Figi's Retaliatory reporting???

[Anonymous]

I disputed an old Figi's Account with EQ that went to collections back in 2008. Last payment was made in August 2008 and that was the payoff. Since my dispute last month they have changed the status to 120 days late, which I redisputed, and now they have changed the account to CA for July of this year even though the balance has been $0 since 8/2008.  Took a 22 point Fico hit for that.  Below is how it is reporting(the * represents OK status for that month). Is this legal???


2010 * * * * * * CA
2009 * * * * * * * * * * * *
2008 * * * * * * CA CA * * * *

[guiness56]

What is the CA?  A collection agency?

If the account was paid off in 08 they can't report anything past that as CA, CO or late.

You are allowed to dispute directly with the OC.  Write to them, include copies of your CR with that account.  Let them know you dispute how it is being reported.

[Anonymous]

The CA stands for Collection Account, but this hasn't been in collection since 8/2008. Getting ready to fire off a 623 letter to them as Equifax has stated the info is reporting accurately.

[MachoMarkSaavge]

Equifax is the worst with reporting and disputes, they could care less about you. I had the same problem where I had a Chase/Kohls card. Was paid off and closed in Dec 2008, And on equifax it is showing 150+ days late, from dec 2008 to aug 2010, so i disputed it. Gained 25 pts on my credit. And then it comes back verified and lose the 25 points, so I called them and they will not redispute but told me to take it up with Chase themselves. So frustrating. So I would call the CO and have them take a look at it and fix it.

[RobertEG]

A bit confusing, but this is how I interpret the scenario.

You had monthly delinquencires with the OC that apparently reached 120-days late, but the OC did not originally report, at least, the 120-late at the time.  Then the OC referred it to a debt collector, who reported a CA to your CR.

You then satisfied the debt, apparently by payment to the CA.  Is that correct?

The OC is not prevented, even after payment of the debt, to update your credit file with correct information that led to subsequent actions or payments.

In my opinion, there is nothing to prevent them, if they had not previously reported the 120-day late, to now update their OC account by reporting it.  That is totally unrelated to subsequent payment of the debt.  IF the OC has now reported their final status as referred for collection, that is not improper.  If They sold the debt to a debt collector, then reporting of a %0 balance on their part was requried, and does not signify payment of the debt.  ONly that they no longer own it.  REporing of their status as referred for collection, however, is not the posting of a collection to your credit file.  An OC cannot report a collection, only a debt collector can do that.

Who did you ultimately pay, the debt collector or the CA?

[Anonymous]

I honestly don't remember who I paid. I think it was the CA. But having the account in CA in the payment history for the month of July 2010 is causing it to look like a new 120+ day late. The OC has the account listed as a Collection Account, but I think it was their in-house collections.

[Anonymous]

Long time no update on this but now I have an update and am happy to report that it is gone. I went back and forth with Figis and EQ regarding this debt and then gave up for a while as it appeared I had hit a dead end. I then recently remembered that Figis had said the only things they verify for disputes are name and address so I redisputed with EQ last Thursday and asked them to verify the SSN associated to this account. As of this morning this account is gone from my report.

[annielorie]

Persistance