Re-aged Debt

[Anonymous]

Hi Everyone! I’ve been reading posts forever, and I have learned tons from everyone. So happy to be here.
Here is my question. I have a charge off with Credit One. It looks like it was re-aged. Can anybody please help me decipher this? This is what it says on my credit report:

Account Type: Revolving
Condition: Other
Date Open: 1/12/10
Balance: $1,044
Monthly Pymt: 0
Acct Balance: 0
Last Reported: 6/2/2018
Amnt Past due: 0
Limit: $750
Remarks: Charge Off
Responsibility: Authorized User
Past Due @ 30, 60, 90: 0

I have cleaned up just about everything on my credit. Can’t pay a charge off. I have had zero contact with Credit One nor has my hubs who is the actual account owner. I am an authorized user.

Does this look correct what they have reported? Thank you!

[chiefone4u]

From my understanding (and experience with Chase), a bank can continue to report monthly accurate information.

So, basically, because there is a balance to report they can continue to report it regularly.

Some have stated that a charge off should report $0.00 balance not the charged off balance (others will likely chime in on this).

As far as cleaning up your credit report, because you are an AU on the account you are not legally obligated to pay the account. You are well within your legal right to dispute the account "not responsible for account" and have it removed from your Credit report.

That said, disputing only removes it from your reports; it does not erase the debt. Your husband will still owe the debt and depending on your states statute of limitations attempt to get a judgment against him (and you in some community property states).

I personally would dispute the account to have it removed from my credit report, and figure out how to pay/settle this debt (if within statute of limitations) to avoid legal action.

Best of luck.

[CreditInspired]

---

@chiefone4u wrote:
From my understanding (and experience with Chase), a bank can continue to report monthly accurate information.

So, basically, because there is a balance to report they can continue to report it regularly.

Some have stated that a charge off should report $0.00 balance not the charged off balance (others will likely chime in on this).

As far as cleaning up your credit report, because you are an AU on the account you are not legally obligated to pay the account. You are well within your legal right to dispute the account "not responsible for account" and have it removed from your Credit report.

That said, disputing only removes it from your reports; it does not erase the debt. Your husband will still owe the debt and depending on your states statute of limitations attempt to get a judgment against him (and you in some community property states).

I personally would dispute the account to have it removed from my credit report, and figure out how to pay/settle this debt (if within statute of limitations) to avoid legal action.

Best of luck.

---

Dispute immediately on your report(s) and let DH know this charge off is negatively impacting his credit profile.

[Anonymous]

1st like the rest have said if you are an AU than this should not affect your credit and shouldn’t be on the report as you are not liable, but your husband is liable for any charge offs.

When did the charge off date occur, this is the most important part of this debt? Statue of limitations is also a time when they can still collect the debt, re-aging should only occur when the original owner of the debt contacts the creditor and acknowledges debt is theirs or contacts them to settle the debt. This is what starts the re-aging process and keeps the debt fresh, this is why it is not recommended to contact the creditor, if you’re not going to pay off the charge offs.

[RobertEG]

It appears to be the standard reporting of a revolving account that was charged-off by the creditor, and then the debt was sold.

The balance on a charged-off account is not updated to $0 due to their taking of the CO per se.

A consumer continues to owe the entire debt after a charge-off, and the account continues to be delinquent.

Delinquency status is permitted to be reported under CRA delinquency codes as either the time since initial delinquency (e.g. 90-late, 120-late, etc), or alternately as CO, which equivalantly comprises a permitted reporting code if the account is both delinquent and has been charged-off.

If a creditor sells a delinquent debt, then they are required to update the current balance to show $0, as no debt is still owed to them.

If the purchasing new party then chooses to report, they will show the debt balance in their reporting.

It appears to be accurate.

As for whether or not they have re-aged the debt, re-aging is not per se improper.

Any update that reports continued account delinquency is a proper reporting that the delinquency has aged, and is proper.

"Improper re-aging"  is a term that is generally used to changing the reported date of first delinquency to a later date in order to extend the ultimate date of credit report exclusion.  

The DOFD is not shown in the posted report.

You need to determine the reported DOFD in order to determine when the charge-off will be excluded.

Exclusion of a reported charge-off is based only on the reported DOFD, and must occur no later than 7 years plus 180 days from the DOFD.

However, since you are only an AU, you can have the account removed by getting yourself removed as an AU.

[Anonymous]

If I were an AU on this account I would remove it faster than greased  lighting. 

[Anonymous]

Good Morning! Not sure if I’m responding correctly here. Hope y’all see my response.

I wanted to say thank you for all of your input.

I called Equifax and Trans Union this morning. Equifax took the report and said it should come off within 72 hours
Trans Union took them off per the phone and said it would reflect within 48 hours.
It was painless. Again, thanks so much!