First PREMIER re-aging debt

[RobertEG]

Your prior check would certainly be helpful in establishing an earlier date, but it is not conclusive.

Should they ever find themselves in court, they would have a real problem as their internal records would be subject to discovery, and could very well document both the actual, real, and first DOFD, and changes in its reporting along the way.

I undertand that you dont want to have to resort to civil litigation to get it removed.

I suggest a few things short of litigation.

1. Do all you can to obtain a credit report prior to any suspected changes that shows their reported DOFD, and a copy after their apparent change.

YOU NEED A SPECIFIC SHOWING OF WHAT THEY ACTUALLY REPORTED as the DOFD.

2. If you are not successful in obtaining the currrent reported DOFD, then send the CRA a request under the provisions of FCRA609(a)(1), which entitles a consuemr to request and receive any information of record in their credit file at the time of the request.  Send a request for the reported "FCRA Compliance Date / Date of First Delinquency," which is the field code designation used by the CRA to store the reported DOFD.  You will than have direct evidence from the CRA of the actual reported DOFD.  Requests under section 609(a) must be accompanied by proof of your identity and the processing fee, which is currently $11.00.

3. Using the best documentation you have of what they reported as DOFD, send a formal complaint to the CFPB that asserts they did not conduct a reasonable investigation of your dispute, as your evidence clearly shows a DOFD that is later than when your first went delinquent and nver caught up.  Perhaps the CFPB will ooncur based on your showing.........

[Anonymous]

Okay, my log in info got messed up, said I had no account, when I do....  so I had to make a new account  so here is latest:

Okay, I received a copy of Experians dispute report results.  It says I was first 30 days late in August of 2011, BUT it is due to be removed from my credit report in May of 2018...  That does not sync with the 7 years from first date of delinquency, does it?  I have not heard back from first premier again yet. They sent me one letter saying they are not a debt collector, DC laws do not apply to them, so they do not have to send me anything, so I sent them a  FCRA:§ 623 letter in response to their response.  Then Experians letter and CR came today and I saw that discrepancy in the time frame between when it will be removed from my report and their accounting of the first DOD.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Okay, my log in info got messed up, said I had no account, when I do....  so I had to make a new account  so here is latest:

Okay, I received a copy of Experians dispute report results.  It says I was first 30 days late in August of 2011, BUT it is due to be removed from my credit report in May of 2018...  That does not sync with the 7 years from first date of delinquency, does it?  I have not heard back from first premier again yet. They sent me one letter saying they are not a debt collector, DC laws do not apply to them, so they do not have to send me anything, so I sent them a  FCRA:§ 623 letter in response to their response.  Then Experians letter and CR came today and I saw that discrepancy in the time frame between when it will be removed from my report and their accounting of the first DOD.

---

DoFD is not determined by the individual lates that are reported. It is a separate reported date that is *not* shown on reports except for Equifax. TU and EX will simply show the estimated removal date, while EQ shows the actual reported DoFD.

Is this item showing up on your Equifax report?

[Anonymous]

The first late is the only first late. no payments were made after the first late ( however, first late on CR is wrong by three years (see OP)  )

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

The first late is the only first late. no payments were made after the first late ( however, first late on CR is wrong by three years (see OP)  )

---

OK, I get that but I cannot stress enough that LATES REPORTED are NOT used to determine DoFD. The reason is that individual lates are not REQUIRED to be reported, and the full degree of lateness is not always reported - for example, in a particular month you might be 90 days late, but they may choose to report 30 days late. You can be 30 days late in a month and they may choose to not report that at all. The DoFD is a SEPARATE data point that they are REQUIRED to submit to the CRA's once the account is charged off. The OC determines the DoFD from their own internal account records, not whats been reported to the CRA's.

You are going to have to get tough with these idiots. While they are correct in that they are not regulated by FDCPA, they most certainly are regulated by FCRA as they are a furnisher of information. You really need to get a hold of SOME kind of documentation showing the original DoFD.

[Anonymous]

I NEVER had a late until I went delinquent, period.  and I went deliquent years before they are reporting as the first late is the entire point of this post.  they say that it takes 7 years for an item to fall off your report from the DOFD BUT the date is it set to fall off is  LESS than 7 years from the now first 30 day late they are reporting... But ya, I am hoping the 623 letter works

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

I NEVER had a late until I went delinquent, period.  and I went deliquent years before they are reporting as the first late is the entire point of this post.  they say that it takes 7 years for an item to fall off your report from the DOFD BUT the date is it set to fall off is  LESS than 7 years from the now first 30 day late they are reporting... But ya, I am hoping the 623 letter works

---

OK, yes I get all that. But how the lates are reported simply doesn't matter, simply BECAUSE they are not always reported consistently. Keep at them and like I said try to get some kind of documentation of an earlier report showing the correct DoFD.

[Anonymous]

Still IF first reported late is in August of 2011 (according to "verified" CR), how the heck can it be set to be removed from CR's in under 7 years? I think that alone proves FP is cooking the book.... CR does not report DOFD either, only first late 30 aug 11, then 60 Sept11, 90,  Oct,2011, 120  nov 2011 and a C/Oin 12/11 and hten 1/12  then nothing until yet again report charged off in 11/2012...

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Still IF first reported late is in August of 2011 (according to "verified" CR), how the heck can it be set to be removed from CR's in under 7 years? I think that alone proves FP is cooking the book.... CR does not report DOFD either, only first late 30 aug 11, then 60 Sept11, 90,  Oct,2011, 120  nov 2011 and a C/Oin 12/11 and hten 1/12  then nothing until yet again report charged off in 11/2012...

---

You're just not getting it. Lack of an earlier late *proves* nothing more than earlier lates were not reported. There is no statutory requirement that a late be reported AT ALL. They can choose to report no lates at all and only report the charge off. They can also continue to report lates AFTER the charge off, though they typically don't. I'm not saying their reporting isn't obviously screwed up, its just that one (the lates) doesn't prove anything regarding the other (DoFD), it just proves their overall reporting is sloppy and inconsistant - which seems to be common with FP.

[RobertEG]

If you are having no luck getting the reported DOFD from reports you order or via an informal call to the CRA, you can always resort to a formal request sent to the CRA to provide you that date.

The FCRA has a specific provision entitling a consumer to obtain any information of record in their credit file by sending a request under FCRA 609(a).

Such requests must be accompanied by proof of your identity and the required processing fee, which is currently $11.00.

Identity the information that you are requesting as hte "FCRA Compliance Date / Date of First Delinquency," which is the formal title for the code that stores the reporrtedf DOFD.