Not precisely credit related (and I don't think I've Kudo'd three posts in a row in the CC forum like ever, excellent Skye / Callandra / KDM all three!) but EO's back in the day were incredibly difficult to reach in all market segments: I was one of the techs backing the EO CSR's at Dell back in the early 90's, and by the time any of the cases got handed to me it's because the customer had gone through pure hell as a result of our customer service and tech groups: we're talking on the order of 20 calls into Dell, some utterly laughable and stupid things in the log, shipping parts and techs that had no hope of fixing the problem obviously just to get them off the phone, etc ad naseum.
I had carte blanche in that role to up and simply send them another computer, but the funny thing was, out of all the calls I never had to do so: some of them were frighteningly easy (after talking the righteously angry customer down off the ledge, believe me they had a right to be angry at this point), and while others were more complicated, the fact is most really never needed to go this route in the first place and it was our fault that they did.
While you could've gotten me in the second line queue anyway when I wasn't handling these issues, the fact is to get to senor Dell's office, you had to have not only been dragged through the muck, but they had zero issues telling you off and not bothering me with the issue if it wasn't clear that we'd screwed the pooch with the customer somewhere (vast majority of customer issues were resolved with one call, most of the rest with 2, and exceptionally few with 3... when we're talking double-digits, well something went wrong and it was probably our fault).
So calling the EO with the equivalent of a hangnail issue or even more trivial than that? Think others have it exactly right, it will cause lenders' to change their policies, and usually not to the benefit of us or the people who actually need EO assistance. TANSTAAFL, and as KDM suggests, there will be a mark in the file, and that may not be in your favor later.
I view it about as favorably as I view the SCT recommendations frankly, may not be to your benefit to exploit it.
@Anonymous wrote:
@CreditCuriousity wrote:I gotta admit I wrote an email to the EO asking them nicely yesterday if they would consider removing some late payments from 4 years ago as my report is pretty dang clean now and the lates were due to losing a job and having to move across the country. By no means do they have to do this and most they won't but really the EO is the only method to perform this, so in this case I will write them as I had a hardship during this time and had to make a decision of moving and having a roof over my head or missing some payments, guess which one I choose four year ago? So I am hoping they consider my circumstances that was a very detailed email and willing to GW remove them as I have had perfect payment history the last 4 years with them and multiple new accounts. Is this a misuse of the EO email? This can be debatable cause yes I was at fault for the lates, but kinda out of my control. I can live with them for another 3 years or maybe they will remove them early as a courtesy as others have had some success. Only one way for me to find out right? Guess I could of sent them Snail mail for this request, but ultimately it is the same thing, just quicker way of getting ahold of them by email.
I agree about CLI and asking for conversions to Signature card or WMC or what not is what really most likely got the phone # shut off and the likes.
Am I the only one that thinks stuff like this should not be allowed? The very concept of centralized credit reporting and cra's is that the report contains unbiased factual information. Allowing people to do stuff like request courtesy deletion of lates or pay-for-delete schemes to me seems like a way for a customer to bribe a financial institution - either with a payment now or in the case of a courtesy deletion what the bank probably hopes is a promise of future business - to withhold truthful information from the reporting agencies. The late policies are supposed to be the same for everyone. If it was just an accident or a bad circumstance you then show this by future on-time payment history, which creditcuriosity did.
Don't get me wrong, it seems perfectly reasonable and even a right to allow the customer to make their case. For example if someone were to be declined for those lates they should have the chance to explain that it was a one-time hardship and they have since proven their credit worthiness. However to purposely delete accurate negatives just because you like the customer - i don't think financial institutions should be allowed to do this.
Am I the only one who thinks 7.5 years is WAY too long for late pays to report? I mean I can understand charge offs, bankruptcy, collections, judgments, etc. taking that long to fall off, but late pays? I think if you were late, got back on track, and haven't been late again then those should be removed after like 3 years or something. But, that's just wishful thinking on my part.
Back to the topic, I agree with Skye completely. I just read a post yesterday where someone had asked for a CLI after only having the card 2 months. They were denied, so they contacted Cap1's CEO 
People need to be more patient with things like this and quit contacting the EO (or CEO) over something that can probably be taken care of on its own with just a little time and patience.
@CreditCuriousity wrote:I gotta admit I wrote an email to the EO asking them nicely yesterday if they would consider removing some late payments from 4 years ago as my report is pretty dang clean now and the lates were due to losing a job and having to move across the country. By no means do they have to do this and most they won't but really the EO is the only method to perform this, so in this case I will write them as I had a hardship during this time and had to make a decision of moving and having a roof over my head or missing some payments, guess which one I choose four year ago? So I am hoping they consider my circumstances that was a very detailed email and willing to GW remove them as I have had perfect payment history the last 4 years with them and multiple new accounts. Is this a misuse of the EO email? This can be debatable cause yes I was at fault for the lates, but kinda out of my control. I can live with them for another 3 years or maybe they will remove them early as a courtesy as others have had some success. Only one way for me to find out right? Guess I could of sent them Snail mail for this request, but ultimately it is the same thing, just quicker way of getting ahold of them by email.
I agree about CLI and asking for conversions to Signature card or WMC or what not is what really most likely got the phone # shut off and the likes.
No way could i call this misuse. Life happens to us all. If not now, Later.But at some point in life we all experience hardships. Real or Perceived. In any case. i would keep good willing them and sooner or later something is going to bite. Im sure you read the story of this guy in my Taxi to get my last Baddie off of my report. otherwise it would have been 2017 before that thing fell off. I explained to him how i goodwilled my cable company and over and over they denied me. Despite that I still have the service. Im sure this Cfo went and looked at my account as i gave him all my information. and he could see it was 5 years of nothing but good will on my part as consumer. So 4 year old lates. i think the EO would be the only place that would handle that. And i have seen lates removed before from cap one. You guys were talking about old accounts being visible earlier. I have one with cap one. 11 years ago. i still have the emails where they were blasting me for blowing them off. hehehe. Keep trying CC. and use the EO as much as you feel necessary to get those lates off. Still waiting to see the boost in your scores. 