Disputing a CO - Plains Commerce Bank

[phix]

I have a question about disputing a charged off credit card from Plains Commerce Bank....

Plains Commerce Bank CO is on all 3 of my CRAs, the charge-off date was 11/2008. However, back in 2012 it seems they reported again in 10/2012 that the account was charged-off. I even see in the payment history leading up to 10/2012 the 30/60/90/180 late notices. Is this consider illegal re-aging? Can I dispute this?

Also on Equifax it is reporting a $ balance instead of $0.00 and that my first major date of deliquiency was 02/2012.... it was charged off in 11/2008!

[guiness56]

Is the CO paid?  Who owns the debt, the OC or a CA?  Is it reporting a balance?

Those questions need answering to tell whether it is legal or not.

[phix]

The CO isn't paid, I'm not sure if a CA owns it or not, I don't see any listings from a CA for Plains Commerce Bank, but I believe they went out of buisness or something like that. There address has a weird entry under it called "Tape Only".

[guiness56]

If they still own the debt they are allowed to post lates until it is paid.

If they don't own it and it shows a 0 balance they cannot post late payments from the date it was sold/transferred.

[RobertEG]

The "write-off/charge-off" of a debt is within their accounting books and tax returns

It is not a "write-off" of any portion of the debt with the consumer.

After taking a CO, the entire debt remains obligated by the consumer, and can continue to be reported, as can any subsequent delinquencies on the debt.

The significance of a reported CO to the consumer is that it is an entry in their credit report that a creditor has made an accounting determination that thay are unlikely to pay the debt.  Dispute of a CO requires that the consumer either assert the debt itself is not legitimate, or that the creditor was not entitled to take that accounting measure.

[guiness56]

---

@RobertEG wrote:

The "write-off/charge-off" of a debt is within their accounting books and tax returns

It is not a "write-off" of any portion of the debt with the consumer.

After taking a CO, the entire debt remains obligated by the consumer, and can continue to be reported, as can any subsequent delinquencies on the debt.

The significance of a reported CO to the consumer is that it is an entry in their credit report that a creditor has made an accounting determination that thay are unlikely to pay the debt.  Dispute of a CO requires that the consumer either assert the debt itself is not legitimate, or that the creditor was not entitled to take that accounting measure.

---

Not if the OC no longer owns the debt.  They cannot continue to report lates after the debt is sold transferred.

[DE2TX]

Definitely illegal. The account can show a balnce if they own the debt, but they can't go into you CR and report the charge off date inaccurately. I would dispute unless you are in one of the states that has an ultra long SOL.

[RobertEG]

True.

However, the post stated that the OC is still reporting a balance, so i presumed they still own the debt.

Thus, the date they did or reported the CO has no effect on their ability to report continued delinquencies if they owned the debt.

As for reporting of the charge-off, the date it was initially reported was 11/2008.  That does represent the date they actually did their accounting.  The date they actually did the CO is not required to be reported, and is not significant other than it must have been done prior to when they reported it, and the DOFD must be prior to the date they did the actual CO.  The reportd DOFD has not been asserted to have been updated, so I see no issue of improper reporting of either the CO or possible delinquencies.

Once charged-off, it remains charged-off, and they are entitled to continue to report that fact  in subsequent "updates."

That does not mean they did a new CO.