How to fix incorrect Date of First Delinquency?

[Jamex]

I had a GMAC auto loan that originated in 2005. I fell behind in the payments in mid-2007, and it was repossessed that fall. In November I made a lump-sum payment to get the vehicle back, but then in January 2008 a family emergency happened which resulted in me having to stop making payments on the vehicle again. GMAC once again took possession of the vehicle.

They sent me a few letters throughout 2008 and 2009 asking for payment, and because of the stress of what was going on (a close family member who had been the primary breadwinner was incarcerated, and I had to take their place helping others get by), I just ignored them. (Stupid, I know).

Bottom line, GMAC notified me in July 2010 that it was officially charging-off the account. 

As of now, however, July 2010 is also reported as the date of first delinquency for this account. When looking at my report, it shows Jan. 2008 as 30 days late, Feb 2008 as 60 days late, but then in March 2008 it goes green again and stays green till July 2010, when it shows it was charged-off. (And to be clear, I made no payments after December 2007)

So, right now it is saying it will stay on my report until July 2017, but I think in fact it should fall off in January 2015, right? And if that's the case, I'd be within my rights to request the DOFD be changed to January 2008, right?

Any insight would be greatly appreciated. On the one hand I feel guilty asking for any help with an account that I was in fact never able to pay satisfactorily, but on the other hand I've been working really hard since then to rebuild my credit and want to be able to re-access normal loans as soon as I'm legally able to.

[Anonymous]

If you made no payments from Dec 07 until it was CO'd, Dec 07 should be your DoFD.

I would send a direct dispute to the creditor outlining why they are reporting it inaccurately and ask them to correct it.

If you have any proof of last payment made, I would include that also.  The more substantial proof you have the less likely they can argue with it.

[Shogun]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

If you made no payments from Dec 07 until it was CO'd, Dec 07 should be your DoFD.

I would send a direct dispute to the creditor outlining why they are reporting it inaccurately and ask them to correct it.

If you have any proof of last payment made, I would include that also.  The more substantial proof you have the less likely they can argue with it.

---

+1

They should have CO'd the debt after 90 days and no continued payment.  So I would put Dec. 07 as being the actually DoFD.  I would do a direct dispute with this information.

[Jamex]

Thank you guinness56 and Shogun, I really appreciate your prompt and helpful replies.

Just to clarify, do you think it would be better to address this kind of dispute directly to GMAC, or to each of the 3 credit bureaus? 

Your point about proof was especially helpful. The downside is that I do not have any copies of letters requesting payment that were sent in early 2008, but I do know for sure that there's no way they could show any proof of payment after December 07 (e.g., no checks, online payments, etc.) If I pulled all my bank statements it would similarly showed that no money went to GMAC after December 2007.

Do you think it's reasonable to put it in their court, i.e., "please either show receipt of payment after December 07 or fix the DOFD?"

Thanks again to you both for all your help. I really appreciate it.

[Anonymous]

The direct dispute puts it in their court to do a reasonable investigation.  It takes out the CRA as a go between.

Use the direct dispute link in my signature.  There is a format to use and it tells you exactly what needs to be addressed.  Explain to them exactly what you explained here.

If you want to write it up and have us look at it that is ok.

[Jamex]

Thanks so much again, guinness56. This is incredibly helpful and I really appreciate it.

The only reason I'm a bit concerned about initiating any direct communication with GMAC is because I'm worried about still being within the SOL for a lawsuit for the amount owed (both the state I'm living in now and the state where the loan was originated have 6-year SOLs for writtne contracts). And I'm worried that this could put me back "on the radar" and that this kind of request might bother them enough that they'd respond with a suit.

Assuming good faith behavior on their part, I do think that I'd be on solid ground saying that the 6 years came to an end as of December 2013, but the fact that my DOFD is off because of their reporting makes me worried that they might play rough. Do you think it's still a good idea to get in touch with them directly, or should I wait till later this year when it's even less likely that they'd have much of a case that I'm within the SOL? And if this is the kind of question that only a lawyer can answer, I of course understand that (it would be hard for me to afford one right now, which is why I thought I'd at least ask).

Thanks again so much for everything so far, I really appreciate your time & insight.

[Anonymous]

By law, if you haven't made payments for 120 days they have to charge off the account.  If they did not do that but continued to show you made payments and you did not,  then that is a violation of the FCRA.  They have to report accurately.  That would be falsifying your CR. 

It would be on them to prove you made all those payments.  And if they can't they could be in serious trouble if they don't fix it.

I understand your hesitation to contact them due to the SOL but, if they did decide to sue, only a judge can ultimately say it is outside SOL or not. 

If it were me I would not hesitate to send them a direct dispute.

[Jamex]

Thanks again - this is really helpful information. I'm thinking I agree with you, I'm just going to think it over a bit. If/when I do send the dispute letter, I'll update this thread so that you (and anyone else reading who might be in a similar position) knows how it turns out.

[RobertEG]

Assuming the account was not in a delinquent status when you ceased making payments in Dec 07, and became delinquent in Jan 08, that would be your DOFD.

That jives with their reporting of 30-late in Jan 08.

When they report a charge-off, they are required to report the DOFD that preceded their charge-off, and they must report that DOFD within 90 days after reporting the CO.

So the reported DOFD must be in your file.  Is your assertion that they reported a DOFD of 7/2010 based on you having evidence of their actual reported DOFD, or an assumption based on the projected CR exclusion date?

I would firts advise making sure you have the speciic DOFD that they reported prior to disputing its accuracy.  If it is not specficially provided in your credit report, you can check your free report at annualcreditreport.com or order  a copy directly from the CRA.  No need to ask them what they reported.  It is required to be in your credit file.

If attempts to get their specific reporting from credit reports fails, you can always send a formal request to the CRA under the provisions of FCRA 609(a)(1), which entitles a consumer to any information of record in their credit file.  Requests under section 609(a) must be accompanied by proof of your identity and payment of the current processing fee, which is $11.00

They would only be able to verify the later DOFD if they state that the account was in a non-delinquency status in the period up to 7/2010, thus making 7/2010 the date of commencement of first delinquency on the account.

That seems to be at odds with the facts posted.

Armed with that information, which can be obtained without any direct communication with them, if you consider their reporting inaccurate, you have documentation to form the basis for a solid direct dispute.

[Jamex]

Thanks so much, Robert. Really appreciate your thoughts. I did pull one of my free annual reports, and they have it noted that my "date of last payment" was 5/2010, and that it was then charged-off in July 2010. I definitely did not make any payments in 2010 (or 2009 or 2008, for that matter).

I'm hoping that this is a good-faith error rather than a bad-faith tactic to extend the amount of time this stays on my credit report (or even potentially the amount of time they have to collect under the SOL). I am finding it really hard to understand, however, how they could somehow think I was paying for 2.5 years when I clearly was not.

I will update this thread after I take action and when I have any response from either the CRAs or the creditor. Thanks again to everyone for your advice so far.