That's right, it doesn't matter when it was charged off, it can only report for seven years after chargeoff or 180 days after first delinquency. If you have records showing when it charged off I would forward that information to the CRA's and make them delete the tradeline. If you don't have proof, then you need to contact the creditor and ask them for a complete statement of account showing the history of the account. If they don't have that, or if they refuse to give it to you, then there is no way the account can be verified if you dispute it with the CRA's and it should drop off. If they verify it with the CRA's, then they are violating the FCRA. Anyway you look at it, an account that old shouldn't be reporting now, no matter what you did later.
The open date isn't what you want to look for on this anyway. That only says when the account was first opened. You want to look for the "status" date or the Date of Last Activity to determine what they are reporting.
Good post Butch. This is always a confusing topic to experienced and novus's alike. I was curious about a couple of comments you made. Is it really customary for CRA's to delete an item 3 months before it is due to come off? I have a tradeline on Equifax that is due to come off in February. If that is the case, I suppose I should dispute it as past the reporting period, or just ask them to delete it? Also, how did your tradeline get re-aged once it was deleted from your report? What did the CRA do when you called them and asked them about it?
UPDATE: I just called CSC Credit Services (affiliate of Equifax) and the legal aid there told me "we just got a note to delete the account. It should take 3-5 days". SUCCESS! Never let them get away with stuff!! As usual, thanks to Butch, Sassy, LKH and all the other credit netter's who helped me through this latest episode of Credit Bureau hell.
Butch, I wish she would have elaborated a little more, but I didn't want to push the issue. It seems that she showed the documentation I faxed her to someone (probably a manager or lawyer) in the office and they told her to delete the account. I will give it a week (checking the report every day) and see if it drops off like she said. If it doesn't, I'll call her again. Technically, this account isn't due to come off for a little while longer, so I wanted to drop the issue and not take a chance of alerting them to a possible mistake on their part
I think you already did. That's why they folded so easily. Great Job. I think we should keep up with this conversation as there are a lot of new items of info. in here. If you'd be willing Jdog, I'd love to see the letters you sent them pointing out the problem. Email is always on.
This is one of the most valuable threads on the board. I've been lookin for this thread for months. At issue: Do CRA's calculate the 7 year reporting period form the DLA or the date of delinquency. The answer may lie in your painstaking research with each of your situations. New member Henner asks a great question, for which the answer is complex. He asks: Can Ca Move Orig Dla http://consumers.creditnet.com/straighttalk/board/showthread.php?s=&postid=408664#post408664 And wonders when it should fall off his report. Back in the old days the 7YP was calculated from the DLA. In many cases they still do. It may be up to YOU to force the issue, like Jdog did here. .
: Equifax and the seven year clock I think you might have to wait until the 7 years is up and see if the CRA drops the item automatically. If they don't, then you have a case. Originally posted by ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1*I hope you were kidding about that statement. If there is anyone stupid enough to wait seven years for a mistake like this to clear itself (roll over and play dead) they are a complete and total idiot. jdog0411 ========================== 1*cable666 wasn't talking about the next 7 years. He was referring to the present 7 years. **************** ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ They never take it off the report when we make it right so why should we take it off the docket when they do?? ><- <>- ><- <> ~~~ ><- <>- ><- <> ><- <>- ><- <> ~~~ ><- <>- ><- <> From a preacher in California > >As some of you may know, one of my son's serves in the military. He is >still stateside, here in California. He called me yesterday to let me >know how warm and welcoming people were to him, and his troops, >everywhere he goes. Telling me how people shake their hands, and thank >them for being willing to serve, and fight, for not only our own freedoms >but so that others may have them also. > >But he also told me about an incident in the grocery store he stopped at >yesterday, on his way home from the base. He said that ahead of several >people in front of him stood a woman dressed in a burkha. He said when >she got to the cashier she loudly remarked about the U.S.flag lapel pin >the cashier wore on her smock.The cashier reached up and touched the pin, >and said yes, I always wear it. > >The woman in the burkha then asked the cashier when she was going to stop >bombing her countrymen, explaining that she was Iraqi. A gentleman >standing behind my son stepped forward, putting his arm around my son's >shoulders, and nodding towards my son, said in a calm and gentle voice to >the Iraqi woman: "Lady, hundreds of thousands of men and women like this >young man have fought and died so that you could stand here, in MY >country and accuse a check-out cashier of bombing your countrymen. It is >my belief that had you been this outspoken in YOUR OWN country we >wouldn't need to be there today. But, hey? if you have now learned how to >speak out so loudly and clearly , I'll gladly pay your way back to Iraq >so you can straighten out the mess you are obviously here to avoid." _______________________________
What bothers me is that the DOLA is the only thing that Equifax is basing the seven year clock on. 1*since my score dropped 100 points when this tradeline was added, it is obvious to me that the FICO is based on a charge-off that it is calculating as only two months old. jdog0411 ============================== 1*Ah. Now you see the purpose of credit scoring. FICO was drummed up to take advantage of this and the tens of thousands of other bogus credit statements in order to bilk consumer out of billions. It matters not whither these reporting glitches are intentional or not. The consumers are getting screwed just the same.
Not to throw a monkey wrench into this discussion, I have a question regarding this as well. Does anyone know what date the clock would start for BK 7 accounts? I had all mine set at the date of my filing by Experian. I would assume it would be the date that it WENT delinquent, not when I filed. I've searched for concrete confirmation by way of statute, laws and even the FTC and no one has yet to give me an answer. Thanks in advance for any input. BTW- I'm at 5yrs for those accounts based on Experian's generic date. Neither TU, nor EQ list those same accounts with a generic BK filing date!
Re: Re: Equifax and the seven year clock so I was penalized and it was added back to my report as a new TL that won't expired until 2008? The more I think about it, I think was screwed for having to pay this thing..... Amzgrc ============= Did you ever get this off your report?
Re: Re: Equifax and the seven year clock The key is, whichever field is used to calculate the 7-year, whether it's hidden or visible, is the field that must by law show the date of original delinquency. If we can confirm which field is used by which CRA to determine this, we'll all be able to argue our potential re-aging cases with much more certainty.
Re: Re: Equifax and the seven year clock Wow! That's very astute Jones. They all [well almost all] use the "Metro 2 Format". I'll see if I can dig up the input field. Not sure it can help us though, without discovery. .
Re: Re: Equifax and the seven year clock I'm looking at a UDF right here (from a different account, though) and I'm not sure which field it is. There's a "Date Last Payment", "Date Open", "Status Date". This may not be the same form used by collectors, though. Furthermore, we also need to be concerned with which fields FICO uses to calculate their score. Suppose the CA is correctly listing the (hidden) date of original delinquency, so it will drop off the CRA in time. BUT, suppose that FICO uses the "Date Opened" or "Status Date" for their scoring algorithm instead. Well then, that's clearly a violation of the FCRA, isn't it? This definitely calls for some clarification directly from FICO as well.
