Federal Rules Re Negative Info on CRs

[Anonymous]

It's exactly the opposite. The FCRA § 605. "Requirements relating to information contained in consumer reports" [15 U.S.C. §1681c] states that negative TLs can be viewed in the following situations:


(b)Exempted cases. The provisions of paragraphs (1) through (5) of subsection (a) of
this section are not applicable in the case of any consumer credit report to be used in
connection with
(1)a credit transaction involving, or which may reasonably be expected to involve, a
principal amount of $150,000 or more;
(2)the underwriting of life insurance involving, or which may reasonably be
expected to involve, a face amount of $150,000 or more; or

(3)the employment of any individual at an annual salary which equals, or which may
reasonably be expected to equal $75,000, or more.




My understanding is that CRAs delete negatives TLs after 7 years as a matter of course. But I wanted to know if anybody has seen their negatives reapper in their reports when in the situations above.

[Anonymous]

IMO you are misinterpreting the information  There is no time limit on reporting information about criminal convictions; information reported in response to your application for a job that pays more than $75,000 a year; and information reported because you’ve applied for more than $150,000 worth of credit or life insurance. Information about a lawsuit or an unpaid judgment against you can be reported for seven years or until the statute of limitations runs out, whichever is longer.   It can stay longer than 7 years in these circumstances.

[Junejer]

Got it (multi-tasking is not a good thing for me right now). That sux royally. So, then like LS said, the files never purge. That's completely crazy. Yet, they claim that they can't re-insert my lost MBNA account, as they don't have that file. I hate CRAs.

[Anonymous]

I'd like to apply for a mortgage soon. My negative info is due to fall off in the next couple of months. But I am worried that when lenders pull up my report, the negative info will be there even though the 7 year period has passed since the mortgage application will be worth more than $150K as allowed by the Federal Rules. The question that I have is whether anybody has seen that happen (they had their negative TLs fall off after 7 years, but when applying for a mortgage worth $150k or more, the negative info remained on the report? Or if CRAs just delete negative TLs once the 7 year from DOFD or DOLA has passed(period).

Hope I'm being clear.

Message Edited by upmyscore2008 on 03-07-2008 02:43 PM

Message Edited by upmyscore2008 on 03-07-2008 02:47 PM

[Anonymous]

To the OP:   The Fair Credit Reporting Act is correct in saying that negative info must be removed after 7 years, with the exceptions that have already been mentioned.  Note that those are time limit exceptions; there is not alternate credit reports that exist for mortgages, etc, etc.  So, if I apply for a mortgage and a previous delinquency has been removed from my credit report--say, 5, 10 or 20 years--then, no, a bank DOES NOT see that when evaulating my credit.

Can things be reinserted at a later date?  Sure, but that's what disputes are for.  As long as you can show that ANYTHING is past its FCRA time limits, you can always dispute and it should be removed.

Regarding the $75k jobs; the explanation is that employers MUST pull credit for jobs paying over $75k--it is required by law!  Otherwise, employers usually dont pull credit reports when applying for jobs unless you are working in the banking industry (again, that's when they must pull).  Is that clear?  So, <75k, credit report is usually not involved in background check; >$75 credit report IS ALWAYS part of background check.

[Anonymous]

I found this link from the FTC;

http://library.findlaw.com/1998/Dec/10/129056.html

[Anonymous]

Okay. it goes back to my original question. the FTC letter clearly says that the CRAs can continue to report "adverse" information, without any time limits, if the report is being pulled by an employer that is considering an applicant for a job that pays $75K annually or more AND/OR by a lender that is evaluating a consumer seeking for a credit line of $150K or more.

My original question was whether anybody has seen this happen:

A) they applied for a job with a salary of at least $75K a year or for a credit line of at least $150K.

B) they had "adverse" credit info (charge-offs, late payments, collections, etc..) that had been removed since 7 years had passed

C) But B (adverse info) re-appeared on their report to the employer and to the lender as specified in A (the job paid at least $75K and/or the credit line requested was for at least $150K)


I know what the rules are, just wanted to know what the CRAs do in practice. Do they keep the negative info hidden even past the 7 years AND report them only to the employer and the lender in the situations above OR do they never report that adverse info again once deleted notwithstanding CA or CO that re-ages account or other reporting errors.

[Anonymous]

---

upmyscore2008 wrote:
Okay. it goes back to my original question. the FTC letter clearly says that the CRAs can continue to report "adverse" information, without any time limits, if the report is being pulled by an employer that is considering an applicant for a job that pays $75K annually or more AND/OR by a lender that is evaluating a consumer seeking for a credit line of $150K or more.

My original question was whether anybody has seen this happen:

A) they applied for a job with a salary of at least $75K a year or for a credit line of at least $150K.

B) they had "adverse" credit info (charge-offs, late payments, collections, etc..) that had been removed since 7 years had passed

C) But B (adverse info) re-appeared on their report to the employer and to the lender as specified in A (the job paid at least $75K and/or the credit line requested was for at least $150K)


I know what the rules are, just wanted to know what the CRAs do in practice. Do they keep the negative info hidden even past the 7 years AND report them only to the employer and the lender in the situations above OR do they never report that adverse info again once deleted notwithstanding CA or CO that re-ages account or other reporting errors.

---

This is what I would like to know, as well.  One would think that if it were a common practice, we would have heard about it by now, since routine mortgage applications are for credit exceeding $150K.

My gut feeling, with absolutely no evidence to back it up other than a lack of reports to the contrary, is that CRAs purge data after the normal reporting period just to be on the safe side and avoid reporting things they shouldn't.  Otherwise the CRA would have to know the dollar amounts involved in each credit transaction for which a pull is initiated so they would know which items to include in the report and which to suppress.  I would be surprised to learn that CRAs have that capability.

[Anonymous]

My thinking of it is..........accounts that you just let "drop off" instead of the CA/OC deleting........they remain in the CRA's system and probably coded in such a way that when a regular credit report is pulled, they do not appear. However, I am sure when employers pull your CR or mortgage lenders pull it and you've applied for $150K+ mortgage, or applied for life insurance for more than $150+, they can inform the CRA of this and received a FULL report with the accounts that no longer appear because of age.

I don't know this to be true.........but is what I gather.

Accounts that are deleted, I would think would not appear under any circumstance. They are deleted for a variety of reasons---mistakes, fraud, id theft, etc.

I am going to call the CRA and ask them about this on Monday.

[Anonymous]

---

sidewinder wrote:

I am going to call the CRA and ask them about this on Monday.

---

Are you sure you want to do that?  As little as they appear to know about the FCRA, you may not want to tip them off to this little bit of information.