cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

SOL Discover

tag
Icemanku
New Contributor

Re: SOL Discover

Is there a risk? What's the worst they could do? I'm under the theory the answer is ALWAYS "NO" if you don't ask... Smiley Happy

Message 11 of 16
llecs
Moderator Emeritus

Re: SOL Discover

The worst they could do is to do nothing, so mostly an upside. I'd do it.

Message 12 of 16
Icemanku
New Contributor

Re: SOL Discover


@Anonymous wrote:

@Icemanku wrote:

I'm confused? I thought DOFD was exactly that? Which would be in 2004?

 

It's reporting on my EQ.....ahhhh. what does this all mean??? Is that why it says 'Date Reported'?

 

Length of Credit History: 15 Years , 8 Months
Average Account Age: 7 Years, 4 Months



DoFD doesn't mean " the first time that you were ever late." It's the date that you became delinquent and never again recovered (the account was never brought current again), ultimately leading to charge-off. According the payment history provided, you were 30 days late in August of 2004, but you completely recovered in September of 2004. You were 30 days late in June of 2005, but you completely recovered in July of 2005. In January of 2006, you were 30 days late. In February of 2006, you were 60 days late. In March of 2006, you were 90 days late. In April of 2006, you were 120 days late, and it appears that Discover might have charged it off at that point, or that's when you began to make partial payments that still didn't bring you current. <-- If the account had been charged-off we could look backwards to the DoFD. It'd be January of 2006. That'd be the first date of delinquency (DoFD) from which you never again became current.

 

BUT, it appears that you worked out some kind of payment plan that Discover agreed to (hence the settled for less than full balance. Under that agreement, it appears that Discover began to report the last payments as current, and ultimately closed your account as "Closed/Pays as agreed". NOT "charged-off". So, I think that the CRTP is going to run for each individual derog. Like this:

 

 DateDelinquencyDate of fall off (range)
1Aug-0430 day late8/2011 to 2/2012
2Jun-0530 day late6/2012 to 12/2013
3Jan-0630 day late1/2013 to 7/2013
4Feb-0660 day late2/2013 to 8/2013
5Mar-0690 day late3/2013 to 9/2013
6Apr-06120 day late4/2013 to 10/2013
7May-06120 day late5/2013 to 11/2013
8Jun-06120 day late6/2013 to 12/2013

 

Then there's the really good "BUT". When the last late drops, your account should continue to report as a good and old account until June of 2016! Even now, it's still helping (while it's simultaneously hurting you with the major lates - FICO looks at the 120 the same as a if it were a charge-off) with the age of the account. And, I think that's a better end than the whole account going {{poof}} between January and July of 2013.


So what exactly should I ask them to do in my GW letter? I don't want them to drop it completely because it will delete an old account and probably hurt things, right?

Message 13 of 16
guiness56
Epic Contributor

Re: SOL Discover

Each late will come off after 7 years.  The extra 6 months are only for negative TLs coming off.

Message 14 of 16
Icemanku
New Contributor

Re: SOL Discover

So should I still send a GW letter to ask them to take the lates away?

Message 15 of 16
guiness56
Epic Contributor

Re: SOL Discover

Oh yes of course.  I was just saying lates come off after 7 and not 7.5 years.

Message 16 of 16
Advertiser Disclosure: The offers that appear on this site are from third party advertisers from whom FICO receives compensation.