@Anonymous wrote:
I just wanted to know if the account was 17 times more negatively affecting my report (because of the 17 charge offs.) versus the negative affect of an account being charged off just once. Or if it was even possible. This is the area that I lack knowledge on big time.
Gotcha - No, it's not counting against you as if it were charged-off 17 times - what it is doing is preventing the derogatory from aging and thus, your scores from recovering.
So yeah, if you never brought the account current, then their should be a single chain of delinquency starting with the original 30-day late. Sounds like you have grounds for a dispute.
@Anonymous wrote:wow sorry for such a long response. I didn't re-read it before I post it.
I wanted to add that I don't use any other websites other than the actual CB sites themselves because they cant be used in court should I sue any CB or CA. I do use credit karma and some others for personal reasons like ease of use but I ALWAYS make sure that the reports match the ones listed on the actual CB websites though if I'm disputing anything. I also update my report same day as I write the dispute letter.
They still use fluff software though. That's the thing. I had an account that I thought was reported incorrectly on Equifax based on Equifax's own web-based report - but when I looked at my hardcopy (paper) report mailed to me, the data was actually correct. I always recommend double checking before disputing anything related to historical payment data. But that is, of course, up to you.
@Anonymous wrote:OH MY GOD I was completely unaware of this!!!! Thank you for making sure I understood what you were saying. Thank you so much!!
So to make sure I am understanding this completely... The web version of a report is not the exact report. You must have the CB mail the report to you. Basically the mailed report is the only one that is "direct from the horse's mouth" so to speak
Yes exactly - or get them from annualcreditreport.com because that site gives you what amounts to the PDF of your paper reports and it's federally regulated so admissible in court.
I saw your other post about how your scores will react to the removal of a old account now charged-off - but I'm going to have to answer that tomorrow bc it has a somewhat complicated explanation. It can go either way (scores may increase or decrease) depending on certain factors and it's 3:30am where I'm at.. lol. I'll come back in the afternoon to respond to that.
@Anonymous wrote:Thank you for the welcome!
I'm worried that it is, in fact, counting as more than one charge off. I'll explain - I just got my updated 3 CB report (bought from Experian) Two CB are listing it as closed (Dec. 2013.) Yet there are 2 (120 days) late pays in 2014 and then on-time payments for the next 21 months. THEN the negative mark (charge off mark) is marked every month for the following 15 months.
The true last delinquency date was august 2013
How would I check to verify that it is only being counted as one charge off per CB?
An account can only be charged off once from original creditor. The "charge off" count you are seeing is based on the number of times Failure to Pay has been recorded to the account after charge off.
If the last time you made a payment against the account was 2013 then all the on-time payments after that point in time are actually incorrectly reported. You could dispute this but the result of that dispute would be to convert them to FP, Failure to Pay.
Are you intending to settle the debt or wait it out to fall of your reports?
You can confirm the expected removal date by getting copies of all your reports from annualcreditreport.com which will more specifically recite the DOFD (Date of First Deliquency) and the expected removal date.
If I'm not mistaken, I believe that is your real question, re: to confirm the DOFD date and the expected fall off date as you believe it may not be reported accurately given that the account is showing 21 on-time payments after you ceased paying in 2013.
Doing the above will give you your answer and then you can decide if you are going to dispute the DOFD date as it is now listed with Experian and/or other CRAs.
@Anonymous wrote:Thanks for taking the time to help me! It is very much appreciated!!!
I have another question for youLet's say for instance:
An account has 10 years of on-time payments - making a great positive effect on the score.
Then in the 11th year, there is one delinquency that leads to a charge off and the account is never repaid. If the account was removed from the report - would the score increase or decrease.
Does a charge off automatically make any past on-time payment value, instantly useless when factoring the score up? or do each hold a certain value to the score and all of the other factors on the report will determine exactly how much weight each one holds.
Once the account enters a charge-off status, that derogatory status essentially negates all previous positive history. However, if you were to pay the outstanding debt, the account will still be considered a charge-off (but paid) and count negatively against you, but once the derogatory reaches it's 7 year exclusionary mark, the charge-off notation, and all relevant notations within that chain of delinquency, will be removed and the account will then turn to a closed, positive account -- which will be of benefit for the remaining years it is present on your reports. *Closed accounts in good standing can remain on your reports for 10 years after the closed date.
If, however, the charge-off remains unpaid for the duration of the 7 year exclusionary period, once it hits it's 7 year mark, the entire tradeline will be removed from your reports. Often, the removal of a derogatory account will have a positive effect on your scores -- an increase- particularly if it is the only remaining derogatory on your profile; but there are some exceptions where other, profile-specific factors may cause a loss in points, or virtually no score change at all. For example:
1. If other negative accounts are still present on your reports, you may not see much, if any, score improvement from a single derogatory account being removed.
2. If the derogatory account that is removed happens to be your oldest account, you may see a decrease in score because removal causes a reduction in your AoOA (Age of Oldest Account). The loss of points due to the AoOA reduction may be more than the points gained by the removal of the derogatory, resulting in a net decrease in score; the loss of points may be less than the points gained by the removal, resulting in a net gain - but less of a gain than had you not lost any points for reduction of AoOA; the loss of points may be equal (or almost equal) to the points gained, resulting in virtually no sccore change.
3. If the removal of the derogatory account reduces your AAoA (Average Age of Accounts), the same theories noted above regarding point loss vs. gain applies.
4. If the removal of the derogatory results in a FICO Scorecard reassignment which places you on a lower tier on a new, clean (derogatory free) scorecard. You can search the forum for 'scorecard segmentation' for more details on this -- it's kinda deep. Moving to a new scorecard can, sometimes, result in a decrease in score -- it can also result in an increase, or no change. We don't have a ton of definitive information about scorecards because it's proprietary information, but have been able to determine certain things based on collected data and the limited info we do have.
So... it's impossible to say for sure how removal will affect you. And yes, once the tradeline is removed - all previous payment history, both positive and negative - is gone along with it. Your scores are a snapshot in time - so whatever is present on your reports at any given moment determines your scores.
@Anonymous wrote:
My question is about Dec 2015 - Feb 2017. I'm concerned that each month (15 months) there is a negative mark, that it negatively affects me. The reason I'm thinking that it might be is because directly under the account name (Kohls/capitol one) it says word for word "15 charge-offs"
So did each additional charge off hurt me again and again? or does Experian not actually mean kohls was reporting additional charge offs and the "15 charge offs" is actually a design flaw and it actually means that the account remained negative for those 15 months. YES
I intend to dispute this with Experian. I want everything to report accurately like they are legally obligated to do. If they don't then I intend to sue them. I want to know if it was hurting me, again and again, each month for those 15 months because If they don't make it right and I end up needing to sue - I need to know if their errors hurt me 15x more than it actually should of.
Does that make sense?
As I explained in a previous post -- you do not have 15 different charge-offs. You have one charged-off account that has been continuously updated as a charge-off for every month it has remained unpaid until they stopped updating in Feb. 2017 (for whatever reason). Yes, each time the account is updated with a new delinquent notation, it forces your scores to remain surpressed, keeping them from recovering from the original severity of having a charged-off account.
With monthly updating, the account will continue to hurt for as long as it remains unpaid. But it still counts as a single charge-off. Until that account is allowed to age without further negative notations, it will hurt your scores.
For example - if the creditor were to stop updating the unpaid account for several months, your scores would begin to recover -- but if the creditor were to begin updating again, your scores will drop - not because you're being penalized for a new charge-off account, but because the already derogatory, charged-off account has aged a bit has now been updated to reflect the current month as still delinquent. It's not hurting you as much as having 15 different charged-off accounts; it is continuing to hurt as much as it did when the charge-off first occured because, instead of the account aging and hurting less over time, it is being updating monthly which makes it continue to look new in the eyes of FICO.
It looks like this creditor stopped updating in Feb. 2017 - if they still own the account, then that means they can choose to update again at any moment. So, if they were to udpate the account again next month, your scores will likely drop because instead of that charge-off looking like it's nearly 2 years old, it will look brand new again.
That is how it works. I don't know how many different ways I can explain it...
@Anonymous wrote:
This is how Experian is reporting my Equifax report:
August 2013 = Last time I paid my bill (last time I made ANY payment what so ever)
Sept 2013 = 30 day late
Oct 2013 = 60 day late
Nov 2013 = 90 day late
Dec 2013 = 120+ day late
Jan = 2014 = 120+ day late
Feb 2014 = 120+ day late
Mar 2014 - Nov 2015 = On time (Yes, these are incorectly reported) << Have you confirmed that this is innacurately reporitng on your hard copy report obtained from Equifax or AnnualCreditReport.com?
Dec 2015 - Feb 2017 = Negative (this "negative" status is what Experian uses as "charge off")
Unless the period from March 2014-November 2015 is, indeed, reporting innacurately on your HARDCOPY report from Equifax or the Equifax report pulled from annualcreditreport.com, you do not have a basis for dispute here. Experian's software is (perhaps poorly) portraying a derogatory charged-off account that has remained unpaid for 15 months and is, therefore, updating with a new negative notation for every month the outstanding debt remains.
Even if they are reporting March 2014-November 2015 innacurately as 'on-time' - a dispute will simply fix that error so the payment history is accurately reflected, it won't change the Charged-off status or the DOFD. The payment history will still reflect 30-day, 60-day, 90-day, 120-day+ delinquencies, followed by charge-off notations for the months after the 120-day+ representing the month mark, til present.
So-- in other words, if your first 30-day delinquency occurred in Sept 2013, your payment history, if corrected, would be more like:
Sept 2013: 30-Day
Oct. 2013: 60 - Day
Nov. 2013: 90-Day
Dec 2013: 120-Day
Jan. 2014: 120-Day+ (representing 150-Days)
Feb. 2014: CO (after 180 days it becomes a charge-off).
March 2014 - Present: CO
Your dispute would result in them updating the account's payment history through to the current month.