I have 3 credit cards that collectors seem to renew. I reviewed new 2012 credit reports and each of the 3 credit bureaus often have different takes. Some of the cards have different names on them and extend way beyond when they were closed. One card has two different names. The last payments on the three were 2007, 2003 and 2004. California law statute is 4 yrs. The collection agencies don't seem to be pushing too hard, just calling now and then with no msg left. How is it they can renew a card that should be uncollectable due to statutes. Or am I wrong in that? Two cards are coming up in March to be taken off. Is that really taken off?
Statutes of Limitations only cover how long you can be sued for a debt. (See my signature for a thread that was started several years ago discussing the SOL in more depth.) Reporting has a separate limit of 7 years past the date of the delinquency resulting in the charge off, and accounts covered in a BK have another limit of 10 years from the BK. An account could conceivably have multiple tradelines on your credit report. The OC - original creditor; a JDB - "Junk Debt" buyer; and a CA - collection agency is one possibility (OC sells the debt to a JDB, who fields it out to a CA to do the hands-on collection activity, could result in 3 tradelines.) A tradeline which became delinquent and resulted in a charge-off in 2003, should have fell off in 2010; 2004, should have fell off in 2011; 2007 should fall off in 2014. The cards due to come off in March would be taken off, except for 'exempt' reports, if you are trying for a high-paying job, or a high-limit credit line, for example. This is a really simplified version of what is in the FCRA, the best way to understand all the nuances is to sit down with a print-out of the law, and read it, and it will make sense. This isn't to say that CA's haven't tried to collect on accounts past the reporting deadline, but if they attempt to put the tradeline on your credit report they're doing so in violation of the FCRA.
