CA reporting 120 days late, but not really?

[RobertEG]

How would the furnisher of information (debt collector) be responsible for "fixing" how another party has chosen to present information in a credit report they sell?

[guiness56]

---

@RobertEG wrote:

How would the furnisher of information (debt collector) be responsible for "fixing" how another party has chosen to present information in a credit report they sell?

---

+1

I don't believe it is a "style" of reporting.  It is a commercial report.  That is why you need to look at your reports direct from the CRAs.  If it is on there like that, which it should not be, then there is a basis for a dispute.

[sphinx313]

They aren't. My actual "report" as I stated shows them with a tradeline and listing derogs instead of just listing a collection. Their reporting is correct on TU. It is not correct on EQ and I have no idea about EX.

[Anonymous]

I have the same issue, a CA account description saids paid but in the current status it still shows "120+ days past due", i am very curious as of how this can be fixed.  Please do share your results from filing a claim with BBB

Thanks!

[guiness56]

---

@sphinx313 wrote:

They aren't. My actual "report" as I stated shows them with a tradeline and listing derogs instead of just listing a collection. Their reporting is correct on TU. It is not correct on EQ and I have no idea about EX.

---

Sounds like it could be an issue with the CRA and not the CAs reporting.  Have you contacted the CRA and asked them why it is in the accounts section and not in the collection. 

FICO would score it the same no matter where it is.

As for the currently 120 days past due, that isn't correct.  I understand they can report the delinquency as it was reported to them but once paid it should show was 120 days past due or worst delinquency.

[Shogun]

+1 with it more than likely being a formatting issue.  I'm still not gung ho on the whole factoring company thing however.  If coded correctly, there wouldn't be a place for listing lates in the first place.

But like has been said before, I would want to see my actual report from the CRA.  If by chance it was reporting that way on it, I would then take action.

[TSB71]

I have this exact problem!  I actually just submitted a BBB.  Someone on another post told me they did that with LVNV Funding who reports the same way and they ended up getting it all deleted.  I figure its worth a shot.  Worst thing that came come from it (I hope) is accurate reporting.  I dont like it looking something Ive done in the past few years.