CNAC...are they reporting correctly?

[guiness56]

To be safe you should check NC statutes on SOL.  Some states will another states SOL to be used in your state. 

[Schoolbuskid]

yea i will...seem like i looked up all that stuff when i first started, might have it saved somewhere.  thanks again!

[RobertEG]

I am assuming that CNAC is the original creditor.  I see no indication of a collection.

As such, the DOFD on the account is meaningless.  DOFD has only one application in credit reporting, and that is the deletion of a collection or charge-off from your CR.

As such, each prior delinquency reported by the OC has its own, individual CR exclusion date, which is 7 years from its date of occurance.  Thus, the reported delinquency in 2/2006 would not expire until after 2/2013.  So I dont see the account becoming "positive" as of 11/2012?????

Continued reporting on their part was proper.  Their last reporting of an actual delinquency was in 2/2006.  In any reporting after that, all they are doing is repeating the status of the last reported delinquency.  That is not the reporting of a new delinquency.  It is simply the continued, current account status of 30-days late as of closing of the account.

[Schoolbuskid]

Can someone help me understand this statute...i think it refers to what guiness was explaining. Thanks! 

CGS § 1-21. Defendant out of State; when action begun or judgment enforced.

If when the cause of action accrues or judgment is rendered or docketed against a person, he is out of the State, action may be commenced, or judgment enforced within the times herein limited after the return of the person into this State, and if, after such cause of action accrues or judgment is rendered or docketed, such person departs from and resides out of this State, or remains continuously absent therefrom for one year or more, the time of his absence shall not be a part of the time limited for the commencement of the action or the enforcement of the judgment. Provided, that where a cause of action arose outside of this State and is barred by the laws of the jurisdiction in which it arose, no action may be maintained in the courts of this State for the enforcement thereof, except where the cause of action originally accrued in favor of a resident of this State.

The provisions of this section shall not apply to the extent that a court of this State has or continues to have jurisdiction over the person under the provisions of G.S. 1-75.4.

[guiness56]

To me, this seems more like it is talking about tolling.

Also, it appears to be saying that if it is time barred in the state a judgment was given, then this state won't enforce it.

PM O6 and ask him.  He would be the expert in this.

I am so glad I am not in the legal field, I could never understand what was being said.