This was my first try at disputing with experian. This is what it my report showed. Status: Included in Bankruptcy Date opened: 01/1997 Reported since: N/A Date of Status:01/2001 High Balance: N/A Recent Balance:N/A Recent Payment:N/A Scheduled to continue on record until 12/2003 Account History: Discharged through bk7,11,or 12 01/22/2001 to 02/02/2002 I did file a chp13 in 1998 that was dismissed so why are they showing the notation in account history as "discharged through bk 01/22/2001 to 02/02/2002? I actually had an account with them since the mid 80's but I think this account was opened some time in 1992. So I disputed that "I never opened an account with them in 1997". This is what the results are: Status: Account charged off Date opened: 02/1994 Reported since: 03/2002 Date of Status:03/2002 High Balance: N/A Recent Balance:$986 as of 03/2002 Recent Payment:0 Scheduled to continue on record until 03/2009. This item was verified and updated on 03/2002 Account History: charge off as of 3/2002 They have re-aged the account an additional 7 years. I also must state that this creditor has a judgement against me and a collection account all showing balances. That means that the balances are reported 3 different times for one account. Whats even more odd is the collection account for this creditor is scheduled to continue until 6-2002, not the 3/2009 date that they have updated for the original creditor. The collection account that is about to fall off obviously had to occur after the delinquency with the original creditor and it is scheduled to come off in the next couple of months. What gives on this? Where do I go from here?
Was the account included in BK? Why did you bother to dispute it? When it's included in BK, the account is unrated.
Experian reaged one of my accounts by three years as well, so I know your pain. I've repeatedly attemped to point out their error, but the bottom line is, when they go to the original creditor, original creditor says "do not change" so that's that according to Experian. Finally, I got fed up and called Experian and asked exactly what evidence they needed in order to use the accurate date and I was told I needed the date the account went delinquent on the original creditor's letterhead. Fine. I've been in touch with the Fraud Dept. of the original creditor because I don't recall ever having a credit card with them. I had just received letter from the original creditor saying the original signed contract and statements were available for $3.00. :::sigh::: So I shelled out $15.00 and requested the original signed contract, along with the last four statements issued on the account. I also asked them to please tell me exactly what date this account went delinquent. If I can't prove fraud...that's just fine...I don't even care since its due to age off in February, 2003 *IF* it isn't illegally re-aged, that is. One way or another...its coming off in eleven months and if lawsuit number two has to be against Experian...well, I'll have more experience at it by then, so so be it. This is becoming an oddly familiar response by Experian and at some point, a patten of behaviour is going to develop with them reaging disputed accounts. L
As I said, it was my first try at disputing and obviously I screwed up huh-lol!! Yes the account was included in the bk. I disputed it because it was wrong and it showed up in the area on experian that says "negative information". So I didn't take it as being unrated. I was hoping by disputing the opened date that they would delete it. Or at least show the correct date of delinquency (7/95) which would mean that the account should come off within the next couple of months.
I thought that is what experian was supposed to do, verify the accuracy. I hope you sue those incompetent &*($#% Oh, I guess you will be sueing those $%#@#
