No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
Ok so here is a small dilemma I'm in.
I had a Discover that I used as a balance transfer card.
So I let it go, (bad mistake, sure everyone has had one) thus it goes into CO status.
I decided to throw it onto a DMP and currently pay on it as agreed each month.
Here is my question: If its being paid as agreed, then why does Discover continue to report it as a CO? They agreed to the terms, and the amount being paid...
Does that make much sense to anyone?
Once they've thrown it into CO status, it stays there. It's being paid off now, but their records have already shown it as a CO. Bummer of a deal, I know.
+1
A charge-off is the reporting of a one-time accounting measure taken by the creditor. Subsequent activity on the account, including payment in full, does not alter the fact of their having taken that past action.
Once paid, it can be addressed by requests for GW deletion.
So even though its being paid as agreed, and the amount they approved, it continues to be reported as a chargeoff?
Offly odd.
Stated differently, having a charge-off is not a lingering current account status once another event occurs after the CO is reported. It is an old, single adverse item in your file that remains, similar to having an old reported monthly delinquency or a collection.
The CO is only removed if it dies of its own old age after 7 years plus 180 days from the DOFD on the OC account, or the creditor voluntarily deletes it earlier.
Personally, I share your frustration with the continued adverse impact. I dont think that a charge-off should even be a reportable adverse item to a consumer's credit file, as it is an internal bookeeping measure taken by a creditor, which is, other than paying the debt, out of the control of a consumer. They are incentives offered to creditors to move uncollectible debts out of their business accounting ledgers, thus providing a fairer statement of the real assets.
However, charge-offs are accepted as reportable adverse items, so one must deal with it.
@RobertEG wrote:
Personally, I share your frustration with the continued adverse impact. I dont think that a charge-off should even be a reportable adverse item to a consumer's credit file, as it is an internal bookeeping measure taken by a creditor, which is, other than paying the debt, out of the control of a consumer. They are incentives offered to creditors to move uncollectible debts out of their business accounting ledgers, thus providing a fairer statement of the real assets.
However, charge-offs are accepted as reportable adverse items, so one must deal with it.
Why shouldn't a creditor be able to report a charge-off status? Allowing a trade/credit line given to a consumer fall 120-180 days past due should not be viewable to other lenders? There are consequences for every action.. no? Please let me know if I am misreading this.