No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
Sure, he paid less than the full debt accrued, but that is not the usage of that special comment.
It only applies when the paid status resulted from payment of a delinquent debt. It is not intended to record voluntary offers of creditors to excuse non-delinquent debt.
It is an improper code in this situation.
Roberteg,
It doesnot amke any difference if the account has been or is delinquest.. If you do not pay the balance in full that remark will show on the report.
I respectfully disagree.
@RobertEG wrote:I respectfully disagree.
And I respectfully hope you're right, Robert!
@AndySoCal wrote:jimbo831,
The settled for less than balance would come from he paid only 90% of the amount. owed according the OP original post
I understand that, but I'm not sure if that is legit. Settled for less, as far as I know, is reserved for collections and charged-off accounts. While the account was still current, you can change the original agreement if both parties agree to do so. IMO that new agreement would supercede the old agreement and not be settled for less, but instead, paid off in full at the newly agreed upon balance. This is obviously just my opinion on the situation.
For those who think this comment is reserved for only charge off and collections I can you give the reason(s) why. By reasons I mean something besides another persons post on this site. Btw it currently being reported as a charge off.
Edited; I readed the OP again.
The account should not be reported as a charge off that is not correct. The account should be reported as Paid as the account status with a comment account was settled for less than full balance as Settled as the account status. The comment is needed to clarify how it was paid ie not balance in full. The charge off came after the fact of the agreement on the terms of paying the account off. And in my opinion should not be reprted as such.
@AndySoCal wrote:For those who think this comment is reserved for only charge off and collections I can you give the reason(s) why. By reasons I mean something besides another persons post on this site.
Andy, yes, please give me the reasons why so I can figure out what to do about this bad boy. I've only got a couple more left to remove from my CR before I'm golden again! So do I dispute this with the CRAs or throw myself on the mercy of Chase with a GW letter?
The reasons I wanted are from those who think the remark account settled is for less than full is reserved for charge off and collections. I see I left a word out. That said now regarding trying to get this account off your report. You can try to see if Chase will do a good will deletion If you have the $$ you can offer to pay Chase the amount saved in the settlement this would convert the account to a positive one. I do not see disputing the account with the bureaus helping your score any if at all. Of the options given you might try the GW letter not sure how it will work out