Help calculating DoFD from last payment date.

[Anonymous]

Sigh. Duly noted.

EQ is my lowest score, I was hoping that account would drop off sooner rather than later. Guess it's another three years of crap scoring until things will get better.

Thank you for all your help!

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:
And therein lies my quandary. PRA had already had some oddities in how they were reporting, showing a few 116 dollar payments in the balance history in EX report for 2013. (It was listed as account balance / date payment received / scheduled payment amount / actual amount paid and the 116 showed for several months under the "actual amount paid" column.)

In the EQ it has the date the first major delinquency being reported in 2013 but the balance history doesn't go as far back as the EX does.

TU has the least amount of info with just the date opened, the last payment date and then the date due to fall off.

The debt has been paid, but with it reporting oddly on the different CRAs, I have no idea when I should expect this account to fall off or request it be taken off. The sooner I'm done with PRA, the better.

---

As RobertEG pointed out, ignore all that, its completely irrelelvant. By disputing it, you simply cause it to be updated, which freshens it and dings your score. You're last payment was in Novemember of 2010, which corresponds very favorably with a DoFD of Jan/2011. It will drop from all three by the end of 2017. If you want to try to get early exclusions, start trying with TU in July 2017, and EQ/EX a few months later.

[Anonymous]

Any way you slice it, it's still 2 more years from now that I'll see relief from PRA. Once it updates to paid, I'll feel a little better.

If EQ would stop dinging me for it every time I breathe, I'd be over the moon. It's still baffles me that each report can hold the exact same amount of data, update with the same exact data every month, yet there's a 50 to 60 point difference from EQ to the others. How can they be so different than the other two CRA?

[Anonymous]

EQ has always been my lowest as well. By about the same amount until recently

[Anonymous]

They're headquartered in my backyard, practically. I ought to go knock on the door and ask why they delight in depressing scores so thoroughly compared to their counterparts.

[Anonymous]

Must be fun living so close to the monkey house at the zoo.

[Anonymous]

Not my circus, not my monkeys.

They actually asked me to interview there at one point in my career. The idea of them having unmitigated access n every aspect of my life was frightening.

I do think EQ does FICO a disservice. It clearly uses a completely different standard in its scoring, and it's plainly evident in the way the scores play out for those under the 740 mark. If anything, it makes a mockery of the idea of consistent scoring models.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:
Not my circus, not my monkeys.

They actually asked me to interview there at one point in my career. The idea of them having unmitigated access n every aspect of my life was frightening.

I do think EQ does FICO a disservice. It clearly uses a completely different standard in its scoring, and it's plainly evident in the way the scores play out for those under the 740 mark. If anything, it makes a mockery of the idea of consistent scoring models.

---

I think the whole idea of credit scoring based *entirely* on past behaviour is a mockery in itself, and borders on delusional.....but thats just me.