CA reporting 120 days late, but not really?

[sphinx313]

So, at first glance it looks like Midland is reporting 120 days late. First thing I thought when I saw this was "WOOHOO! BBB here I come for a deletion." So I log in to the EQ dispute page to get all of their information and in THAT report, it doesn't show as 120 days late. On the graph above, it shows 120 days in November 2012. That's impossible because this original account was closed in 2009. In the EQ dispute report, it shows they listed as OK until November 2012 when they listed as "Collection Account" and then "OK" again in December 2012.

Why did they change their reporting in November 2012 to CO/CA or whatever the coding is? Probably because of my dispute or payment? And if they are allowed to just randomly put one of these on my report, why does the customer view take the CO/CA branding as 120 days late? Please let me know if I can pursue this further.

[fishbjc]

midland.....AGAIN!!!! 

[Jslow]

hence why COLECTION AGENCIES should nopt be allowed to report as FACTORING COMPAINES. I dont care who says they are scored as collections by FICO, prove it to me, if they are collections why are they not in the colelction section of your CR? everyone on this board says dont worry about it there is nothing wrong with it, I am sick of hearing it...

[DaBears]

Ask a consumer attorney the same thing, he will also tell you there is nothing illegal about them reporting a factoring company!!!

[guiness56]

---

@DaBears wrote:

Ask a consumer attorney the same thing, he will also tell you there is nothing illegal about them reporting a factoring company!!!

---

+1

[sphinx313]

I guess I am not entirely concerned with the Factoring Companies part, more-so the 120 days late issue.

[RobertEG]

Remember that what you are viewing is a credit report, not your credit file.  No credit report shows your entire credit file, and thus is always just someone's version and summary.

Consumer credit reports are notorious for poor formatting of information, extracting info from the base segment of your file, and then posting it under a heading that references the debt collector, whose reporting is contained in a separate segment of your credit file.

The key factor is that if it shows as a "payment history", it was taken from the OC account not the collection, as there are no codes for debt collectors to report monthly delinquencies.

As for deletion based on any such inaccuracies, even if incorrectly reported, the furnisher can always correct their reporting.  Inaccurate reporting does not compel deletion of the information that is the subject of the disptue if it can be corrected.

Additionally, a dispute relates only to the accuracy of the  item of information disputed.  Even if deletion of that item is ultimately required, that does not require deletion of the entire account.

As for reporting as a factoring company, if they are a factoring company, that is perfectly proper.  It is their stated field of legitimate business.

While some debt collectors may use the fact of being a factor as a reason to report other incorrect information, such as now having an installment account with the consumer, that is a separate issue. 

[sphinx313]

Thank you, Robert, as always for your insight. 

[guiness56]

Technically, a CA can never report a 120-day late.

It is probably, for what ever reason a merging of the OC and CA file.

Look on your annualcreditreport.com and see if it shows the same thing.

[guiness56]

Technically, a CA can never report a 120-day late.

It is probably, for what ever reason a merging of the OC and CA file.

Look on your annualcreditreport.com and see if it shows the same thing.

[sphinx313]

I have filed a complaint with the BBB for this "style" of reporting with a merged account or what have you. The complaint is just for a correction of information or deletion due to the inaccuracy. I attached the image as proof and they will either completely explain it, fix it or delete it.