No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
Good afternoon everyone,
I had a quick question, can a creditor count you as thirty days late if the initial payment was made after the due date but before the thirty day mark? The creditor counted a late fee that was imposed as the reason for the thirty day late reporting. Thanks for your input.
That does not qualify for 30-day late reporting.
Some lenders require it being late plus 30 more days. This is the norm.
Some require it to be just 30 days after the due date.That is unusual.
It is completely unreasonable for someone to report it 30-days late just because it was after the due date and received a late fee.
The CRA credit reporting manual is very specific on this topic. A late is not a reportable 30-day late to a CRA until it has reached 30-days beyond the billing due date.
As an example, you get a billing statement in May setting a due date on, for example, June 30th. YOu are 30-days past the billing statement date after June 30th, and thus are delinquent. However, you are not "30-days late" in the lexicon of credit reporting until after July 30th. You are delinquent, but it is not reportable as a 30-day late if you make payment before 30 days past its due date.
This distinction has implications in other areas, such as determining the DOFD on an OC account. In the scenario set forth above, you ARE delinquent after June 30th, so technically, that would be your DOFD. However, most will simply rely on the date of their first reported 30-day late as the date for determining DOFD. Actually, it would be July 1st. Only a month, but the distinction is there.
Thanks for the reply, however does unusual mean unlawful, or in error? I was hoping to get specific information regarding the late payment being used as the reason for a thirty day late status when the principal payment was payed long before the thirty day cycle.