What allows the CRA to change the DOFD and removal date for a TL?

[LifeSAVERS]

I was sorting and putting all my annual reports and related correspondence into 3 ring binders for each credit reporting agency last night and noticed something for the first time:

* Merrick bank

   - 2007 Annual Credit reports - 2006 Oct 30 days late, Nov 60 days late, Dec 90 days late, January 2007 Closed

  Address on credit report at end of 2007 is Merrick Bank, c/o CCS with their address in NY

   - 2010 CRAs - 2006 delinquences gone, either ND or an *, but just gone, address is Merrick bank address.

Current fall off/removal date is April or May 2015 depending on CRA statement.

Received a notice in March 2013 from CA Denovus with a settlement offer, not reported on CRs, still just Merrick listed.

I have copied all of the reports, showing the removal of the 2006 delinquencies in both the summary listing and the Payment agings.

What request should I make to the CRAs for removal? I thought these were actually going to be removed originally in 2013, based on the 10/2006 DOFD.

Should I send a letter for SOL, or is it a firmer statement concerning re-aging?

Also occurred on an HSBC (now Cap1)  card, same scenario, 2006 baddies dropped, closed acct 10/2006, still reporting with removal now 2018, as I paid it off in 2011.

[RobertEG]

First, if your credit report does not show either a collection or charge-off, then DOFD is irrelevant.

The only use of DOFD in credit reporting and scoring is to provide the CRA with the date for calculating the maximum exclusion date of either a charge-off or collection.

Under FCRA 623(a)(5), a creditor is only required to report the DOFD on their account after reporting of a charge-off or collection referral.

Similarly, a debt collector must report the DOFD within 90 days of reporting their collection.

The CRAs only change a DOFD if the creditor or debt collector specifically reports a change.  They have no way to independtly determine a DOFD on an OC account.

Any reporting of a DOFD is separately stored by the CRA under a code called the "FCRA Compliance Date/Date of First Delinquency."  The CRAs do not infer a date of first account delinquency based on monthly reportings, as it may not necessarily be the date that the account first became in arrears.

A reported 30 late, for example, has a date of 30 days past the date the consumer became delinquennt on the account, and thus is not the actual DOFD.

Monthly delinquencies do not all become excluded based on DOFD.  They each become excluded no later than 7 years from their individual dates of delinquency.

As for deletion of the OC account, the account itself is not deleted based on expiration of any of the exclusion periods for adverse items reported undr the account.

The other reporting remains unless the OC voluntarily reports deletion of the account.

Collections are different.  They are not accounts with the consumer, and do become excluded in their entirety no later than 7 years plus 180 days from the reported DOFD.

[LifeSAVERS]

I guess I do not understand how they (assuming the OC) was able to remove derogatory account information 2 years after the fact, which could potentially require the account to be removed in 7 years +180 days (although most CRA remove close to 7 year mark), and by removing the derogatory the removal date is than changed to a different timeframe 2 years in the future in this case. The OC reported the charge off in May 2008, but the account closed 01/2007. Is that not re-aging, if not what is?

As per Experian Q&A section on their site:

DELINQUENT PAYMENTS:

If you make a payment more than 30 days after the due date, it will appear as a late payment in your instant credit report.  Even if you pay off the account in full, the entry will continue to appear in your report for 3 to 7 years from the date you missed your first payment. (Which would be October 2013 -  7 years)

COLLECTION ACCOUNTS:

If you don't pay an account for three months (Jan 2007 reflects 120 days and the date reported "Account closed by credit grantor", a creditor or lender can mark your account for collections. Your instant credit report will show the payments marked for collection for 7 years from the time you missed the first payment that led to the collection.  Even if you pay off the account in full after collection activity has started your instant credit report will show the entry for 7 years.  At the most, it may be marked as "paid collection".

If I understand what you are saying, however, that the clock starts ticking when the OC decides to report the CO date (in this case 2008 = 7 years at 2015).  So all a creditor has to do to extend the removal date from a consumer's CR is to hold off on reporting the charge off date?  I thought that was the point of DOFD - Not DO..CO?  I truly have a high level of intelligence, however, I feel like someone is playing ping pong through either side of my head with contradictions.

Thank you for your patience with me!

[RobertEG]

The date they actually took or reported a charge-off has only one effect.

By statute, the DOFD must precede the charge-off.  Thus, they can never report a DOFD on the CO that is after the date they took their CO.

You wont know whent they took that accounting measure, but it must have been prior their reporting of having done so.

Thus, no DOFD can be reported that is later than the date they reported their CO.

Other than that, the date they actually did a CO is not relevant to your CR, and is not reported to the CRAs.  What is required to be reported is the DOFD.

The CRA uses only the reported DOFD to determine the max credit report exclusion date.

Congress amended the FCRA back in 1998 to clearly specify that one, and only one, date-certain governs when a reported collection or charge-off must be excluded from a consumer's credit report.  That date-certain is no later than 7 years plus 180 days from the DOFD on the OC account.  See FCRA 605(c).

The only way a creditor or debt collector  can extend the exclusion date of their charge-off or collection is to report a later DOFD.

If they report a later DOFD that is knowingly inaccurate, that is a very serious violation of the FCRA that would subject them to civil action on your part.

[LifeSAVERS]

OC reported in 2007 (pulled annual CRs) that there was a delinquency 10/2006, 11/2006, 12/2006, 01/2007 (30,60,90,120) and account closed 01/2007, than in future reports - CO 05/2010 (2010-2014) they are now reflecting DOFD as 06/2008 (EQ CR 05/2012) ; with payment history reflecting 07/2008, 08/2008, 09/2008, 10/2008, 11/2008, 12/2008 (30, 60, 90, 120, 120, 120); DOLP 04/2008; Comments: Charged off account; Date Major Delinquency First Reported 12/2008.

Does the CO date carry 7 year aging or does the original DOFD?

[RobertEG]

The reporting of two strings of delinquency looks a bit odd, but DOFD works like this:

When you first become delinquent, you have a DOFD.

That DOFD exists, but is not reported to the CRAs until they have reported their charge-off.

If, at any time after the current DOFD, but prior to their taking the charge-off, the account is paid back into good-standing, the old DOFD becomes meaningless.

If back in good standing, they could not then charge-ff the debt until it again became delinquent.

If and when a new first account delinquency then occurs that is prior to their ultimate charge-off of the debt, that becomes the new and current DOFD that relates to the CO, and the DOFD that would be properly reported.  Theymust then report that DOFD wiithin 90 days after reporting their charge-off, thus providing the CRA wil the date to calculate its ultimate credit report exclusion date.

Was the account brought back into good-standing after the original DOFD?  If not, the original DOFD would still apply. If brught currret, the first deliquency in the new chain of delinquency would then apply.

As for date of the CO itself or their reporting of th CO, once again, that is not used to determine the CR exclusion date of the CO.

The reported CO then becomes the information that must then be excluded, with its exclusion date being no later than 7 years plus 180 days from the DOFD that preceded that CO.

[LifeSAVERS]

Sorry for the delay..got a new vacuum cleaner today...self propelled..Fun! 

Do you think it is worth a try to send the CRAs a request to remove the TL as obsolete, providing the copies of the report changes of DOFD, with the 2006 derog payment history there and than gone, as documentation...or wait it out until May 2015 for removal? Not feeling too patient right now, on a roll of clean up (not just my carpets), but do not want to make the wrong step out of sequence either.

[LifeSAVERS]

Just read your message again, and saw your question about good standing.  It would not have been brought into good standing as it was delinquent 10/2006, 11/2006, 12/2006, 01/2007 and the creditor closed the account on 01/2007 with delinquency owing and not brought current and opened again, correct!? Is that not what the CRA would agree to also if shown that information?

[RobertEG]

Yes, if for any reason you know that you did not bring the account back into good standing, then the first delinquency that preceded the CO would remain as the reportable DOFD.  I presented that possibility as an example of what could happen, but if it continuously remained delinquent, you are correct.

As for presenting the information to the CRA and requesting they change the DOFD, I highly doubt they would become independently involved in internal contests about what is or is not the accurate DOFD.  The requirment is on the creditor to accurately report the correct DOFD.

You would raise the issue by way of an actual dispute over its accuracy, thus getting the creditor involved.

If you send an actual  dispute to the CRA over its accuracy, that would then require them to forward a copy of your dispute to the creditor for their investigation and response.

If the creditor, notwithstanding your documentation and arguments, affirms the corrrectness of their reporting, then the CRA would be left to make a decision, and the almost univerally will rubber stamp a verification provided by the creditor. 

If the creditor agrees with your assertion of DOFD, then they can merely correct it.  Deletion would not be required.

Give it a go, and perhaps it will suceed, but do it by way of a formal dispute rather than a request for the CRA to change the DOFD based on your assertions and documentation.

Deletion of the entire account would not be an outcome in any event. 

A dispute relates only to the specific information that is asserted to be inaccurate.

If the DOFD is corrected so as to then require exclusion of the CO, the exclusion would apply only to the reported charge off, not the entire OC account.

The account would then still show a balance due with no indication of payment unless and until you reach a settlement.

[LifeSAVERS]

If the original DOFD were to stand, than the account would be removed in full, as the 7 years would be up in October 2013 (if DOFD is 10/2006)...Yes?

I want to thank you for your concise detail and allowing for variance due to the potential outcome of any decision...by CRA preferably!

I would really prefer to PFD, but as has been stated time and again on here, that is not something they are willing to do. I really do not want to make a payment again and have it than remain until 2021! :{