EQ report question...

[aquatic1]

I am repairing my credit report and had a question about EQ and how they report items.  I have two TL's (LVNV and PORTFOLIO RECOVERY collections) but they are listed under the "other" section of my reports.  In the collection section I recently had three CO's deleted (medical and cell).  That only leaves 1 more listed under collections.  My questions are:

1.  How is the fact that 2 CO's are listing themselves as "other" affect my scores?

2.  Once the last CA account is deleted and there is nothing listed under collection, will I see a bigger jump in score? 

[nothingman02]

Thats a wrong listing. Those collection accounts have to be listed under collections. The 'other' is for other type of open or closed accounts which are not revolving or installment. Such as AMEX charge accounts.

The collection account listed as other is having a negative impact on your FICO in terms of UTL, AAoA etc. Its not supposed to count.

Getting rid of the last collection account should get you a significant score bump but its extent would depend upon your other existing accounts as you would be re-bucketed. 

[aquatic1]

---

@nothingman02 wrote:

Thats a wrong listing. Those collection accounts have to be listed under collections. The 'other' is for other type of open or closed accounts which are not revolving or installment. Such as AMEX charge accounts.

The collection account listed as other is having a negative impact on your FICO in terms of UTL, AAoA etc. Its not supposed to count.

Getting rid of the last collection account should get you a significant score bump but its extent would depend upon your other existing accounts as you would be re-bucketed. 

---

thank you nothingman02.  I knew that would be the answer.  I have been trying to PFD LVNV but have gotten absolutely no response.  I will keep sending them however.  I really hate this compant.  Once I can at least pay them (still hoping for a PFD) I will handle the other CA (Portfolio) as I am trying to save money as fast as possible to DV them.

[nothingman02]

Its always best to obtain a PFD. A collection A/C has the same impact whether paid or unpaid. The irony is that in your case, even a PIF should fetch you a score bump because of the way the a/c is listed on your file. But only on EQ. Also, the loss of age should not affect a significant change on the AAoA. I have a collection A/C by AAC posted in a similar fashion on my EQ and as an installment on my EX and a PIF would fetch me a score bump whereas a PFD could cause my score to drop temporarily as I would be re-bucketed and those are my oldest A/Cs and my AAoA would drop as well. I am trying hard as well to obtain a PFD.  I am digging into their a/cs and collection laws and stuff hoping to find some violations which I could use as leverage to negotiate a PFD. This improper listing is a violation for instance.

[aquatic1]

---

@nothingman02 wrote:
Its always best to obtain a PFD. A collection A/C has the same impact whether paid or unpaid. The irony is that in your case, even a PIF should fetch you a score bump because of the way the a/c is listed on your file. But only on EQ. Also, the loss of age should not affect a significant change on the AAoA. I have a collection A/C by AAC posted in a similar fashion on my EQ and as an installment on my EX and a PIF would fetch me a score bump whereas a PFD could cause my score to drop temporarily as I would be re-bucketed and those are my oldest A/Cs and my AAoA would drop as well. I am trying hard as well to obtain a PFD.  I am digging into their a/cs and collection laws and stuff hoping to find some violations which I could use as leverage to negotiate a PFD. This improper listing is a violation for instance.

---

So basically you are saying that due to the fact thatat LVNV is reporting incorrectly on my CR for EQ, it will actually help me if I paid them since its not listed in the collection area?  But it may hurt with the other two CR's.  My biggest issue is that EQ id my lowest FICO score by at least 80 points and both of my CU pull EQ for car loans. 

Would it make sense to try to at least pay them and then deal with the reporting later AFTER I try to get a new car loan?

[Anonymous]

---

nothingman02 wrote:

The collection account listed as other is having a negative impact on your FICO in terms of UTL, AAoA etc. Its not supposed to count.

---

While it isn't supposed to count in util, AAoA, etc......it isn't always a negative impact. It isn't always included in util by the misreporting-- depends on type of account it is marked as.

But, it is misreporting.

[nothingman02]

Nope! Im certainly not encouraging PIF the CA and then dealing with the a/c later. In my books, there is no trusting a CA and they have no incentive to accede to a GW request.They could alwasy correct their improper listing as paid collection a/c as well.

Also, as mentioned, its not even necessary that the a/c is impacting the score. 

Depending upon the way it is listed, it may or may not be impacting the UTL. Same with payment history and AAoA. That has to be studied first. For instance, on my EQ, The CA account is listed as my oldest and first opened A/C so I believe it has an impact an my AAoA.  Got to check the other parameters and the way the a/c is listed again.

If all those 3 aspects are actually having an impact, then PIF would result in the utl going down and a score increase could be expected.  A PFD would result in UTL going down but the payment gistory goes with it and you would be re-bucketed if its your last derog. AAoA would have to be calculated.

I was mentioning about the possible drop or increase in score with PIF just so that you would have an idea what to expect. But thats that. Theres no way I'd settle for anything less than a PFD unless I have to and would encourage you to do the same. Re-bueckting is only a temporary drop.

[aquatic1]

---

@nothingman02 wrote:

The collection account listed as other is having a negative impact on your FICO in terms of UTL, AAoA etc. Its not supposed to count.

---

Company/Account Name: LVNV FUNDING LLC Company Address/Phone: PO Box 10584
Greenville, SC 296030584
(866) 464-1183  Account Number: XXXXXXXXXX Date Opened: 08/2008   Last Activity: N/A First Delinquency: 01/2007 Type: Revolving Rate/Status: COLLECTION ACCOUNT High Credit: $6XX Terms: N/A Balance: $7XX   Past Due: $7XX Most Recent Date Reported: 03/2009  Comments on Account: Consumer disputes this account information,
Collection account  

---

This is how its reporting on my CR for EQ.  Again, it is listed in the "Other" category.  Also, On the front of the report where there is a graph it basically says that LVNV is my newest account and Portfolio is listed as my oldest account.

[nothingman02]

Im afraid I cant tell. I think it is very hard to determine for sure. It could be surmised yes. If its causal, after any action, if there is a change in score, it could be attributed to this a/c. But to determine for sure before any action, I am afraid its pretty hard. Sidewinder??

ETA: The UTL is showing on my EQ. Not on  TU.

Message Edited by nothingman02 on 04-10-2009 10:19 AM

[Anonymous]

Do you have a report from myFICO?

If so, look to see when it says your oldest account was opened. Does it appear it is counting this account?

Look at your util....does it appear these are counting?

At any rate-- a creditor will know if this is a CA or not, based on the name-- no matter where reported.

Also, it is a negative account(likely) and affecting score in some manner.

I would work on having it removed.