Hi there OP,
I have removed your cross post on this from the CC App forum, please refrain from this in the future it can create confusion and its not inline with our TOS. As your main complaint is a reporting problem I have moved the post from the CC forum to the General Credit Forum so the members can help you with your reporting issues. I thank you for your understanding on this.
Lenders can and do pull from a variety of sources; unfortunately outside of the bureaus some of these 3rd party providers are stupidly opaque.
It's possible there was a report by WF of any sort of late to this other possible dataset; however, it will not be on the bureaus, they don't even have a code for that in the software library implementations they provide and as you note you didn't see it on the report; additionally, no lenders do not get additional information on the standard credit report pull... actually we get more if we pull from the bureau when it comes to credit reporting (soft pulls for example).
Otherwise there is some confusion somewhere possibly by the CSR which is where I suspect the problem lies, who in general have an infamous reputuation on these forums for "my CSR said..."
What does or does not comprise a reportable 30-late to a CRA is not defined by statute, it is defined by CRA policy in their joint credit reporting manual, the "Credit Reporting Resource Guide."
The definition in the manual is that a late becomes reportable to a CRA once it reaches 30-59 days past the billing due date.
A late that is less than 30 days past its billing due date is a delinquency under the account agreement, but does not become reportable until it reaches 30 days past the billing due date.
There is no legal controversy over what is or is not a reportable 30-late.
If you have a late that fails to meet the clear and standard definition and yet is reported to a CRA, you begin by filing a formal dispute of its accuracy.
If that fails, you have the option then of a complaint to the CFPB or of bringing your own civil action contesting the verification provided by the CRA.
Barclays are a bunch of a-holes apparently they did two softpulls in a row and can see that your balance did not move after 2 months of reporting from Wells Fargo. I don't see how they can make that judgement what if you charged exactly the same amount two months in a row?
I have no reason to lie, I'm not gaining anything from lying lol. When the Fraudkent cash advance charge was initially made, there was interest charge and fee that was reverse red. I don't know how the wires got crossed, but I was charge again for if. and yes WF did report 2-3 day late charge;s there's was no way that Barclays rep would of found out about it. Lenders can see things we can't, I called WF executive office and they confirmed they report late payments before 30 days because of that FAIR ISSAC law
FAIR ISSAC law?
no creditor is reporting 2-3 days late and it's not even an option on a credit report to show such things... it's either current or 30+ days late.
Not sure where the misunderstanding was but it's false.
Pull a TU report of your own and verify that wells has not reported a 30 day late and if not move on... Barclay can be great or they can be EPIC stupid! I think you hit the latter tonight!
This is news to me. I always thought that anything from 1 second late up to 30 days late was reported as 30 days late, 31 days to 60 was 60 late, and so on. Is this not the case?