topic Re: How do I take care of this? in Rebuilding Your Credit

How do I take care of this?

gloverkevin — Mon, 31 Mar 2025 03:04:28 GMT

How do I take care of this account. It doesn't show on any of my credit reports but it's been charged off since 2018 and I want to re-establish a relationship with Capital One. I only have the Kohls card with them but I got it due to Kohls merging with their network. I can't even apply for any Capital One cards. If I pay off this charge off, will I be able to start bulding a new relationship with them?

Re: How do I take care of this?

GZG — Mon, 31 Mar 2025 04:00:33 GMT

@gloverkevin wrote:
How do I take care of this account. It doesn't show on any of my credit reports but it's been charged off since 2018 and I want to re-establish a relationship with Capital One. I only have the Kohls card with them but I got it due to Kohls merging with their network. I can't even apply for any Capital One cards. If I pay off this charge off, will I be able to start bulding a new relationship with them?

did you contact them, did they not have info for the collection agency it was sent to?

Re: How do I take care of this?

Creditwiser — Mon, 31 Mar 2025 08:11:16 GMT

You can call them, make arrangments to PIF. Although when you poke this bear, you're now at risk of awakening this case and subject to Credit Reporting. If it was not on my CR's and they havn't contacted you , ask yourself if you really want this card . No way of knowing this outcome.

Re: How do I take care of this?

bass_playr — Mon, 31 Mar 2025 14:39:00 GMT

Hiya,

First, I would not worry about credit reporting, since a card gets charged off usually around 6 months after first going delinquent. And since you said it was charged off in 2018, it's going to be either already past the SOL for reporting or very close to it. So, if it did go on your credit reports, it cannot stay on very long. Depending on exactly what month in 2018 it was charged off, it either cannot go on your credit now or would only be reportable for a few months. Also, if it did show up on your credit, it would show up as a charged off account with a zero balance owed. That's the only way Cap One could legally report it. Now, if the new creditor decides to report it, they will do so with balance info showing it as a collections account. But again, I would make sure you know the month it was charged off--many debt buyers sometimes break the law when it comes to reporting past the SOL.

Next, contacting Cap One would be fruitless in this situation in my experience because Cap One will simply tell you the same thing that this message tells you--that they no longer own it, and that whoever the new creditor is will contact you. You cannot pay them because once it is acquired by another party, Cap One has zeroed out the account on their books and can no longer take payment for it since they no longer own it.

Unfortunately, even paying off the new creditor won't affect Cap One's decision. You may just have to wait this one out a bit longer. I know that eventually, Cap One would consider you again because they did for me several years ago.

Re: How do I take care of this?

BallBounces — Mon, 31 Mar 2025 15:39:59 GMT

I am curious, why do you want to "build a relationship" with Capital One Credit? Whatever that in fact means.

Re: How do I take care of this?

Seatac — Sun, 13 Apr 2025 05:33:53 GMT

Step very carefully here.

Find out from your credit reports what the DOFD is on the charged off account.

The DOFD is what sets the Statute of Limitations for them to sue you AND for reporting to the CRAs.

If you contact them BEFORE the SOLs Run out they MIGHT claim your contact reset the SOL as it was admitting you owed the debt.

If I were you I would find out the DOFD, then add a FULL YEAR before I did anything. Then I would look to see what cap 1 says. If the message is still there contact a lawyer to negotiate a deal.

I find the wording ODD for an account they have SOLD. It implies they are somehow tracking what you do with the vultures that bought the debt....very odd.

Re: How do I take care of this?

bass_playr — Sun, 13 Apr 2025 05:54:40 GMT

@Seatac wrote:
Step very carefully here.

Find out from your credit reports what the DOFD is on the charged off account.

The DOFD is what sets the Statute of Limitations for them to sue you AND for reporting to the CRAs.

If you contact them BEFORE the SOLs Run out they MIGHT claim your contact reset the SOL as it was admitting you owed the debt.

If I were you I would find out the DOFD, then add a FULL YEAR before I did anything. Then I would look to see what cap 1 says. If the message is still there contact a lawyer to negotiate a deal.

I find the wording ODD for an account they have SOLD. It implies they are somehow tracking what you do with the vultures that bought the debt....very odd.

I must ask, where exactly are you coming from with some of this post?

First, the DOFD is already apparently known to the OP since OP said it was charged off in 2018. From charge-off, it can be reported for a maximum of 7 years on credit. As for SOL for suing, that varies from state to state. According to this consumer law attorney site, there are only two states whose credit card debt SOL's are more than 6 years--10 years for Rhode Island and 8 years for Wyoming:

https://consumerlawfirmcenter.com/statute-of-limitations-on-debt-by-state/

If OP doesnt live in one of those two states, then a DOFD in 2018 puts this debt outside the SOL for suing. There's nothing to tread carefully about when it comes to trying to sort it out aside from restarting that clock, and each state is specific in how that may occur.

Also, there's nothing "odd" about how Cap One has this notation when he tries to view his account on their site online. They notified him that it's charged off and was "acquired by another party". That is a description of an account that Cap One no longer holds. If they still owned it and had only hired a debt collector to collect on their behalf, then that party would not have "acquired" it....they would only have authority to collect for Cap One. That's pretty basic language. No mystery there.

Lastly, not one word of this "implies they are somehow tracking what you do". It's a simple statement that another party acquired a charged-off account. Nothing more, nothing less. Please, explain how you arrive at that conclusion based on this wording.

Re: How do I take care of this?

Seatac — Sun, 13 Apr 2025 06:39:30 GMT

I stand by my advice to trade carefully and to know his exact DOFD.

For lawsuit purposes the SOL for credit card debt is typically 3 or 6 years. Yes a couple states are odd. For credit reporting purooses it is 7 years.

They both trigger on DOFD. The OP says this was sometime in 2018. This is 2025. Without the exact date he may prematurely and by accident reset the SOL by acknowledging the debt and have it on hos credit report for 7 more years.

As for lawsuit SOL, the vulture nay claim that the SOL was tolled. We don't have his details like state, how or if any legal/ court notices he has received we cannot tell from the post if the court has tolled the SOL Since we don't know this info, you might want to guess one way or another I chose to warn him to step carefully

THE wording I find odd is the screen Cap he provides.

Since cap 1 is lenient ( compared to others) with BK and written off accounts, if they are not in some way tracking him then he will never be able to apply as that message will appear...that is unless there is some type of tracking, even a simple timer that follows his ssn.

It's great you don't think it is odd, I do and stand by the statement

Have a nice nught

Re: How do I take care of this?

vntrsc — Sun, 13 Apr 2025 15:28:13 GMT

@Seatac wrote:
I stand by my advice to trade carefully and to know his exact DOFD.

For lawsuit purposes the SOL for credit card debt is typically 3 or 6 years. Yes a couple states are odd. For credit reporting purooses it is 7 years.

They both trigger on DOFD. The OP says this was sometime in 2018. This is 2025. Without the exact date he may prematurely and by accident reset the SOL by acknowledging the debt and have it on hos credit report for 7 more years.

As for lawsuit SOL, the vulture nay claim that the SOL was tolled. We don't have his details like state, how or if any legal/ court notices he has received we cannot tell from the post if the court has tolled the SOL Since we don't know this info, you might want to guess one way or another I chose to warn him to step carefully

THE wording I find odd is the screen Cap he provides.

Since cap 1 is lenient ( compared to others) with BK and written off accounts, if they are not in some way tracking him then he will never be able to apply as that message will appear...that is unless there is some type of tracking, even a simple timer that follows his ssn.

It's great you don't think it is odd, I do and stand by the statement

Have a nice nught

You stated:

"Without the exact date he may prematurely and by accident reset the SOL by acknowledging the debt and have it on hos credit report for 7 more years."

While a state's SOL might be reset by acknowledging a debt, it does not reset the 7-year reporting period.

See 15 U.S. Code § 1681c(c) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).

(c) Running of reporting period

(1) In general

The 7-year period referred to in paragraphs (4) and (6) of subsection (a) shall begin, with respect to any delinquent account that is placed for collection (internally or by referral to a third party, whichever is earlier), charged to profit and loss, or subjected to any similar action, upon the expiration of the 180-day period beginning on the date of the commencement of the delinquency which immediately preceded the collection activity, charge to profit and loss, or similar action.

It specifies that the reporting period starts 180 days after the "delinquency" that "preceded" collection or charge off. That means there must have been a late payment or nonpayment that occurred before collection or charge off.

A delinquency can only occur if an account is current. As stated in § 1681c(c), a delinquency must occur before ("preceded") charge off. Once an account is charged off, it is permanently delinquent. It can never be current again.

Therefore, the delinquency that came before charge off has already occurred. There can never be another delinquency that takes place before charge off.

In regard to acknowledgment, an acknowledgment is not a delinquency. There is nothing in § 1681c(c) that indicates anything other than a delinquency before collection or charge off triggers the 7-year reporting period.

From the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in Gonzales v Arrow Financial.

"As there is no circumstance under which Arrow could legally report an obsolete debt to a credit bureau, the implication that Arrow could make a positive report in the event of payment is misleading."

From the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Gillespie v Equifax.

"The seven year period begins to run 180 days after the account is placed in collection or charged off by the creditor so the effective result is a seven and one-half year period from the original delinquency. 15 U.S.C. § 1681c(c)(1)."

Re: How do I take care of this?

Seatac — Sun, 13 Apr 2025 18:12:47 GMT

I stand by my advice that you seem to be arguing he shouldn't take care is bizzare and suggests you are just looking to create conflict.

I can point to six people in my orbit faxing the same challenge for making tge mistake o warn him about.

BTW neither opinion you cite is controlling so get over that ball of twaddle.

If you don't like my advice don't take it and move on.

Re: How do I take care of this?

bass_playr — Mon, 14 Apr 2025 01:53:55 GMT

@Seatac wrote:
I stand by my advice that you seem to be arguing he shouldn't take care is bizzare and suggests you are just looking to create conflict.
I can point to six people in my orbit faxing the same challenge for making tge mistake o warn him about.
BTW neither opinion you cite is controlling so get over that ball of twaddle.

If you don't like my advice don't take it and move on.

lol you seem to be unaware that two different people made those posts questioning your claims. Your most recent post appears as though you believe you're speaking to me when I'm not the one who questioned what you said there. Try again.

"For lawsuit purposes the SOL for credit card debt is typically 3 or 6 years. Yes a couple states are odd. For credit reporting purooses it is 7 years.

You are apparently not aware of how the two different SOL's work. There is only one way to reset the SOL for credit reporting--and that's to create a brand new DOFD by making payment enough to bring a still-open account current. It's not the same as state law level SOL for suing, where each state has its own specific requirements for resetting that SOL clock. You can in some states make a written acknowledgement of the debt or promise to pay, and that could restart it. But you CANNOT restart the federally mandated credit reporting SOL by making a promise to pay or acknowledgement of a debt. The law documents this. Only a payment on an account that's still open, and that resets the DOFD to a new date, can restart the federally mandated reporting SOL. If you are dealing with a charged-off account or other account that was closed, even paying the whole balance owed in full cannot restart the clock for credit reporting. You need to stop giving people false info and bad advice. You're not helping them or anyone else by doing that.

In other words, no, you cannot restart the 7 year reporting period for your credit reports as you claimed. It's simply not a thing. Period.

https://www.protectingconsumerrights.com/blog/2013/01/time-limits-on-reporting-and-the-fcra/

"As for lawsuit SOL, the vulture nay claim that the SOL was tolled. We don't have his details like state, how or if any legal/ court notices he has received we cannot tell from the post if the court has tolled the SOL Since we don't know this info, you might want to guess one way or another I chose to warn him to step carefully "

And if wishes and buts were candy and nuts, then we'd all have a Merrier Christmas.

Look, you can make assumptions all you wish. You can try to toss out as many obscure situations as you wish. It changes nothing. We don't have his details, like state, which is why I pointed out that only two states have an SOL period that has not yet expired under their laws. And I listed the two states--so if OP is not in one of those states, then the debt collector is, well, S.O.L on the SOL. Sure, they can always lie and claim otherwise, but you're either not aware or not concerned with the fact that making the claim that the SOL was tolled and proving it are two different things. SOL tolling tends to occur mainly under VERY FEW circumstances--including filing a bankruptcy, because it negates filing a debt collection suit, or if the consumer moved out of the state and then back again, or if he's deemed mentally incompetent. But even so, you're giving general advice and pretending it applies to very specific circumstances--which you didn't even bother to lay out for OP to know. That doesnt work.

"I stand by my advice that you seem to be arguing he shouldn't take care is bizzare and suggests you are just looking to create conflict. "

Is that aimed at me, or at Vntrsc? We both replied to you, and you seem to think that only one person did. Vntrsc said nothing to you about him not taking care. I think you need to slow down and stop lashing out because you don't even seem to know who you're replying to at this point.

"I can point to six people in my orbit faxing the same challenge for making tge mistake o warn him about."

You will excuse me for not believing that, as you're conflating many different things that have no basis in truth or reality---for example, you actually claimed that acknowledging a debt can restart the 7 year clock on credit reporting. Completely false. Please stop posting false info like this. If you don't know, research like the rest of us have had to do. I've been helping people for 2 decades in this arena. Pretty sure you have not been, with this kind of bad info in your posts.

"BTW neither opinion you cite is controlling so get over that ball of twaddle. "

Sorry, no. You don't get to make that claim because you already admitted you don't know what state OP is in. Therefore, you have no idea which circuit his state is in, so you have no ability to make that determination as of now. So, get over your own ball of twaddle. If OP lives in a state that's within the 7th or 9th circuits, those are absolutely on point for him. Plus, you've completely ignored the fact that the other circuits most likely have their own case law examples that line up with this because it's a pretty straightforward federal law concept.

For example, vntrsc cited Gillespie v Equifax, a 7th circuit case. A quick Google Scholar search on that exact name pulls up no less than 75 results--cases from the 6th, 7th, 9th circuits, and from federal district courts in several different states--Nevada, Minnesota, Michigan, Illinois, Florida, Pennsyvania, Connecticut, California, Georgia, Kentucky, Missouri, Texas, Virginia, Maryland--all citing the 7th Circuit case that he cited and agreeing with its result. That's two different circuits and 14 states, and that's just one of the cases he cited. So please, get over that ball of twaddle. Really.

Case law that's not within the same jurisdiction is not binding but is quite often still persuasive. It happens in courts every single day.

Just for deuces and ha-has, I checked the other case too, and it shows 60 results, from federal district courts in CA, OR, NE, IL, IN, AZ, WA, NJ, TX, AR, MA, MN, and from the 3rd, 7th and 9th Circuits as well. See the point? That's 18 states whose federal courts agree with what vntrsc posted to you above, as well as three of the ten circuits where these two cases were favorably cited. So much for that one, I suppose. It would really get fun if I decided to waste even more time on this one and started basic searches for cases in all states using the same terminology, not just the ones in which those case names were cited.

"If you don't like my advice don't take it and move on. "

If you don't like your incorrect claims being questioned, then why post them in a public forum where everyone else is just as free to comment here as you are? Did I or anyone else tell you to stop posting? Nope. I simply asked you not to post false information because it harms the people who come here in need of help. If that's really too much to ask, then I don't know what to tell ya. But it's rather nonsensical to think that no one should be allowed to counter the things you say with evidence that you're making false claims.