No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
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...
The worst they could do is to do nothing, so mostly an upside. I'd do it.
@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:
Date Delinquency Date of fall off (range) 1 Aug-04 30 day late 8/2011 to 2/2012 2 Jun-05 30 day late 6/2012 to 12/2013 3 Jan-06 30 day late 1/2013 to 7/2013 4 Feb-06 60 day late 2/2013 to 8/2013 5 Mar-06 90 day late 3/2013 to 9/2013 6 Apr-06 120 day late 4/2013 to 10/2013 7 May-06 120 day late 5/2013 to 11/2013 8 Jun-06 120 day late 6/2013 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?
Each late will come off after 7 years. The extra 6 months are only for negative TLs coming off.
So should I still send a GW letter to ask them to take the lates away?
Oh yes of course. I was just saying lates come off after 7 and not 7.5 years.