Removals

[Eighthundredbound]

I have 30, 60 and 90 day late charges for 2/14, 3/14 and 4/14 follows by current in 5/14 and another consecutive 30/60/90 late beginning in 6/14 that then becomes a charge off. Is the date of first delinquency handled separately for the 2/14 and 6/14 lates? If so, I suppose that the 7 year charge off removal would be timed from 6/14 - 6/21 instead of the preferred 2/14 - 2/21 date which would delete the charge off 4 months earlier. Am I correct? 

im also aware of the TU 6 month, Experian 3 month and EQ 1-2 early exclusion.

Thanks in advance for any responses.

[Brian_Earl_Spilner]

Starts from the first default that leads to the chargeoff. So, June.

[VanderSnoot]

Not sure about charge offs, but for delinquencies, check out the thread Aging Delinquencies:

• EQ: Deletes each successive level of delinquency three months in advance of the seven year mark (i.e. EQ doesn't delete strings, but deletes each individual report of delinquency 3 months early).
• EX: Deletes all delinquencies in a common string or chain two months in advance.
• TU: Deletes each successive level of delinquency independently one month in advance.

[CorySoccer]

@VanderSnoot Thank you for this information.  I was wondering why Equifax removed a charge off, yet it hasn't been removed from the other two.

[RobertEG]

While there is a difference in interpretation of the begin date for deletion of monthly delinquencies between the big-3 CRAs due to generalness of the statute, there is no such ambiguity or difference in interpretation for the exclusion of a reported charge-off.

FCRA 605(c) governs the exclusion of charge-offs, and provides clear and specific exclusion criteria for charge-offs, namely, that the begin date is the date of first delinquency that led directly to the charge-off and the period is no greater than 7 years plus 180 days.

The only difference between the CRAs is how much of their own early exclusion they routinely provide, but each are approximately at 7 years from the reported DOFD.

However, if the deliquency is reported as days late, such as 60/90/120/150/180-days late, one CRA (namely EXP) interprets the FCRA provision governing monthly delinquencies (i.e., section 605(a)(5)) as requiring exclusion of all delinquencies in a common chain on the same date of 7 years from initial delinquency, while the other two interpret exclusion as not being mandated until each reaches its own 7 year exclusion period.

[CorySoccer]

@RobertEG Thanks for the advice.  You seem very knowledgeable on the stopic so let me ask you this...As stated above, I had a Discover card that I had not made a payment on since April 2014.  By August 1st it showed as my First Date of Delinquency.  When I called Equifax in February and spoke to a supervisor about an EE she said ok. And within a few days it was off my CR.  My CR score jumped up almost 100pts.  

I stupidly thought I had also requested an EE with TransUnion which apparently I didn't because I called them yesterday about why the EE had not been removed and she was like, we never received an EE request from you.  I said, really? Well, ok, is that something I can do now? She put me on hold and came back and said yes they can do it and said it would be removed within 20-30 minutes, which it was.

Now to Experian...the bain of my existance at the point.  I called them up yesterday after I spoke with TU.  EX is basically saying absolutely not because even though it shows my last payment date of April 2014, the payment history section shows I made payments in May, June, July, August, September, and it became 30 days late in October? Which is not the case. They said I could get it removed June 16th.  How is it that two CRA's show accurate information as reported by Discover and were very easily removed from my CR but yet EX is saying that I made payments for an extra 5 months and I have to wait almost 2 more months for it to be removed?

I don't want to call Discover (since Discover actually sent it to a law-firm for collections).

Are my only options to just sit and wait until June for it to fall off?  I asked if I could send proof from a different CRA showing the correct information and they said I could but they would still have to contact Discover.

With it being so late (only a couple months) I don't want to mess something up.  It's just frustrating because my

TU went from 663 to 756 

Equifax went from 674 to 754 

Experian score is sitting at a measly 635.

So I can't really do anything (such as apply for a new/better credit card (for the most part I have junk starter cards) because most credit cards I believe pull from all 3 credit bureaues.  

Anyways, sorry for the long response.  Do you have any suggestions??

Thanks in advance.

[RobertEG]

In response to @coreysoccer:

Exclusion of a charge-off is based solely upon DOFD, and the DOFD that is used by the CRA must be separately reported by the creditor to the CRA no later than 90 days after reporting a CO.   See FCRA 623(a)(5).

There is no explicit requirement under the FCRA for separate reporting of a the DOFD when only monthly delinquencies are reported.

To that end, the posted scenario does not reference any reporting of a charge-off.  It refers only to monthly delinquencies.

Thus, no separate and explicitly reported DOFD is available to the CRA.

Since Exp excludes all monthly delinquencies in a common chain at 7 years after the same DOFD, they estimate a DOFD based on reported payment history profile, which could be inaccurate or incomplete.  It is, neverless, the best estimate they can make.

If the reported payment history profile shows a prior chain of delinquency and then a return to pays as agreed, good standing, a new DOFD is then set for exclusion of any subsequent chain of delinquency.  That is apparently the issue.

You could always submit either your own account billing statements or a statement by the credtior that there was no payment back to good standing and thus no reset of the prior DOFD.  

That would provide factual support for contesting their apparently reasonable interpretation of the delinquency history, and thus proper applicable DOFD to be used for exclusion of a chain of monthly delinquencies.

Again, that becomes moot if the later chain of delinquency also included reporting of a CO status.

Reporting of a CO would then have required the creditor to have explicitly reported the appropriate DOFD.

[CorySoccer]

@RobertEG I did call Discover and they verified that I had not made a payment since April 2014. I thought great. And asked for a copy of my payment history. He refused and said he couldn't because it was sent to a law firm.

Does that sound right? Can a creditor refuse to send you a copy of your billing/payment history on your own account? 

[RobertEG]

The Truth in Lending and Fair Credit Billing Acts mandate sending of monthly billing statements setting billing due dates at least 21 days prior to the billing due date whenever the revolving account has a principal balance or assesses any finance charge.

There is no provision requiring the creditor to thereafter provide additional copies of prior statements simply upon request of the consumer.

It is the duty of the consumer to maintain biling records.

However, payment history profile is a required item of information when updated reporting is made, as clearly stated in their common credit reporting manual, the Credit Reporting Resource Guide.  Comlete and accurate reporting to the CRA is mandated, not to the consumer.

If you contest the completeness or accuracy of the reported payment history profile, that is subject to dispute with the CRA, to which you should cite their reporting policy. 

[CorySoccer]

@RobertEG Makes perfect sense. Ty