Seems to be the topic lately....!! On EXP, is the Date of status/Last reported column the date of last activity on negative accounts, collections and chg offs?? I do have several I cross-disputed with CA and CRA and EXP listes them Last reported in Aug 2003, the month of the disputes. I also have one that says under Status: NO STATUS....what's up with that? If violations have occured, is it $1000 per TL?
Tony, Take a look on your reports and see if you spot a line that says; "Scheduled to remain until: xx/xx/xxxx" ... off to the right, or something similar. Then count backward exactly 7 years and see if it matches anything. .
Hey Butch, I only see "Scheduled to remain until: xx/xx/xxxx" on an EXP report from August, not more recent. However, when I calculate that old report's numbers the "Reported since" date matches, which is what I did B4, however the "Date of status/Last reported" column is really the one in question because on a few TL's, it's listed as Aug 03, the very first date I disputed these items. The "Date of status" date matches the "reported since" date: Here is what it says: Date opened/ Reported since 8-1997/ 8-1997 Date of status/Last reported 8-1997/ 8-2003 (And then at the end) Status: Collection accnt $XX past due as of 8-2003 Why would a CA report updates to the CRA if there was no more attempts to collect this debt? I thought that was only a practice of OC's with open accounts.
Re: Re: Reaging Question The continued reporting IS further attempts to collect this debt, by keeping the account updated they are trying to collect, in a way that doesn't cost them any more $$$$$... If they send you a letter, they're paying $0.37 + paper + ink + envelopes + the salary of the employee to hit the print key. If they make a phone call, they're paying the cost of the call + the salary of the employee who is making the call, etc.
Re: Re: Re: Reaging Question Just thought I'd throw in my 2 cents From what I got out of the post this would not be re-aging. A OC, or CA can report on the status of an account any time. The status line is the last time the CA reported anything to the CRA. If you disputed and the CRA contacted then CA then that new status is the month they contacted them. Re-aging is when a CA tells the CRA that an account was open later then it really was. This would damage your credit longer then the 7 years. If you sent a validation letter to the CA and then to the CRA, expect to see a new status. This means the CRA did its job and actually contacted the CA. Re-aging would be if the DOLA or "expected to remain" line is wrong. I wouldn't consider this any type of violation unless they never validated and are still reporting every month. That could be considered an attemot to collect without validating.
