Taking your example, yes, if your payment history profile reports as being 120 late in 7/2009, that rasises questions as to how the DOFD could be that same date.
The only way that could be the case is if the account was in good-standing in 6/2007, and 7/2009 was a new first delinquency, and the CO then occured after that date.
That is contradictory to having reported as 120 late in 7/2009, so you clearly have an inaccuracy in either the reporting as being 120-late in 7/2009, or that 7/2009 is the DOFD.
However, you cannot simply back-date from 7/2009 by four months to determine a DOFD for a couple of reasons.
First, creditors are not required to report a 30-late the actual first month that it is possible to do so. They can delay, and first report as at least 30-late several months after the first reportable 30-late. The same applies to later levels of delinquency.
Second, a 30-late is not reportable until an account is 30 days past the date of first actual account default, and thus the legal DOFD is a month prior to a reportabel 30-late.
As demonstrated by the above, neither a CRA nor a consumer can determine the DOFD based on a reported payment history profile. Thus the requiremnt under FCRA 623(a)(5) that the DOFD must be separately and explicitly reported to the CRA no later than 90 days after having reported a collection or charge-off.
You have a clear inaccuracy in reporting, but whether it is a payment history inaccuracy or a DOFD inaccuracy is left to be determined.
You can either contact the credtior informally and request clarification, file a direct dispute with the creditor, or send a dispute to the CRA and let them handle referral to the creditor.
