PNC Bank - Wrong Reporting - Again?

[Oyiwaa]

Hello,

I need some help in checking whether this TL from PNC - Bank is reporitng wrongly

Experian Report fragment in May 2013: http://imageshack.us/a/img802/9466/43h1.jpg
Experian Report fragment in October 2013: http://imageshack.us/scaled/large/4/80gj.jpg

These images refer to a PNC Bank card (formerly National City) TL.  It was charged-off in 2010. After numerous PFDs have failed since then,  I paid off the account in full in March this year (2013).  Now Experian has tagged the account as "Charged-off" in March 2013 - this is incorrect since the account was actually charged-off in 2010 - but I understand that this is normal reporting to have it tagged as Charged-off.  

The second issue is that Experian / Equifax are now reporitng the account as "Settled" or Paid in full for less than full balance - as shown in the second picture.  This is wrong since I paid the charged-off amount in full. 

Should I dispute this with the CRAs or with PNC bank directly (via direct dispute)?

Tbanks - Oy

[llecs]

IMO, the CO mention is OK. All it is saying that as of March 2013, the TL was a CO. Technically, the CO should be reporting monthly since the last reported late.

The settled comment is iffy. As it stands with the CO, removing the comment won't impact your FICO or your standing as viewed by lenders. However, I personally would use it as a springboard in my GWs to get them to delete.

[RobertEG]

Settled for less, regardless of scoring impact, places a statement in your CR informing others that, in the past, you had an amount of debt that you obligated, but did not pay the full amount.  That can be a factor in lending decisions by other creditors, as it states that you may seek payments for less than your full debt, and thus they may take a loss on credit extended to you.

In my opinion, it is will worth getting removed from your CR.

I would send them a direct dispute, as the CRAs have no independent basis in their reinvestigation to rely on anything other than the response from the creditor, so I see no value in thier reinvestigative review..