cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

So annoying! Collection reappeared

tag
Anonymous
Not applicable

Re: So annoying! Collection reappeared

thanks for letting me know that Robert. I am hoping it does not come back. I wonder what is the possibility of that if there are any stats on that. Will it reage if it reappears? Or does it usually stay with the same DOFD? thanks.

 

I have had two removed without pay. 1 was that charge off for inaccuracies. and the 2nd was a medical collection that they could not verify according them.

 

I wonder if I could use the letter of delete from the ca/oc if they reinstate to get them to remove again if it ever gets reinstated. hummm.

Message 11 of 15
RobertEG
Legendary Contributor

Re: So annoying! Collection reappeared

No, the fact that the OC or a prior debt collector chose to delete is not basis for compelling the current debt collector to delete.

As long as the new debt collector has collection authority, either by way of assignment from the current owner or they themselves own the debt,they are entitled to report their collection to the CRA.

 

The only restriction on reinserting information that was previously deleted is if the deletion was done as the outcome of a dispute, with the finding that the accuracy of the rporting could not be verified.  Even then, the information can be reinserted provided the furnisher includes a statement of verification of accuracy of the information.

 

As for extendng the ultimate exclusion period of the collection, any debt collector is required to report the DOFD to the CRA.

The DOFD should be the same, as it is a factual date, and thus there is no extension of the exclusion date based on when a new collection is reported.

Message 12 of 15
diveforfun97
Frequent Contributor

Re: So annoying! Collection reappeared

Just some food for thought (or discussion).

 

If I remember right, which I am probably not, for the NYS exclusion the account must be over the 5 year mark and paid in full.  I don't think that the bureau will delete an account that shows "settled for less that full amount".

Starting Score: Sep 23, 2014 EQ 577 TU 583 EX 567
Current Score as of 6/28/17 EQ 628 TU 643 EX 625
Goal Score: 700
Message 13 of 15
RobertEG
Legendary Contributor

Re: So annoying! Collection reappeared

That distinction is NOT stated in the NYS code.  It simply states "paid" as follows::

 

"accounts placed for collection or charged to profit and loss which antedate the report by more than seven years;  or accounts placed for collection or charged to profit and loss, which have been paid and which antedate the report by more than five years; “

 

One CRA was making the tortured interpretation that it must be paid in full rather than paid for less, but that was a few years ago, and to my knowledge, they have subsequently given up on that interpretation.

 

Message 14 of 15
diveforfun97
Frequent Contributor

Re: So annoying! Collection reappeared

Good to know. I figured I was wrong and that's why I like to ask instead of passing wrong info. Thanks RobertEG!!!!
Starting Score: Sep 23, 2014 EQ 577 TU 583 EX 567
Current Score as of 6/28/17 EQ 628 TU 643 EX 625
Goal Score: 700
Message 15 of 15
Advertiser Disclosure: The offers that appear on this site are from third party advertisers from whom FICO receives compensation.