Equifax never reports chargeoff status as paid chargeoff?

[Anonymous]

I still have a couple of chargeoffs lurking and notice others say they are paid but Equifax only mentions it in the comments. Do they siimply NOT have a paid charge off status?

[RobertEG]

The three major CRAs all use the same credit reporting manual and Metro 2 reporting format, jointly developed via their contractor, CDIA.

A paid account must promptly be updated to show a current status of paid, $0 balance, for each CRA.

The charge-off is retained separately under your Payment Rating and Payment History Profile,and continues to affect scoring, but is not longer the Current Status.

The creditor was required under FCRA 623(a)2) to have promptly updated their reporting to show a new current status of paid once the debt was discharged.

I would begin by making an informal call to the creditor, advising of the lack of update with each CRA.

If they dont update in their next regular reporting cycle, then I would file a formal dispute of accuracy of the current status, compelling a 30-day conclusion of your dispute.

[cuthatcard]

Ha ! 

I paid, 8k, to BoA , on a judgment  back in April. .  BUT...EQ will not even update it to satisfied or paid ! 

Been trying to get them too do so with no avail!  Their procedures are useless unless it benifits their "furnisher of information " ole...Lexis-Nexis!  

[RobertEG]

The CRAs dont consider LexisNexis to be a "furnisher" under the FCRA.

They consider them to be their own private vendor for review of public record information as their agent.

As such, FCRA 623(a)(2) does not apply to CRA review of public record information (at least in the view of the CRAs).

See Jenkins v. Equifax for a discussion of pending litigation regarding CRA update of public record information.

It is an ongoing civil matter that is yet unresolved.

[cuthatcard]

This ^^^, is what what I was, sarcastically, referring too!

The "Jenkins Case" shows us that EQ has been using Lexis-Nexis as THEIR.."Furnisher of Information ", even though this case is not finalized!

We've seen folks, ( on these boards) already reference this case in their disputes with luck in removals of derogatory information.