Rebuilding Your Credit

[guiness56]

---

CS800 wrote:

I always wondered that myself whether the OC had to pay the CRA's to report any item.

If they CRA's get $$, they might just pester the OC's to report up till the 7-10 year mark. Why let $$ out the door.

I'm not sure how the process work if OC'c have to by law report up to 7 years. Someone could shed some light on this.

---

There is no law that says an OC has to report for up to 7 years.  All the FCRA says is they have to report accurate informaton.

As for the 7 years, that is how long negative information, if reported,  can stay.  That too is per the FCRA.

[CS800]

So technically, the OC can stop reporting an account if they feel like it? Say it's PIF?

[ScoreBooster]

Update:

Citi was the first to reply. They told me they advised all CRAs (incl. Equifax) to report my two TLs (CCs) I had with them again. It would take up to 30 days to update which is fine with me.

However, IF Equifax is still ignoring these accounts, I'll bet Citi would like to know as well.

That's making me a bit more optimistic. I mean, if Citi can run a 'refresh", the other creditors should be able to do the same.

[ArtHill]

This response is bull.  15 U.S.C. 1681e requires the maximum possible accuracy and accounts in good standing which are deleted in contradiction of a CRAs own policy is nothing short of willful violation the FCRA and is likely part of a industry policy (unwritten).  I too had a good standing account, closed in 2009, suddenly disappear in 2011.  This was after I filed suit against Equifax.  Equifax never responded to a dispute of the missing account.  They obstructed my attempts to activate credit monitoring that could have alerted me to the disappearance of the account and even had the nerve to claim, in court, that the account was never reported by the creditor at all.  TransUnion lied and claimed the account never existed.  So did Experian and Innovis.  Dropping good trade lines do affect your credit.  Don't believe this bull and the person responding may be assisting the CRAs by giving you the impression that there's no reason to dispute or sue the CRA for violation of the FCRA or for defamation or civil conspiracy.  Instead, ask a consumer protection attorney who's familiar with the FCRA.

[Shogun]

Hello Arthill and welcome to the forums.

Just wanted to let you know that the thread you posted on was 2 years old.  As far as the concern, the posters were trying to assist with helpful information and we are in no manner in league with the CRAs.

As you have stated, you used the court system to decide the outcome of your particular situation.  I feel this is a valid and justified means and sometimes is the only course left in determining an outcome.  However the information provided above was accurate and prudent to the OP's situation.

Thank you for joining our boards and we look forward to having you as a member.

Thank you

Shogun, myFICO moderator.