Re-aging is when the CRA or creditor changes the dates on your account to increase the time the item is on your report. Derogatory items can only be reported for 7 years so if you had an account that was charged off in 1996 and the CRA or creditor updates it to 1998 - poof you just gained 2 more years that the item will appear on your report. Experian seems to be notorious for this. They have a habit of updating accounts, inserting a new date and using that as the reporting period.
Hermit5, Negative tradelines should only stay on your credit report for 7 years. For accounts charged-off before 1998, the date of last activity (usually the charge-off date) is used to calculate the 7 year reporting time. For accounts charged-off 1998 or later, the 7 year reporting time begins from the date of first delinquency which led to collections and/or charge-off. If the creditor/ca to reports a more recent date (thus keeping the tradeline on your report longer), then they are attempting to "re-age" the account. donnav- Yes they are robots... robots that are non-upgradable and who will forever be programmed to believe that the 7 year reporting time begins with the charge-off date for all accounts pre-or post-1998.
That cleared up so much! So if the correct date of my charge-offs is 6/98, then they have to go by the first delingency date rule (which would be 6/96 + 180 days) and if the correct date of the charge-off is 11/97 then i use that date!! Either way these are coming off this year!!! By george I think I've got it!!
Thats it! FYI. some of the CRAs drop the +180 day bit (at least Exp and TU do for sure). BUT wait, how do they come off this year?? You must be on the special 5 year NY plan I KNEW I should have moved to NY!
donnav... good luck getting FDS (FACs group legal department) to do anything for you regarding the reporting on your account. My experience in total... Letter 1: you are re-aging this account. FDS Response: the reporting time starts with the charge-off date which is March 1998. Letter 2: you are mistaken and are breaking the law. here are some FTC opinions and FCRA documents which clearly explain... FDS Response: we are not mis-reporting any information to the credit bureaus. you need to settle this account now. Letter 3: I will settle only if you report the correct date of first delinquency to the credit bureaus and put it in writing in a settlement letter <essentially I am offering to pay THEM to correct THEIR mistakes> FDS Response: This item will be removed from your credit report at the appropriate time required by law which is 7 years from the charge-off date. We will accept 80% of charge-off balance to settle this account. If you do not respond, we will send this account to outside collections. Letter 4: To be written... I have some choice words to use here... I drafted an "imaginary letter" in a previous post: http://consumers.creditnet.com/stra...ad.php?postid=152299&highlight=kit#post152299 Anyway, I am racking up these "response letters" so I can prove willful non-compliance -without a doubt- in court if I have to.
Kit, Thanks for the heads up. I am probably going to similarly follow your tracks. That's just unbelievable. We could probably highlight the sections of the FCRA they violated, draw pictures and they would still say the same bs. Please keep me updated on your progress.
By the way Kit, that's a great letter! LMAO! You should definitely send it! It would be interesting to see their response.
oh yes... and just so you know in advance. In the process of all of this disputing, they will no doubt pull several "hard inquiries" on your credit report-- thats the added bonus!!
Wow, didn't realize that in NY you could get a paid charge-off removed at 5 yrs. Anyone know if Indiana has any such law ? Catherine
This is the story: 3/95 purchased car 5/95 car totaled in accident 1 payment made & last payment made 7/95 ins. recieved by Ford Motor Credit Credit report lists charge off 7/96 The debt is payed..I don't know why they think we owe them anything
OK, so how many people does it take for a class action lawsuit. It seems like we are all being deliberately screwed by FACS Group. I have been doing the exact things you are doing and have received the exact same responses from them. On one of my letters I specifically asked them not to pull another inquiry, (I even underlined/bolded that!) and guess what, as soon as they got the letter, they pulled and inquiry! I just sent them a "last letter before I file suit" last week. I gave them 10 days, and they haven' t replied yet. I am currently drafting my letters to the FTC and BBB. This is insane!
Miranda, I was wondering the same thing. It seems they don't really give a damn. If this many of us are being screwed by them (just from this board) there must be many other people as well. Perhaps a class action would perk their ears up.
I'm in for a class action- you KNOW we are NOT the only ones with this problem... besides, FDS/FACs has been in trouble before for credit related issues- seems like they would want to be more careful so as not to get the FTC investigating them again... obviously, they are asking for it!
If your debt was delinquent and reported before Jan.1,1998,then the later"charge-off" date applies,but they are so lousy at understanding anything you can probably dispute it off.
Why Chat, You always say this..but in the Brinckerhoff-Amason FTC opinion letter it specifically states that if the CHARGE-OFF occurred after December 29, 1997 then it is subject to the new provisions-it does not say that only accounts with delinquencies reported after this date are subject to the new laws. I will restate relevant portion of the opinion here... 3. Since Sections 623(a)(5) and 605(c)(1) provide new rules for calculating the 7-year period that became effective in 1997, do chargeoff accounts now have different obsolescence periods depending on when the chargeoff occurred? Yes. Section 605(c)(2) states that the section "shall apply only to items of information added to the (CRA) file of a consumer on or after" 455 days after enactment, or December 29, 1997. Therefore, a chargeoff reported to a CRA on or after that date is subject to the new commencement-of-the-delinquency method of calculating the obsolescence period set forth in Sections 623(a)(5) and 605(c)(1). On the other hand, a chargeoff reported to a CRA before December 29, 1997, is not covered by the new provisions, as discussed in one of the enclosed letters (Kosmerl, 06/04/99). If a credit account was reported as a chargeoff before that date, the Commission's view has been that it can be reported for seven years from the date the creditor actually charged it off.(3) Maybe I'm missing something, but I think it is pretty clear.
So I guess no one knows how may people it takes to file a class action? I know a consumer law attorney here in NY. Maybe I'll pick her brain with a couple of questions - see what I can find out.
