Equifax Report Question (and backstory)

[itsanndrreww]

So in my journey to rebuild and be a responsible credit user after not being that years ago - I've had to dispute some items on my credit reports due to the lender (in this case, Barclays USA) not reporting a previous charge-off as paid even though I had received a letter stating it was paid and resolved. 

I disputed with all 3 bureaus, and both Experian and Transunion quickly resolved using the letter that I uploaded when placing the dispute. However, Equifax came back showing the account as updated, but for some reason added under the line for "Date of 1st Maj Delinquency Reported" as 08/2024. 

I gave Equifax a call and told the rep on the line that I was concerned that this was added as the delinquency was reported years ago, and this had only been added when the account was updated to show as paid. I was told that that line has nothing to do with the "Date of First Delinquency" which is the date that is used after 7 years has passed and the charge-off falls off the report and not to worry about that affecting anything on my report going forward.

Am I overthinking/looking into this too much? I'm hoping someone who's maybe had a similar issue or story with previous charge-offs can provide some insight. To me "Date of 1st Major Delinquency Reported" should list the first date they reported a major deliquency, not an updated date or when they updated info regarding the account. Any insight would be much appreciated!

[MissLiz]

Your first step should be to pull your EQ report from annualcreditreport.com to see what the DOFD says there. If it is not accurate and EQ doesn't correct it, your next step should be to file a complaint with the CFPB.

[JoeRockhead]

This is a fairly common mistake by EQ. While I didn't have a charge off, I had a similar experience with EQ regarding a late payment and a wrong date listed. I had co-signed a car loan for my youngest son. A few years later he decided to trade the car in on another car. The dealer that sold him the new car, failed to make the payoff on the traded in car in time, resulting in a 30 day late showing up on all three of my reports. 

I disputed this with all three bureaus close to the time the account would have been eligible for EE  from reports anyway (don't know why I waited so long). Based on my statement as to why the late payment occurred, without verification from the lender, TU removed the entire account from their report, EX, again without verification from the lender, removed the late payment only and the account remains there to this day listed as closed, in good standing (no late payments).

EQ verified via dispute with the lender who said no, he was late, it stays. Then came the fun part. They updated my report that it was reported 30 days late and last date reported... for that current month. Not only that, when I called in to talk to them about the wrong date being listed, the first level CSR said that because it was updated, it would reset the date the account was set to fall off until 7 years from that date (new date). I knew this was absolutely false so I politely asked to speak to a supervisor. I explained the whole thing to that gentleman who completely agreed that the previous CSR was "mistaken". In addition, it was wrongly notated as well. The whole account was deleted from EQ shortly after. 

It might not be a big deal to them, but I could see where this notation (as they have it) could be confusing to another lender manually reviewing your report and see it as a red flag. So, I would take the above advice and review your reports, try to get in touch with a supervisor at EQ to correct, or remove the notation, and... if that fails to produce results, file a complaint with the CFPB for inaccurate reporting.

[itsanndrreww]

Thank you @JoeRockhead and also @MissLiz  for the helpful information here. I think I will go ahead and investigate further and escalate. It does sound a bit like they should have honored my initial inquiry into why the "Date of 1st Major Delinquency Reported" was put as August 2024. 

I agree that it just opens up too much uncertainty with future lenders who may see that date and I don't want that to become an issue.