When the OC assigns/sells an account to a CA, why can the OC continue to report an account delinquent/charge after they've sold it AS WELL AS the CA report the account delinquent/charge off? What interest does the OC still have especially in the case of the debt being sold? Essentially I'm getting 2 "dings" every month for the same debt.
Someone with more knowledge will likely reply and correct me, but let me take a stab if I may... I think it's illegal to have the same account appear twice on the same report. So, the collection would likely have to come off. I think you can dispute that somehow. The OC will stay on there for 7 years from the first delinquency. 2007 is gonna be a magic year for my credit, haha.
Thanks for the reply... by the way, if this is "fishy", how would I go about correcting it? CRA's have "validated" with both OC & CA.
Actually what Mike Mar stated isn't necessarily true. The same company can't list the same debt twice but the OC and the CA can list the same debt. Whether the OC sold or assigned the debt, they are within their legal limits to list the debt on your credit report. Even though the OC isn't actively pursuing the debt themselves, the amount was originally owed to them. The CA has the right to list the same debt because they are actively seeking payment. I could be wrong but I've been in that situation so I have some knowledge. Try doing a search on this board to find more info.
I'm going to apply logic here. Quite likely, this is a realm in which logic doesn't apply. It seems to me that if the OC has ASSIGNED the debt to collection agency, reporting twice makes sense... you owe the OC, and you vicariously owe the CA. But if the OC has SOLD the debt to a collection agency, you probably shouldn't still have the OC reporting. After all, if you sued the OC saying "I don't owe you any money"... you'd be right. The debt is no longer property of the CA. The CA hasn't subcontracted the job of collection to the OC.
Thanks for the reply folks Tom, I love logic too...being the devil's advocate; In your first instance, the OC ASSIGNS the debt to the CA to collect...what "charge off" would the CA have if the debt isn't paid? They are only acting as an agent for the OC, thus I don't see how the CA could list a "charge off" of something they have no financial interest in. hmmmmm...I often OVERthink things. Anyone else?
The CRA are reporting the facts about accounts The OC can remain on your CR even if they sold the debt to a CA. They must list the account as "sold" or "ransferred to another lender" and they musat list the balance as 0$ but other than that they are allowed to remain for 7 yr reporting period
Thanks PD...you are a wealth of knowledge, may I please trouble you just a bit further? Maybe I'm just not getting it, the answer could be right in front of my eyes but I'm not seeing it. After the OC transfers/sells the account, can they (the OC) continue to report monthly as a charge off? hypothetical-- Discover lists charge off in 9/04 Transfers/sells account to NCO in 11/04 After 11/04, is it acceptable for Discover to report the charge off (i.e. 12/04 - charge off, 1/05 - charge off, 2/05 - charge off) AS WELL AS "NCO" listing the account as charge off for same months (12/04 & 1/05, etc.)? Also, what to do if OC reports a balance AFTER the transfer/sale to CA?
