Yep that's what the SUPERVISOR at Equifax just told me. Unreal!
I called because I was trying to determine the last change to my Verizon Wireless account because they changed the DOFD from 3/2006 to 8/2006. The account had been reporting as 3/2006 up until February, which is the very month that it was supposed to fall off. So I called EQ to find out the exact date that Verizon changed it.
I wound having to speak to a supervisor because I got so ticked off with the front line csr because she told me that "their retention of accounts is based on DOLA", and since the DOLA is 06/2011 then its 7 to 10 years from that. I asked did she just get that job today and also told her that she was wrong and that is a violation of the FCRA and since she had no freaking clue as to what she was talking about that I needed to speak with a supervisor. So then a Stupervisor gets on the phone and repeats the same garbage!!! I had to educate this idiot on what the FCRA states!!!
Needless to say I clearly understand now why we can't sometimes get any justification on our disputes because the very people that are responsible for submitting our infor to the creditors are idiots.
Okay end of rant/////
@guiness56 wrote:If you would have said FCRA Compliance date, maybe they would have understood?
Actually I did say that....just figured the majority of everyone here would already know what I meant.
So the answer is NO!
They DID NOT UNDERSTAND!
They were telling me that the DOLA determines the 7 year reporting limit for negative reporting, not the DOFD.
@guiness56 wrote:
@Rhaeny wrote:
@guiness56 wrote:If you would have said FCRA Compliance date, maybe they would have understood?
Actually I did say that....just figured the majority of everyone here would already know what I meant.
So the answer is NO!
They DID NOT UNDERSTAND!
They were telling me that the DOLA determines the 7 year reporting limit for negative reporting, not the DOFD.
I understood what you meant. I was just wondering if they did not.
No they were totally clueless which is what irked me to death. The supervisor even told me that all credit report agencies report the same way. ROFLMAO!!!
I said alrighty then, well this conversation is not going anywhere so thankies and goodbye.
@RobertEG wrote:The reporting of a DOFD by a creditor is always subject to dispute provided you have account records supporting a different date.
The simple fact that they changed their reported DOFD is not itself a violation if the new reporting is indeed accurate.
I would send a dispute of accuracy of the reported DOFD to the CRA, along with your supporting documentation.
The side issues of the inaccuracy of their assertion that DOFD does not control CR exclusion for a CO or collection is kinda academic until the accurate DOFD is of record.
You know you are correct in that the DOFD controls, so the important thing now is to get it accurately reported in your credit file in anticipation of any issue of its ultimate exclusion date.
Yea I don't have any records to support that 3/2006 is the correct date other than the fact that they reported it that way for 6 years and 11 months. However all of my accounts went bad around the same time which was around 3/2006 and before the filing of my bk. All of the baddies disappeared at the 7 year mark but this stupid Verizon. I think they are playing games but I know its all about what you can prove and not what you suspect to be.
It's just that the timing of the change in the very month that it should have fallen off raises a huge flag. If the date was wrong all of these years why didn't they change it before now (rhetorical)?
