Ok or Bad?

[Anonymous]

Hello –

I just noticed this. On myFico, it isn’t showing as negative impacting but I think it might be. What do you guys think? Also, there seems to be two of these accounts. Should i DV it or leave it as it might not be reducing my score?

Charge Account Target Nb

Status as of	Jan, 2010
Date opened [?]	May, 2005
Date of last activity [?]	Jun, 2006
Largest past balance [?]	$200
Account Type [?]	Revolving
Account holder [?]	Individual
Scheduled Payment Amount [?]	$0
Industry	Complete Dept. Stores

Descriptions [?]

• Closed or paid account / zero balance
• Charge

 And

Charge Account Target Nb

Status as of	Feb, 2010
Date opened [?]	May, 2005
Date of last activity [?]	Jan, 2009
Largest past balance [?]	$200
Account Type [?]	Revolving
Account holder [?]	Individual
Scheduled Payment Amount [?]	$0
Industry	Complete Dept. Stores

Descriptions [?]

• Closed or paid account / zero balance
• Charge

Thanks for your help.

[llecs]

Based on what you posted, it doesn't appear negative. So as long as the balance is $0, "worst delinquency" says none or not reported or something like that, the current status says "paid/closed" or something benign, and there are no lates in the history, then it's OK. To confirm, look on the accounts page of your FICO report. There's a column for a red flag. Any account that has a red flag next to it on the summary page is a negative. Absent the flag, FICO sees it as a positive.

You cannot DV an OC account.

If your AAoA is 6 years or under, then these accounts help. Removing them could hurt your AAoA and your FICO if 6 or under.

Are these reporting twice, or is it a grab from your TU and EQ FICO reports? If twice, I'd be curious why, but if it helps your length of history and AAoA, I'd leave it alone.

[Anonymous]

It said it was a charge account, thats why i didnt know if i should do something about this. I have a Midland collection that I paid in 09 (I didn’t know about this website then) and it shows as paid but for some odd reason it shows its 120 days late. I don’t see a flag on that either but I would think that if I wrote a GW letter and asked Midland to delete it, it would help my score. Am I wrong to think that?

Thank you,

[Guava]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

It said it was a charge account, thats why i didnt know if i should do something about this. I have a Midland collection that I paid in 09 (I didn’t know about this website then) and it shows as paid but for some odd reason it shows its 120 days late. I don’t see a flag on that either but I would think that if I wrote a GW letter and asked Midland to delete it, it would help my score. Am I wrong to think that?

Thank you,

---

You are totally right, if they agree 

[llecs]

Charge refers to the account type. Most store accounts report as a charge account.

Yea, Midland should be hurting. It has been verified, but there are a few rare examples of Midland reporting in a way to pass themselves off as an OC vs. a CA. Many CAs report in the Accounts section and I don't know if the CA or CRA are to blame. But of some of those, there are rare examples of them being mis-coded where they are viewed and scored as an OC vs. CA. Lenders would know the difference off the name, but sometimes FICO misses that.

[Anonymous]

Thanks. I cant find the account number for Midland. Should i call them and ask them? On TU there is a partial number but thats about it. I need it to email a GW. Any ideas?

Thanks guys.