As some of you know I have been trying to get EQ to correct an entry on hubby's report, it is a now paid collection from 1995, but they had been reporting it current delinquent and I have been trying to get this straightened out. I received the following 2 updated reports and don't know if there is really any difference, here' the 2 entries, your thoughts???? Company name LDA Balance Status XXXXX 12/95 $0 05 Previous Payment History 4 times 90+ days late Previous Status 4/01-05 2/01-05 1/01-05 Paid collection Now the new entry Company name LDA balance Status xxxxxxxx 12/95 $0 05 Account closed by consumer Okay aside from the account closed by consumer I can't see much of a difference other then the previous payment history and previous status is not there now, but does that get removed once it's paid?? thanks
It looks better to me but I'd be interested to hear what someone with more knowledge has to say as this has happened to me too! Glad you asked it!
Its hard to tell.It looks like the second update deleted the mention of the collection agency completely and just left the original creditor with a zero balance but rated R-05 with a last activity date of 12/95. Can you get the R-5 off? Be careful it should be R-9. VJ
I'd dispute (either one) and let them come back and tell you they verified it, which they will of course. Then demand the name, company address and company phone number of the person who verified it. What you will most likely get back is the name and addres and phone number of the "Baby Bell" they used to get the verification done. That's most likely to turn out to be one of the multitude of C?S Services companies they use to do the verifying for them. Most of them are credit reporting agencies in their own right and you can then demand that they verify the listing. I've had pretty outstanding results with the C?S in my area which is CSC Services Houston, Texas. They actually seem to use some common sense and actually look for dupes on the listing and then delete them and get them off the EQ listing for you as well. Considering what kind of company they are, I'm rather impressed with them. What have you got to lose?
Thanks Nana, Yes the second one appears a little better but then again who the heck knows. VJ, the company name still list the collection agency as the credtiors name. As for the "O5", I have tried talking with EQ about this and they claim the "O" doesn't mean the account is open, it means the account was an open account status not revolving (which is was utility bill). I have disputed this a few times, but this latest version "seems" to indicate yes it was either 120 past due or collection account, but nows it appears it is paid/closed and the LDA is 12/95, so it doesn't "appear" to reflect when it was paid or when the lateness did occur. Not sure if it really looks any better scorewise then it did??
Just thought I'd bump this up to see if anyone has any thought about the second entry being any better?????? Thanks
