Question about collection

[Anonymous]

I have two "bads" on my TU report. In fact, these are both the same issue. Once upon a time, they were on Ex. and Eq., but I disputed and Ex. removed them. Eq recently dropped them, but not because of my dispute (which was from last year); I assume they dropped by age.

This issue appears as a "charge off as a bad debt" from the original creditor. But, they turned it to a CO, and that shows, too. (This is my exhusband's debt and I've already paid enough of his debts, thank you very much.)

Anyway, my question is:  Shouldn't the original creditor's claim drop off once they turn it over to a CO? In other words, this now looks like two separate issues on my report. Is that right, or should I dispute the original claim as a duplicate on my report?

[Anonymous]

The OC and the CA can both report at the same time.

You said it dropped from EQ recently. When does TU say it is to drop?

What is DOFD?

[Anonymous]

From my understanding, and I could be wrong, I think the OC and the CA are both allowed to report for the same account.  I have the same thing happening on mine and haven't been able to get the CRA's to remove them. 

[Anonymous]

---

Cheech wrote:

I have two "bads" on my TU report. In fact, these are both the same issue. Once upon a time, they were on Ex. and Eq., but I disputed and Ex. removed them. Eq recently dropped them, but not because of my dispute (which was from last year); I assume they dropped by age.

This issue appears as a "charge off as a bad debt" from the original creditor. But, they turned it to a CO, and that shows, too. (This is my exhusband's debt and I've already paid enough of his debts, thank you very much.)

Anyway, my question is:  Shouldn't the original creditor's claim drop off once they turn it over to a CO? In other words, this now looks like two separate issues on my report. Is that right, or should I dispute the original claim as a duplicate on my report?

---

CO = charge off

CA = collection agency

OC = original creditor

I believe you mean the OC sold the debt to a CA.

If that's the case, both can report.  Yes, it is possible to have two derogatory tradelines for the same debt.  However, if the OC has sold the debt, they must report $0 balance on their own tradeline, the debt having been transferred to the CA.

[Anonymous]

---

cheddar wrote:

---

Cheech wrote:

I have two "bads" on my TU report. In fact, these are both the same issue. Once upon a time, they were on Ex. and Eq., but I disputed and Ex. removed them. Eq recently dropped them, but not because of my dispute (which was from last year); I assume they dropped by age.

This issue appears as a "charge off as a bad debt" from the original creditor. But, they turned it to a CO, and that shows, too. (This is my exhusband's debt and I've already paid enough of his debts, thank you very much.)

Anyway, my question is:  Shouldn't the original creditor's claim drop off once they turn it over to a CO? In other words, this now looks like two separate issues on my report. Is that right, or should I dispute the original claim as a duplicate on my report?

---

CO = charge off

CA = collection agency

OC = original creditor

I believe you mean the OC sold the debt to a CA.

If that's the case, both can report.  Yes, it is possible to have two derogatory tradelines for the same debt.  However, if the OC has sold the debt, they must report $0 balance on their own tradeline, the debt having been transferred to the CA.

---

Still getting used to the abbreviations. :-)

You are correct as to my meaning. The OC is not reporting it as a zero, and the CA has added fees (thereby increasing the amount and adding to the appearace of this being 2 separate matters), which as I read the FTCA is illegal, but I'll worry about that as a separate issue.

Thank you for your reply, Cheddar. Your input is always valuable!

[Anonymous]

---

sidewinder wrote:

The OC and the CA can both report at the same time.

You said it dropped from EQ recently. When does TU say it is to drop?

What is DOFD?

---

TU says April, 2009. What is DOFD?

[Anonymous]

---

Cheech wrote:

TU says April, 2009. What is DOFD?

---

DOFD= Date of First Deliquency.

Does TU say 2009 for both the OC and the CA?

[Anonymous]

---

sidewinder wrote:

---

Cheech wrote:

TU says April, 2009. What is DOFD?

---

DOFD= Date of First Deliquency.

Does TU say 2009 for both the OC and the CA?

---

Yes. Both say the same date.  This isn't really a "delinquency," per se. It represents rubber check fees that my ex ran up at our joint account (in a non community property state) after I left him. The date showing for that occurance is June, 02.  The date placed for collection on the CA's issue is 07/02.

[Anonymous]

Before I found this forum, this happened to me also. What I did, was , what we call GW the OC. It did work. I just asked them, since they sold the debt to a ca, would they please be willing to take off my cr.

[Anonymous]

---

RUSTY101 wrote:

Before I found this forum, this happened to me also. What I did, was , what we call GW the OC. It did work. I just asked them, since they sold the debt to a ca, would they please be willing to take off my cr.

---

Cool. I think I'll give that a try . . . Thanks!