Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Charge off vs past due


Charge off vs past due

Hoping for some clarification on an old charged off account. From NMAC. My TU shows charged off by the Exp is reporting it as past do 90 days 50 + times. Shouldn't it report on Exp like it is in TU? Trying to add screenshots but I don't know how
Message 1 of 3
Not applicable

Re: Charge off vs past due

@Ms6Footer wrote:
...  Trying to add screenshots but I don't know how

Select "Photos" on the REPLY Toolbar (next to the camera). Select DRAG or CHOOSE and connect your screenshot. Not many steps & simple enough once you know how.

Message 2 of 3
Legendary Contributor

Re: Charge off vs past due

A creditor has the option, after taking a charge-off, to report delinquencies that continue after the taking of the CO either in terms of the standard days late, such as 150-late, or optionally as having been charged-off.


Once a creditor has reported a charge-off, they are also required under FCRA 623(a)(5) to separately provide the date of first delinquency to the CRA no later than 90 days after reporting of the CO.  That then permits the determination of the eequivalent period of delinquency for scoring purposes, and also provides the CRA with the DOFD that is necessary for them to track the ultimate exclusion date of the CO at no later than 7 years plus 180 days from the reported DOFD.


Additionally, while reporting of continued delinquency as being the same level as the prior reporting, such as a long string of 90-lates, would appear inaccurate, it is long-established practice that is accepted by the CRAs, and means the debt was at least 90-late.

You could choose to dispute the accuracy of reporting of sequential 90-lates, as they are defined under the CRA reporting manual as being within the period of 90-119 days late, but few consumers choose to do so, as the creditor will likely simply update later months to higher levels of reported delinquency, such as 120/150/180/180+. which is not beneficial to the consumer.  

Your call if you wish to be a trailblazer and dispute the accuracy of reporting consecutive levels of delinquency as not having increased to a higher level.

Message 3 of 3
Advertiser Disclosure: The offers that appear on this site are from third party advertisers from whom FICO receives compensation.