I've used this board in the past to improve my credit situation after falling on tough times in early 2017. I was delinquent with a creditor around April of that year, although I only recieved one email notification that "something went wrong with your payment." I never was contacted by the creditor again, nor did the issue appear on my credit report. Almost exactly two years later, after having improved my other credit issues, a supposed CA has re-aged my account to 2019 and states that I am missing payments.
I did a dispute to all 3 CRAs, but I believe it was essentially a DV. The CA also sent me a certified letter stating that "they have received a dispute." "They are not a third party CA representing the original creditor" and that "they purchased my delinquent and outstanding debt" and for me to check certain boxes explaining whether the debt is inaccurate, due to fraud, divorce, etc.
My question is, how do I deal with this? Should I negotiate a settlement with this company that states they are not a third party CA? Should I work to get the original age put on? It would be unfortunate considering it was never on my credit report until now. Any thoughts would be appreciated.
Did you ever get your reports from annualcredit? If not i would and when you say re-age is the year 2019 showing as the date opened? If that is the case the debt was not re-aged but bought in 2019 and they decided to report it after they bought it.
Yes they can buy the debt and then report it all of my collections are from 2018 even though I defaulted in 2017 but they will still all fall off 7.5 years from when you defaulted and not when they were bought and reported. Every time they update as failed to pay month to month the delinquency becomes recent. I would not acknowledge the debt but who is the debt with? Don’t pay them just yet try and get a pay for delete first. Disputing the debt will make the debt look newer if they verified the debt.
When a debt collector reports a collection, they are additionally required to report the date of first delinquency to the CRA no later than 90 days after the reporting of their collection.
The age of the delinquent debt is then calculated as the difference between the date of last updated reporting and the DOFD..
A collection thus properly re-ages in period of delinquency each time an updated reporting is made that the collection remains unpaid.
Just as with any unpaid, delinquent debt, such as reporting of 120-late after prior reporting of 90-late by a creditor "re-ages" the delinquency, a debt that remains unpaid properly ages in its negative scoring impact until the debt is paid, or the collection becomes excluded.
As for the statement that a prior communicated sent to a CRA was "essentially a DV," that would not be the case.
A DV is sent directly to the debt collector, with NO involvement of the CRAs.
A DV does not impose any period for response by the debt collector, and imposes a cease collection bar until adequate validation is sent, but only if the DV was timely (meaning it was sent within 30 days after their initial collection notice).
There is little commonality in process or impostion of requirements between a dispute filed with a CRA and a DV request.
Wow, that was super helpful. So I would need to pay this in order for it to be properly aged back to 2017, and potentially I could even work out a pay for delete?
It has not been improperly aged. The CA is simply reporting the date “opened” the collection account in its files. That date has nothing to do with the 2017 date of first delinquency. The credit reporting agencies will go by the 2017 date.