Old debt being reported as current after dispute--HELP

[Anonymous]

Dear Team,
I recently disputed an old CreditOne derogatory: closed acct, delinquency date 4/11, and once completed, the payment status was updated to show activity on 3/18--charge off.
I haven't touched this account since 4/11, and assume it will fall off next month (7 years). Now my Experian score decreased over 20pts.
I've worked so hard to rebuild my credit ( was sitting at 664- exp, 680-690-eq and tu., And this is catastrophic as I will be applying for some loans in the next year.

Can anyone provide some advice??

[Kree]

Welcome to the forums.

For clarification, was the account closed on 4/11, or was that the date of first delinquency?   Because if it wasn't closed until several months later, you have a few more months to go. The good news is that the lates will disappear from your report in April.

Even if you have a few more months to go, you can also contact the credit reporting agency and request a "early exemption", the various credit reporting agencies will often remove 1-3 months early.

Hope that helps.

[Anonymous]

Thanks for replying Kree!  So I'm not sure how to figure out when the account was closed.  It's showing derog on 4/11 and lact act 9/11.  

The part that is killing me is that I'm now showing a missed payment on 3/18 and 3/17, which I assume is why my score tanked 24pts.  I haven't touched this account since 2/11, and wanted to know if I can get these incorrect "missed payments" removed.

I've worked so hard on rebuilding my credit.  I was a mess a year ago at low 500's, and since then I've bought a home (and refinanced for an even lower rate).  Opened a Visa Signature with a $15k cl, Lowes card qith $17k, and will be applying for a loan in a couple months.

In the last 2 years, I've had flawless payment history, and my avg credit utilization is between 1-5% every month.

Any help/advice on what I can do to fix these incorrect missed payments is greatly appreciated!

[Kree]

The first step would be to dispute that information. If the information comes back as verified, you then have other options available. If it gets updated then everything is good.

We recommend disputing in writing versus over the phone or online. But the choice is yours.

Edit:  Forgot you already disputed, which caused the issue. Sorry someone else might be a better assistance.  RobertEG is the resident expect on CRAs I'm sure he might pop by at some point.

[Anonymous]

Thanks again!  Just to clarify, I already disputed this online (last month) and this issue arose from the dispute resolution.  Are you saying to dispute this again in writing?

[Kree]

Yes. For some reason online disputes do not always seem to work properly.  It might be superstition but people swear that paper disputes work better.  Same with phone disputes. There are a lot of stories about those disputes going wrong.

Since you recently disputed the tradeline, I think your followup dispute might need to be different. They can deem repeated disputes "frivolous", so you might need specific wording or information. Sorry I'm not as informed in this area as I could be.  You might also need to escalate to the FCRB, for the errors introduced.

[RobertEG]

It is unclear as to what was the specific reporting item of information that was asserted in the dispute as being inaccurate, but apparently the outcome of the dispute was that it was verified as being accurate.  Whether or not you wish to pursue the determination in the dispute that affirmed the accuracy is a separate issue from the scoring implication of the reported update.

Are you asserting that the determination in the Notice of Results of REinvestigation was improper, or only concerned with the fact that the outcome has affected your score?  If you are contesting the outcome of the prior dispute, then exactly what was the inaccuracy that was the basis for that dispute?

Regardless of the substance of the dispute and its result, the dispute resulted in an update of the status, apparently to show that the account still remains delinquent, with the delinquency status being seriously delinquent in the form of a charge-off.

That is a positive statement that the account has remained delinquent since the prior update, and does not appear to be inaccurate.

That can affect your scoring.

As for disputing, if you file a second dispute that simply provides as the asserted inaccuracy the same basis as the prior dispute, it can be dismissed without investigation as frivolous or irrelevant.  However, if you now wish to dispute the update of their reporting, that would be a substantially new issue, presumably asserting the updating to be erroneous/inaccurate.  While I dont see that to be an inaccuracy that would result in a positive dispute outcome, it would be a new dispute.

From what is posted, I dont see an issue of inaccuracy in simply updating to show that the debt remains delinquent.

[Anonymous]

Thanks for all the replies!  So what doesn't make sense here is that this debt is 6 years, 11 months, and 15 days old (since reported delinquent), back in 4/2011.  Since then I haven't touched the account.  I noticed they were reporting random missed payments after it was closed (on 10/2011) in 2016.  I disputed these missed payements because they were showing up as recently missed payments, and negatively affecting my CS.  After the dispute was complete, they added 2 more missed payments: 3/2017 and 3/2018.  After that was added my score tanked.

From my research and understanding of the law, derogs must by removed from 7 years after they were reported--not every time they sell the debt and send an update to the CB's.  Also, how does a closed account report missed payments--almost 7 years later.

[RobertEG]

I am assumiming, since the account was closed while still unpaid, that it is a revolving account.

Closing of a revolving account prevents the consumer from increasing the debt balance via further purchases.

It does not terminate the continued delinquency status, or the ability of the creditor to report that it remains delinquent.

If the account has remained delinquent and was charged-off, the creditor can report at any time, even if the account is closed, that it remains delinquent, such as that its current status remains as a charge-off.  The old debt is correctly reported as remaining delinquent.

That is not inaccurate.

As for exclusion, a reported delinquency in the form of a charge-off must be removed from both the payment history profile and the current status no later than 7 years plus 180 days from the date of first delinquency on the OC account.

The updated status that it remains delinquent does not affect the exclusion date.

If the account remains delinquent when the CRA must exclude, then they will exclude the entire account at approx 7 years from DOFD, but no later than 7 years plus 180 days from reported DOFD.

If you are awaiting credit report exclusion, then best advise would be to remain silent and not provide any reason for an update in reporting that shows continued delinquency.

[Kree]

Perhaps this isn't relevant. But were the new late payments marked "30 day" "180+" or "missed payment".   Because if it is the 2nd or 3rd, they should still fall off no later than 7years180 days from the 2011 date.  Usually at the 7 year mark.  If they are marked 30d then they are being recorded as new delinquencies, and that does seem incorrect with what you are saying.