING, and may harm you even more if they decide to re-age it; as you yourself have seen happen to unfortunate individuals on countless occasions. The fact is as far as your FICO score is concerned you don't gain so much as 1 point for paying a charge-off, and there is absolutely no difference between 1 and 100 charge-offs the way the scoring is set up. Furthermore, as far as "prime" credit card grantors are concerned, charge-offs whether paid/unpaid/settled or whatever you want to call it equates to automatic rejection, their is absolutely positively no difference and if anybody tells you otherwise their just another bald-faced liar. And Killer while Pat is hardly a plant from Equifax, especially since he has stated he has intentions of suing Experian. There have certainly been any number of such on these sites typically pushing people to pay off collections/charge-offs no matter what..J.A. Mason comes to mind. Remember the collection and mortgage industries are in collusion thats why the insane insistance of cross collections that ONLY benefits the credit industry.
RE: Confused!!!...The Infamous Just a note on this point. I have seen pre-amendment charge-offs on an Experian report with the notation, "This item will expire from your report on such-an-such date" which indicated that they were applying the *new* method of counting the start date (i.e. date of delinqunecy plus 180 days), even on the old accounts, possibly as an across-the-board official policy by Experian. -- CardReport.Com - Credit Tools, News, And Reference http://www.cardreport.com/ Everything You Need To Know About Credit And Debt --
RE: Confused!!!...The Infamous That's exactly what I was talking about. No one including the bureaus seems to follow the pre-ammended rule. They use the dates of last serious delinquency that lead to profit and loss. They should just ammend the rule again to be 7 years from charge off so as not to keep confusing all the consumers that cannot possibly keep track of what was before and after, especially someone who rarely deals in credit. Just another wait to frustrate and confuse us consumers CardReport.Com wrote: ------------------------------- Just a note on this point. I have seen pre-amendment charge-offs on an Experian report with the notation, "This item will expire from your report on such-an-such date" which indicated that they were applying the *new* method of counting the start date (i.e. date of delinqunecy plus 180 days), even on the old accounts, possibly as an across-the-board official policy by Experian. -- CardReport.Com - Credit Tools, News, And Reference http://www.cardreport.com/ Everything You Need To Know About Credit And Debt --
