when CC reports lates for mutliple months in a row, should it be as following (assume 3 months of missed payments which were then brought current)
March -30
april - 60
may - 90
June - ok
or should it be
March - 90
April - 60
May - 30
june - ok
I have an old thing that has about 2 years till it drops off all together and they have it listed as the first scenario - which if I was OK in june, wouldn't the May only be 30 days late and the march be 90? I know it means little at this point, but all GW letters have been denied (I send them about once a month and keep getting back the same answer). I hoping if I have something that I could say "this info is wrong - which technically is in violation of the law" maybe they will be nice about it and just grand my request to delete the whole trade line - whopping $1000 that was paid in full and closed by me not them and not through collections...
It was current in feb and then wasn't able to make any payment until June when I paid all past/current due.
@RobertEG wrote:+!
With the proviso that they are not required to report each progressive level. They can start at any point of their choosing.
I understand they aren't required to report each progressive level, however technically May wasn't wasn't 120 days late - march was so if I can get it deleted on a technicality I'd love to do so. At the very least, pushing that 90 day late to March gets me instantly 3 months further away from the "extreme late". At this point it doesn't do much for me, but I'm trying to get anything and everything in my favor as possible.