What do I do to get this cleared up?

[traveler2005]

So I had this account that is listed below that has a DOFD of 1/2009. It was charged off and sold to another company. I paid that company. I then have asked the Metaindigo company to update it to reflect that it is a paid charge off. Instead of doing that they add another 90+ day late. They have done this a total of six times. The last being 3/2013. Is this legal?  Is there anything I can do to get these removed? Or better yet to have this tradeline removed. I don't think they are reporting correctly. How can they report lates on an account that was sold and paid years after the fact? Please let me know what I need to do.   Thanks in advance!
	EXPERIAN	EQUIFAX	TRANSUNION
Account Name:	METAINDIGO	METABANK/INDIGO	METAINDIGO
Account Number:
Acct Type:	Credit Card	Revolving or Option	Revolving account
Acct Status:	Closed	Closed	Closed
Monthly Payment:		$40.00
Date Open:	12/1/2008	12/1/2008	12/8/2008
Balance:		$0.00	$0.00
Terms:	Revolving
High Balance:		$607.00	$607.00
Limit:	$300.00		$300.00
Past Due:			$0.00
Payment Status:	Charge-off	Bad debt & placed for collection & skip	Payment after charge off / collection
Comments:	Account in dispute-reported by subscriber	CONSUMER DISPUTES - REINVESTIGATION IN PROGRESS	Account information disputed by consumer
24-Month Payment History
Date:	Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 12 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 14 14                                                 OK OK OK OK OK OK KD OK OK KD OK OK KD OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK

[RobertEG]

The reporting requirement is that what is reported must not knowingly be inaccurate.

The issue is not when they choose to report, but rather the accuracy of what is reported.

An account, for example, can continue to have escalating delinquencies after a CO.  Creditors often cease reporting escalating delinquency after a CO, but can.

Any reporting cannot, of course, report a new delinquency as having a date after they no longer owned the debt, but can go back and add any previously unreported delinquencies that occured on the account prior to its sale.

Once you paid the debt, that required reporting of current status as paid, and current debt balance as $0. No creditor  discretion on that reporting.

If the current status does not report paid, it is inaccurate.  Current status is only a snapshot of status as of their last reporting, and reflects no historical information.  It is unrelated to prior delinquencies or prior status.

Any prior delinquencies still remain after the current status becomes paid, and are retained under their own reporting codes.

Thus, paid, was a CO is accurate, as the CO remains in the prior history.

What does the current status and balance read, aside from reporting of monthly delinquencies?

[AeroKrix]

From where I am sitting, the trade line is reporting correctly. The balance is a CO and the balance is $0; therefore, it means that the account is paid. This trade line is reported by the OC and not a CA. in regards to the lates being added, it can only happen if the account was being paid after the CO status, and made delinquent again. Like, you made payment arrangements and failed to make it on time. Typically, once a "charge-off" status is reported to a tradeline, it should report that way till it falls off, unless, you made payments and was late.

[traveler2005]

---

@AeroKrix wrote:

From where I am sitting, the trade line is reporting correctly. The balance is a CO and the balance is $0; therefore, it means that the account is paid. This trade line is reported by the OC and not a CA. in regards to the lates being added, it can only happen if the account was being paid after the CO status, and made delinquent again. Like, you made payment arrangements and failed to make it on time. Typically, once a "charge-off" status is reported to a tradeline, it should report that way till it falls off, unless, you made payments and was late.

---

Hi

Thanks for the reply. 

The account was charged off in approximately april or may of 2009, it was sold and I was contacted by the CA and paid the amount due. I understand that the Original creditor can continue to report a charge off status, since I didn't pay them directly. But they have reported 6   90 + days way after the account was sold and paid off. This is in addition to the charge off status. Is this right?

[AeroKrix]

---

@traveler2005 wrote:

---

@AeroKrix wrote:

From where I am sitting, the trade line is reporting correctly. The balance is a CO and the balance is $0; therefore, it means that the account is paid. This trade line is reported by the OC and not a CA. in regards to the lates being added, it can only happen if the account was being paid after the CO status, and made delinquent again. Like, you made payment arrangements and failed to make it on time. Typically, once a "charge-off" status is reported to a tradeline, it should report that way till it falls off, unless, you made payments and was late.

---

Hi

Thanks for the reply. 

The account was charged off in approximately april or may of 2009, it was sold and I was contacted by the CA and paid the amount due. I understand that the Original creditor can continue to report a charge off status, since I didn't pay them directly. But they have reported 6   90 + days way after the account was sold and paid off. This is in addition to the charge off status. Is this right?

---

To me, it doesn't seem logical that you'd be late on an account that has a CO status. I would just start sending GW letters certified mail and email and calling them on a daily basis. I would skip the asking about the lates and just go for a delete all together.