Reinstated account showing charge off

[Gear1]

Have an account I paid in full and then got the account reinstated, TU and EX both show no CO or late payments but EQ is showing pays as agreed no delinquencies but under the history it shows 30, 60, 90, 120, and a bunch of CO’s
I called the companies credit bureau but did not mention the other two bureaus and they said it was reported correctly. Also called EQ to ask about how it was reported and they said it was correct.
Question is should I be quiet and let EQ go and not mess up the other bureaus or is my EQ file reporting inaccurate?

[FireMedic1]

Contact the original creditor that reports to EQ and tell them that the account isnt showing up correctly. Let them resubmit the info.

"I called the companies credit bureau but did not mention the other two bureaus and they said it was reported correctly. Also called EQ to ask about how it was reported and they said it was correct."

So does this mean your called the OC already? If you were late before settling the CO. The lates wont go anywhere unles they agreed to delete them.

[Gear1]

Yes I called the OC after I called EQ, they said they do not back date,I told EQ the other 2 bureaus did not show any lates or delinquencies of any kind but they said to call the OC. The problem is after reinstatement I did not know until TU and Ex reported and my score jumped up that none of the delinquencies were going to be reported to either of them, so I had no such agreement, that is why I thought I probably should leave EQ alone and take what I got, but was looking for a more educated guess.

[thornback]

Sounds like EQ is reporting correctly and you got lucky with TU & EX. If you had no agreement with the OC to bring the account current in exchange for the removal of delinquencies, then the way EQ is reporting is accurate as previously late, charged-off, now current.

Pursuing this matter could result in EX & TU updating the tradeline to reflect the prior delinquencies. Or, you could get totally lucky again with EQ removing prior delinquencies. 50/50.

[Gear1]

It actually says pays as agreed and N/A under date of first delinquency, the only reference to lates and the CO’s is under history, not sure if that makes a difference

[thornback]

The DOFD is the date the account first became delinquent and was never brought current.

You brought the account current, so perhaps that is why no DOFD is displayed anymore??

[Gear1]

Good question, I have no idea since the other bureaus are reporting everything as being fine I don’t have a comparison, that’s why I was asking here thought some with some good knowledge of credit bureaus might chime in.

[RobertEG]

A creditor can report CO status under payment history as optional reporting of delinquency for any month after they took a charge-off and the account remains delinquent.  Showing of CO under payment history is not their reporting that they took mulitiple charge-offs, it is their reporting that the account was delinquent for that month, and was additionally subject to a prior charge-off during that period of delinquency.

The period of delinquency for any month in which the creditor chose to report delinquency status as CO rather than, for example, 180-late, is then determined by the simple subtraction of the date of first delinquency from the month/yr of reporting.

Creditors are required to separately and explicitly report the DOFD to the CRA after they have reported any charge-off, as that date is needed both to calculate the period of delinquency and the credit report exclusion date.  See FCRA 623(a)(5).

If they have reported a charge-off, either as thr current delinquenct status or as the prior monthly status for any month under your payment history profile, then DOFD is required reporting, and wll be in your credit file, regardless of whether it is shown in your commercial credit report.  It should show if you view your report from annualcreditreport.com.

Bringing a previously delinquent account back into pays as agreed good-standing is rare, but it would not result in deletion of the reported DOFD, as it is still required in order for the CRA to determine when it must exclude any reference to a prior charge-off.

[Gear1]

So I guess short version of what you said is that it can be both pays as agreed and N/A under DOFD and 30, 60 etc CO under history correct? I did get an updated report because I was recently denied for an account and it says the same as what I listed above, also TU and EX as I mentioned earlier are not reporting any DOFD or any lates or CO’s, thanks for the response