topic Re: SOL Discover in Rebuilding Your Credit

SOL Discover

Icemanku — Sun, 08 May 2011 03:49:58 GMT

Shouldn't this be dropped off my credit report by now since this was opened in 2002 and the DOFD was in Aug 2004 and my state's SOL is 5 years?

If not I'm pretty much screwed, right? I haven't seen anyone have GW success with Discover...please tell me I'm wrong!

Account Number:	XXXX	Status:	PAYS AS AGREED
Account Owner:	Individual Account.	High Credit:	$5,400
Type of Account	Revolving	Credit Limit:	$4,000
Term Duration:		Terms Frequency:	Monthly (due every month)
Date Opened:	11/2002	Balance:	$0
Date Reported:	10/2006	Amount Past Due:
Date of Last Payment:	08/2006	Actual Payment Amount:
Scheduled Payment Amount:		Date of Last Activity:	08/2006
Date Major Delinquency First Reported:		Months Reviewed:	47
Creditor Classification:		Activity Designator:	Paid and Closed
Charge Off Amount:		Deferred Payment Start Date:
Balloon Payment Amount:		Balloon Payment Date:
Date Closed:	06/2006	Type of Loan:	Credit Card
Date of First Delinquency:	N/A
Comments:	Account paid for less than full balance

Re: SOL Discover

llecs — Sun, 08 May 2011 04:26:06 GMT

Know that there is a difference between SOL and CRTP. SOL has nothing to do with reporting and that is set by state law. It's the time frame a creditor has to sue you. In your case, SOL is unimportant because the debt was settled. What you might be thinking of is CRTP. That's set by federal law via the FCRA which requires baddies to drop off 7-7.5 yrs from DOFD. In your example, if the DOFD is indeed 8/2004, then it might fall off as early as August.

Re: SOL Discover

Icemanku — Sun, 08 May 2011 04:49:06 GMT

Ahhh, Thanks for the clarification. Glad to know that my stupif college mistake will finally drop off.

Any idea what kind of score increase that might be? 10-20pts?

Re: SOL Discover

RobertEG — Sun, 08 May 2011 05:13:30 GMT

This is an OC account with no reported charge-off, so the DOFD is irrelevant. DOFD only applies to collections and charge-offs.

Each delinquency reported on the account will drop separately at 7 years after its date of delinquency.

What delinquencies were reported on the account?

Re: SOL Discover

Icemanku — Sun, 08 May 2011 05:20:08 GMT

Year

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

2006

120

2005

2004

2003

2002

First was Aug 2004 which would make it fall off this August, no?

What kind of a point increase, ballpark obviously, would this bump me up to?

Re: SOL Discover

llecs — Sun, 08 May 2011 06:52:06 GMT

IMO, your DOFD was 1/2006. You had recovered and that may have reset the clock. Is this reporting on EX and TU? If so, you can get a rough idea of the DOFD as it should be listing a drop off date on each.

BTW, you may not necessarily want it off. It depends. The "settled" comment is scored and does hurt, as do the 60+ day lates, but it is 9 years old. How is your average age of accounts in relation to a 9 yr old TL?

Re: SOL Discover

Icemanku — Sun, 08 May 2011 06:59:07 GMT

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

Re: SOL Discover

Anonymous — Sun, 08 May 2011 10:39:19 GMT

@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.

Re: SOL Discover

Icemanku — Sun, 08 May 2011 13:42:37 GMT

Is there anything I can do in the way of PFD to make it look better currently. Or could a GW for those last three 120 day lates do anything for me? Basically how might I be proactive about this account or should I just leave it alone?

Re: SOL Discover

llecs — Sun, 08 May 2011 14:13:24 GMT

I think it wouldn't be that risky to send GW letters either asking for removal or asking them to drop the lates, assuming this isn't your oldest revolving TL.

ETA....even if they opted not to remove the lates and if they delete instead, you wouldn't be that bad off.

Re: SOL Discover

Icemanku — Sun, 08 May 2011 18:13:36 GMT

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...

Re: SOL Discover

llecs — Sun, 08 May 2011 22:09:05 GMT

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

Re: SOL Discover

Icemanku — Tue, 10 May 2011 02:14:45 GMT

@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?

Re: SOL Discover

Anonymous — Tue, 10 May 2011 04:16:36 GMT

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

Re: SOL Discover

Icemanku — Tue, 10 May 2011 04:40:49 GMT

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

Re: SOL Discover

Anonymous — Tue, 10 May 2011 13:31:21 GMT

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