Should I dispute? (Acct IIB Ch 7 2014 listed as "failure to pay" in 2017)

[Anonymous]

I was checking the details of my Experian report today to track down a mysterious late payment item and discovered that, for some reason, one of the credit cards I included in my 2014 Chapter 7 BK filing (CBNA/Best Buy), for some reason, was reported as "failure to pay" in June 2017. Also, this card and my former Citibank mortgage say in the report they were reported as part of my 2014 Chapter 7 bankruptcy on 6/12/2017 and 6/13/2017 respectively, which is very weird because those accounts have been there all along as part of the BK filing in all three of my reports. What gives (i.e., why did Citi report those two accounts again and list my Best Buy card as "failure to pay" as though it were late in 2017 when it was closed and charged off back in 2014), and should I dispute the "failure to pay" notation?

[DaveInAZ]

I would dispute it, and use the words "Reporting a debt discharged in bankruptcy as "failure to pay" can be considered an attempt to collect a debt discharged in bankruptcy".

[RobertEG]

"Failure to Pay" is not an official Metro 2 reporting code designation that is part of the CRA reporting manual/standard, as set forth in the "Credit Reporting REsource Guide".

It is a shorthand designation used by the vendor of the commercial credit report.

Recordation that a consumer has paid a debt as the form of its discharge is not the same as recordation that the debt was discharged via BK.

It is unclear to me if stating that it was not paid is equivalent to saying it remains undischarged.

I would obtain the actual account status that was reported by the furnisher and stored in the CRA consumer file before disputing the accuracy of their reporting.  Perhaps a call to the CRA might also provide their policy as to any distinction between paid and discharged that might affect their reporting.

[Anonymous]

---

@RobertEG wrote:

"Failure to Pay" is not an official Metro 2 reporting code designation that is part of the CRA reporting manual/standard, as set forth in the "Credit Reporting REsource Guide".

It is a shorthand designation used by the vendor of the commercial credit report.

Recordation that a consumer has paid a debt as the form of its discharge is not the same as recordation that the debt was discharged via BK.

It is unclear to me if stating that it was not paid is equivalent to saying it remains undischarged.

I would obtain the actual account status that was reported by the furnisher and stored in the CRA consumer file before disputing the accuracy of their reporting.  Perhaps a call to the CRA might also provide their policy as to any distinction between paid and discharged that might affect their reporting.

---

Something strange seems to be going on with this account, now that I'm taking a close look at all three reports in CCT. TU shows this account (BBY/CBNA) as "closed/unknown", status updated 6/12/17, EQ says "closed/late" AND "included in bankruptcy", status updated 3/14/18, with an additional comment "null/Bankruptcy Chapter 7", and EX says "closed/paid/Debt included in or discharged through Bankruptcy Chapter 7, 11 or 12", status updated 6/1/17, but under "Payment History" there's a single entry for June 2017 with the notation "Failed To Pay".  In fact, the credit accounts included in my Chapter 7 BK in 2014 all list as payment status "closed/unknown" on TU.