7 years is Way too Da## Long!

[grillandwinemaster]

@, Body Shots, Very nice, real world example. In the end, you did not cause any harm to your creditor. This is an example of how the "human" in us is capable of making silly mistakes. This can happen to anybody.

All things being equal, theres no way this accurately reflects your creditworthiness. A simple mistake that you will have to "stare" at for three next 7 years. A simple mistake that will undoubtedly come up under manual review in a mortgage situation. A shorter exclusionary period under these circumstances would more accurately predict future default probabilities. 

I'll share my story. Not quite as bad as 30-60-90, but definitely a "harmless" 30 day late. I went online with the intention of "pushing" a payment. To this day, I firmly believed at the time that I initiated this payment. The evidence points to the contrary. The money never left my account, and my CC never got paid. I didn't catch this in time because it was a small payment ($25- if i remember correctly) and I didn't notice it. If it was a large payment, like a car payment I would have noticed it. Simple mistake. But it cost me a 30 day late. Does this mistake accurately predict my future rate of default fit the next 7 years? I highly doubt it. Like Body Shots said earlier, if it stops counting after 2, take the DA## thing off!!

More power to those to whom this has never happened. I don't wish this to happen to anybody. But if it does, maybe a different, more sympathetic tune would be sung. 

[Anonymous]

Yup, another good example above.  I just feel like these situations aren't so black and white; human beings should be able to review these things on the lender end and use a little discretion.  In a way I suppose they can, by granting GW adjustments that they deem are worthwhile.  However, it's completely hit or miss with lenders in granting such requests.  You've got some that won't do any sort of adjustment ever even for something they admit is incredibly minor (as has been the case with my $2.93 example earlier) and others are fairly "easy" to get adjustments from even for more serious offenses.

[Anonymous]

I would agree to 7 years being too long.  Im a young pup(at 28 haha) and I made poor decisions when I didnt realize how much credit affects everything anyone does.  Its worse than the dollar.  Money isn't evil, credit is.  However, in the past year the only missed payments I have are when I changed addresses and my bill got sent to the wrong one and was late one

2-4 years ago I was making nothing and had alot.  I wanted and had more than I could afford.  Many, many late payments and chargeoffs.  Since than I have a new job, paid off all of my old charge off and collections only to be at a low 600 score still.  Sounds like I will be here until that damn 7 year mark.  Since all of this happend 2-4 years ago, my report will not be completely clean until 2021 by the current system.  If I wait to buy a hosue until than I will be 34 years old (not a huge deal to most).  

Something else I see is some people with chapter 13's or chapter 7's in the last year or two that have alot better scores than me.  Sometimes I think I would be better off just filing for bankruptcy and waiting a year for a high score than waiting 5 for one.   

[Anonymous]

If I were you I'd start chipping away at some of those baddies with GW letters.  Pick the most recent ones and/or the most severe ones.  Target the 90+ day still first as well as the most recent stuff even if they are 30-60.  I've had success in removing about 50% of my baddies through GW letters over 2-3 months.  It takes some work, but it's worth the score increase if you have an hour or so every couple of weeks to hammer out a couple of letters, make a bunch of copies (as many as you can find different addresses for) and blast them out.

[Aahz]

---

@grillandwinemaster wrote:

@, Body Shots, Very nice, real world example. In the end, you did not cause any harm to your creditor. This is an example of how the "human" in us is capable of making silly mistakes. This can happen to anybody.

All things being equal, theres no way this accurately reflects your creditworthiness. A simple mistake that you will have to "stare" at for three next 7 years. A simple mistake that will undoubtedly come up under manual review in a mortgage situation. A shorter exclusionary period under these circumstances would more accurately predict future default probabilities. 

I'll share my story. Not quite as bad as 30-60-90, but definitely a "harmless" 30 day late. I went online with the intention of "pushing" a payment. To this day, I firmly believed at the time that I initiated this payment. The evidence points to the contrary. The money never left my account, and my CC never got paid. I didn't catch this in time because it was a small payment ($25- if i remember correctly) and I didn't notice it. If it was a large payment, like a car payment I would have noticed it. Simple mistake. But it cost me a 30 day late. Does this mistake accurately predict my future rate of default fit the next 7 years? I highly doubt it. Like Body Shots said earlier, if it stops counting after 2, take the DA## thing off!!

More power to those to whom this has never happened. I don't wish this to happen to anybody. But if it does, maybe a different, more sympathetic tune would be sung. 

---

Great examples from both you and BBS above you!

However, I believe, the optimal solution to both of your problems is not to damage the veracity of current scoring models by limiting their access to information, which is what you're requesting.  A much better solution would be to create some sort of ombudsmen's office or appeals/moderation process in which individual consumers could request human review of the facts surrounding the negative report.  This could be funded in part by the CRAs (their cost portion being passed on to their thecustomers - the lendors) and in part by people such as yourselves who wish to have their cases heard with the results being binding upon all CRAs.  Then you could make the dicsions wether to pay for your mistakes (which both of you acknowledge you made) with either the 7 year reporting or the payment of "review fees".

[Anonymous]

I'd have no problem paying for a review of circumstances surrounding what I or any consumer would deem as unrepresentative information on a credit report.  Money is always the answer to everything; lenders/creditors could simply make a bit more by taking the time out to review such cases at a cost.  Everything isn't black or white the way FICO sees them... there are tons of gray areas.  It's like when you hear that two people murdered someone.  On the surface the crimes are equal, but when the circumstances surrounding both are revealed and you find that one person pre-meditated the crime and killed their ex in their sleep verses the second person that murdered someone that broke into their home in the middle of the night in self defense you can see how both situations are very different.  The law wouldn't treat these situations the same; you wouldn't say that because of what the guy did in self defense that he's "more prone" to murdering someone in the future where with the first person that argument would certainly hold water and punishment would be enforced accordingly.

[Thomas_Thumb]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@CreditDunce wrote:

---

---

A 30 day late derog is 30+ days late. Even 30 day lates don't hurt your credit score after about two years.  A day or two late will generate a late fee, but it isn't reported.  In most cases, the CCC will waive the first late fee if you ask. 

---

If it doesn't hurt your score after about 2 years then it should be removed after about 2 years.  Again, my opinion.  I understand that "30 days late" is 30+ days, but people on this forum have reported receiving 30 day late payments on their account when they are 1 day late.  I'm not saying this is right and of course could get disputed and removed, but it's just more BS that someone has to go through.

---

Keep ALL history on file 7 or 10 years - IMO. Let lenders be the decision maker based on full and accurate disclosure. Reducing impact of past sins on score is one thing but, not a fan of mandated whitewashing credit history.

[Anonymous]

---

@Thomas_Thumb wrote:

---

---

Keep ALL history on file 7 or 10 years - IMO. Let lenders be the decision maker based on full and accurate disclosure. Reducing impact of past sins on score is one thing but, not a fan of mandated whitewashing credit history.

---

That's fine, but when there are gray areas perhaps a little investigation work should be done (at a cost) so that the information reported is representative of ones creditworthiness.

[Anonymous]

I pose a philosophical question...how long does it take you to forgive a friend or relative that borrowed from you, and never paid it back?

Depending on  how much you make, maybe it's only $50 to hold a grudge. Or $10k to help someone roof their house. 

Do you ever really forget?

[grillandwinemaster]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

I pose a philosophical question...how long does it take you to forgive a friend or relative that borrowed from you, and never paid it back?

Depending on  how much you make, maybe it's only $50 to hold a grudge. Or $10k to help someone roof their house. 

Do you ever really forget?

---

I have to flip this on you. NEVER paying it back is one thing. I would never lend to someone that never paid me back.

As a matter of fact, I have lent small amounts, $50 or less, KNOWING I was never going to see it again. I did this purposely because I was tired of being asked by that "friend" for a twenty spot here and then. Them not paying me back was in a way insurance so that they would never ask again. In my opinion, $50 well spent. It's going on three years since this "friend" has not asked for a twenty spot.

HOWEVER, this post is not about NEVER paying back. It's about life happening and making a minor boo-boo. If you lend a friend $500 so he can pay his rent, he promises to pay you $100 a month for 5 months, but he misses month 4, and then he gets caught up, and PAYS IN FULL, are you more apt to lend him again? 

Other than this being an inconvenience, (budget, and pay your own bills buddy) would you consider this friend as a bad payer because he missed month 4 and then he quickly made it back up? Probably not! 

That being said, it bugs me that "friends" ask for money. I'm not a bank! Lol