Equifax score dropped due to investigations

[islandchild82]

---

forthepeople wrote:

True statement for point one. But, before any company will go through that legal headache, they will search your assests, make sure you have something that would benefit their time to seek Judgement.

On the second point, if the collections agency just reported ( to credit agencies) as most do then contact you (in some states, in others they must notify you first) then what's the point, your screw anyways for 7 years.

Then you offer a PFD and hope they accept it. If they do, everybody wins. The debt is paid, the obligation has been met, and one's credit isn't ruined (or at least hurt).

Regarding the "moral" stance, we should feed the homless we see everyday, but do we?

The difference in regards to debt is the issue of responsibility. I am responsible for the debt I incur. I am not responsible for those who are homeless, in the sense that I am not the reason they are homeless. Therefore, whether you call it an obligation, a responsibility, or a moral issue, ultimately, the debt one incurs is their own.

---

[Anonymous]

Good comments, not disbuting someone stance on their obligations. But, I am sure everyone has their own financial situation and would like the chance to legally disbute and/or settle the debt before collections report the situation. So, with that said, my argument is not don't pay your obligations but yet, how these agencies (collections) should give the chance to resolve it before taking measures that will hurt you for 7 years.

If some was to sue you, wouldn't you like to have the opportunity to resolve the matter out of court and quite vs one day just getting a notice that you have been sued and here is the judgement? Most people that has a collections on their acct perhaps fell on hard times. Perhaps  an illness, death in the family, divorce, etc. So, when there is such a big change in your life and then you have some shmuck calling you with attitude without hearing the situation and give one the opportunity to resolve, then one must do what they feel is in their interest.

I represent many clients whom are good people, but hard times fall on them. My case are for those people not the people whom yet have not felt any such sitaution but yet quick to judge. Hope one day you are not in that sitaution, for sure attitude will change!

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Ex. lets say in Jan. 2001 your cc company sent your acct to collections, they in return report this to the credit agency. The report date is Jan. 2001. Now, let's say, you do not notice this collection on your acct until Jan. 2003, so you dispute it and lose. Your now report date is Jan 2003 not 2001, you just started the entire cycle all over again. Bad mistake!

 The cycle doesn't start all over.  The verified date will change to the current date and year, however, if you look at your CR, the report date does not change.  Your CR report is showing that the information was disputed and the information verified. The date the CA is scheduled to fall off is determined by the report date, not when the account was verified.

[Anonymous]

Let me define the "cycle starts over again" as you stated once that acct is verified the report date/verified date can be one. This is the case has I have a current client that had a 7 month old collection which he disputed as he is a vict. of fraud. Well, for what ever reason the credit agency says the debt is verified and his reported date was also uptate to current date as if it is a new collection account and not a 6 month old collection acct.

With that report date now showing this months date, as far as I am concerned the cycle is started again because other creditors will look at this as a more resent collections acct.. though the fall date did stay the same.

[Anonymous]

It appears you are stating something different.  If the CA changed the reporting date and the verified (updated) date, then that is illegal.

[Anonymous]

---

PurpleHaze wrote:

It appears you are stating something different.  If the CA changed the reporting date and the verified (updated) date, then that is illegal.

---

No, it isn't. The date that can't be changed is DOFD. Each time a CA updates(some do monthly) it may change the reported date.

Why do they update monthly? Well, because when this reported date is changed, the scoring model looks at it as a new collection, even though it has been there for X amount of years.

[Anonymous]

---

forthepeople wrote:

Let me tell you why your score dropped. Everytime you make a dispute on a collections acct or bad acct, even good acct for that matter two important things happen. One, the collection agency will get that dispute notice, they will send in their response, then they or the original creditor will pull a hard copy of your credit report to see if the acct is still active on your report(meaning to see if they won the dispute based on info they provided) So, if you dispute 5 collections, then for sure you will get 5 new inquires on your reports.

I have never had this happen. The CA/OC reporting the disputed account does get results of the investigations I believe.

Two, when you dispute a crdit file and lose, the report date on your file gets updated to that current month so it acts as if it is a new collection acct all over again thus lowering your score.

Ex. lets say in Jan. 2001 your cc company sent your acct to collections, they in return report this to the credit agency. The report date is Jan. 2001. Now, let's say, you do not notice this collection on your acct until Jan. 2003, so you dispute it and lose.

Why would you dispute it? Regardless of when you noticed it on your report..you know if you owe the bill and if you stopped paying it and you should know the consequences(getting reported on your CR)  

Your now report date is Jan 2003 not 2001, you just started the entire cycle all over again. Bad mistake! If it is a fraudulent acct, or an acct that is not yours and you dispute it and lose, I would high an attorney. The threat to a collection agency that they are reporting something on your report that is not yours is big. Not only if you win in court would they legally have to remove it, but I personally know cases were these collection agencies had to pay out $30,000 to $50,000 in damages.

If it is from ID theft, usually sending the proper paperwork resolves it. Sometimes you do have to fight it and yes if they disregard all of your documents proving it was id theft, then you hire an attorney. If it was sent in error, then you'll eventually get it removed if you continue to work at it, many times people dispute, it's verified and they give up. Some because they do not know they have any other options, some because they don't want to put the effor into it.

Keep in mind, paying off a collection acct will not help our score nor will it remove the item off your report until the standard time which is 7 years. I think it is very stupid of collections agencies to report an acct on someones credit before getting them to pay so that they do not need to report it. Once a collections company reports to credit agency, what is the motivation to pay? If you pay or do not pay 7 years it comes off anyways! 

If you are applying for anything that will include a manual review, an unpaid collection will most likely get you denied before a paid collection will.

I hope that helped you.

---

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

It appears you are stating something different.  If the CA changed the reporting date and the verified (updated) date, then that is illegal.

---

No, it isn't. The date that can't be changed is DOFD. Each time a CA updates(some do monthly) it may change the reported date.

Why do they update monthly? Well, because when this reported date is changed, the scoring model looks at it as a new collection, even though it has been there for X amount of years.

---

My CA accounts do not have a DOFD. They only show reported date.

[Anonymous]

1.Every credit agency has their way of dealing with disputes and what they are looking for in order to make a decision whether a debt is valid or not. So, anything is possible. Plus remember credit laws vary from state to state so reporting agencies must obligate themselves to each states rules, if you will.

2. see the EX.  that I put on point 2? That means example. My example was based on a what if situation and if the debt was not correct.

3. Sending in the proper document should resolve a situation of identity theft but not always especially when it comes to EXPERIAN, THE CREDIT AGENCY WERE YOU DO NOT GET TO SPEAK TO A LIVE PERSON. They want you to mail everything in the screw you up at the same time. Then you have no one to dispute your case with thus forcing you to file suit in order to clear your name.

4. Manual review/manual underwriting (mortgage) situation that I was refering to will obligate you to pay off your collection before giving a mortgage, thus having a collection on your report and applying for a cc that helps rebuild credit will not mean a no decision.

I hope this clears up any confusion. 

[Anonymous]

Sidewinder has it correct! If you have a collections on your report and the collections agency reported it jan. 2001 and you never contact them to settle or to dispute, the report date will stay the same. Now, if you do contact the collections agency or even settle, they will report this and the report date will now change!

Now, before anyone read to much into my message and assume that I am saying don't pay your bills, that is not what I am stating. This is an EXAMPLE!