@masscredit wrote:Most of the liens are from 2009, '10 and '11. The one for $160. is from last November. That one didn't have much if any impact on my scores. Maybe because I already had 5 other derogs and new ones don't matter as much after a certain number? Or my scores were improving a little but lost that ground because of the new one.
I struggle to find examples where FICO isn't graded on a step function: the more derogatories of a certain type you have, the less they harm you.
I don't know if you've maxxed out your scores but you could be close on some of them: I know on EQ '04 I couldn't really budge my scores regardless of what I did, even a new tax lien only dropped it 5 points when it reported. When I got it off, got roughly the same back napkin math wise. For my report 680 might be as good as it gets... ergo, no mortgage for me and I'm at 676 now.
+1 to UserG's comment: derogatories almost always dominate people's score, especially if they're any sort of recent. The BK is a backbreaker, and State tax liens are awful as for many states there's no way to get them off your report outside the SOL.
As for the real issue, do the napkin math regarding income and assets and subtract expenses the IRS deems legitimate (these are published) and then multiply that by the number of months left 10 years from your tax asssessment date on your liens (should be on your tax transcript which if your advisor hasn't already gotten for you, do it yourself and forget the advisor). That's what the IRS does for it's math on whether an OIC would be accepted... don't believe the hype on OIC's honestly, the fact is EVERY SINGLE advertisement leaves out is how much time was left on the SOL (we saved a person thousands! When there was only 1 year or left to collect... and the person would've probably been better off just continuing to hide under a rock), and with likely 6-7 years left to collect, I'm just guessing that the IRS will expect you to pay the full boat. Most advisors be scam-like though the IRS Is trying to crack down on that.
Personally I just spent the $40 on the Nolo publication Stand Up to the IRS and did it myself: even though I personally only needed a small part of it, it was well worth the money.
@nycfico wrote:
@Revelate wrote:
@masscredit wrote:Most of the liens are from 2009, '10 and '11. The one for $160. is from last November. That one didn't have much if any impact on my scores. Maybe because I already had 5 other derogs and new ones don't matter as much after a certain number? Or my scores were improving a little but lost that ground because of the new one.
I struggle to find examples where FICO isn't graded on a step function: the more derogatories of a certain type you have, the less they harm you.
I don't know if you've maxxed out your scores but you could be close on some of them: I know on EQ '04 I couldn't really budge my scores regardless of what I did, even a new tax lien only dropped it 5 points when it reported. When I got it off, got roughly the same back napkin math wise. For my report 680 might be as good as it gets... ergo, no mortgage for me and I'm at 676 now.
+1 to UserG's comment: derogatories almost always dominate people's score, especially if they're any sort of recent. The BK is a backbreaker, and State tax liens are awful as for many states there's no way to get them off your report outside the SOL.
As for the real issue, do the napkin math regarding income and assets and subtract expenses the IRS deems legitimate (these are published) and then multiply that by the number of months left 10 years from your tax asssessment date on your liens (should be on your tax transcript which if your advisor hasn't already gotten for you, do it yourself and forget the advisor). That's what the IRS does for it's math on whether an OIC would be accepted... don't believe the hype on OIC's honestly, the fact is EVERY SINGLE advertisement leaves out is how much time was left on the SOL (we saved a person thousands! When there was only 1 year or left to collect... and the person would've probably been better off just continuing to hide under a rock), and with likely 6-7 years left to collect, I'm just guessing that the IRS will expect you to pay the full boat. Most advisors be scam-like though the IRS Is trying to crack down on that.
Personally I just spent the $40 on the Nolo publication Stand Up to the IRS and did it myself: even though I personally only needed a small part of it, it was well worth the money.
You said you can't get a mortgage with a 676 score? Really? While I realize you wouldn't get the best rates, it would seem to be that that would be enough to qualify for a mortgage, no?
I should've been more clear: qualified yes, afford no 
.
I'm in So Cal and for jumbo loans the lenders I talked to wanted 30% down sub-700.
@masscredit wrote:10 years from your tax asssessment date, would that be the date when the lien was filed? I'll have to pull my paperwork for the. One was filed in Feb of '05 so it's almost 5 1/2 years old. Next up is March of '10, Feb and Oct of '11 and then Nov of '13. I can easily take care of the last two. They total about $500.
Can they still pursue collections if the amount owed isn't paid by the end of the 10 years or does it just go away for good?
The only movement that I had on my scores recently was TU went from 659 to 656 this week after my utilization went from 3 to 1%. Guess it didn't like that. Other than that, there isn't really anything that I know of that can increase my scores some more. Either time to let things age or try to work a deal to take care of the liens. But as I said, the state doesn't takes offers. They want it all.
The assessment has to happen before the lien was filed: every filed return (or unfiled, substitute for return gets generated and assessed, no bueno, always file even if you can't pay but I digress), and the IRS explicitly has 10 years from that date to collect under the SOL.
As I understand it, though there's conflicting reports online, the collection arm of the IRS is barred from pursuing the debt after that.
To give an example of this, I was working through a couple of liens: one was filed 3/2004, but the assessment date was in 10/2003: once 10/2013 came around it was unenforceable. Typically the IRS was sending me notices on all my liens, and the November round of nastygrams didn't include that one whereas the one several months prior to that did.
Regarding the income vs. expenses: you may be in line for a OIC, but do the full monty calculation - it's similar to the one you would've had to do for the BK: when I was looking at a Ch 13 vs. OIC/Installment Agreement the calculations were pretty much identical... which I suppose makes sense. Anyway an OIC can be a drawn out process, so do the napkin math before heading down that road.