Do various "dirty words" on CR's affect FICO

[Anonymous]

Late October of this year I settled a ginormeous Amex Blue account with a law firm they assigned the debt to for appx. 50 cents on the dollar

It went smoothly so now two months later I am checking the "big 3" CRA' s to see the fallout....

Experian seems to be the kindest...  Experian entries read, 

Status:  "Paid in settlement",... with the  Creditor's Statement reading, "Account legally paid in full for less than full balance."

 

TU was less kind than EX. They reported "Pay Status", as, "Payment After Charge Off/Collection", with nothing derogatory in "remarks";

EQ reports under "account status" as well as "current status" the dreaded "CHARGE OFF", with comments saying , "Account paid for less than full balance".

So here's my question:

Is it worth the effort (to increase FICO scores) to dispute to get said TU & EQ comments & entries changed/removed, and/or to request more demure language regarding the verbiage of the entries?

Don't know what the various corresponding FICOS are for the 3 CR's but I'm asking cuz someone once told me that FICO formula, "looks" for certain words and adjusts the score accordingly.  (i.e.. words like "charge off" & "collection" is worse than merely "settled".  Can anyone confirm/deny/ comment on this?

....not to mention that the entry of, "charge off" by itself is inaccurate because they did eventually get paid back a significant portion of the original delinquent balance in the settlement through the law firm.

Hope that all made sense!

Thoughts, answers, comments greatly appreciated.

[llecs]

Don't dispute!

I'm fairly certain that all of those comments hurt equally. Had you paid in full, it would have said "paid charge-off", which is just as bad.

You'd want all of those comments removed plus any lates too. Try sending them a GW letter kindly asking if they would remove any lates and/or comments.

[ficonightmare]

I don't think there's anything you can dispute in this case.

In the end, the account was charged off and for reporting purposes, that's all that seems to matter- that dreaded word "charge-off" even if it was paid in full, or paid in full for settled amount.

Regarding a charge-off being inaccurate because you paid, I don't believe it is (someone please correct me if I'm wrong). When a lender believes they can't re-coup their debt, they charge it off. Whether or not they sell it to a collection agency, or if substantial enough turn it over to a law firm, doesn't change the fact that they wrote if off as a loss. They do this for accounting purposes and it's perfectly legal even if they get some, or all of the money back later. So they are reporting correctly.

I have one paid in full charge off that's being reported differently on EX and EQ. The damage though is the same.

[Anonymous]

Thanks for the responses.

In nego with the lawers that the OC hired, it was suggested that some portion of the settlement was going back to the OC (Amex)... At least that what inferred when the lawyer would say in negotiation he had to "check with my contact at Amex for that"...words to that effect... so, ostensibly, the OC did get back a fair portion of the original debt.

This is how it seems innaccurate to report the entire bal on the trade line as a "charge off"  when my underatnding was that the OC got a preyty good chunk back after it was all said & done. "Charge off" indicates to me the entire balance was sold, or whatever, written off, & they never recovered any of it. "Settled" seems fair & more accurate than charged off being that the OC got some thing back.  Perhaps this is just my way of looking at it, but if doesn't affect FICO, then admittedly the point is proably moot.

This ties into the other question as to whether "dirty words" on the report affect FICO, no replies to that one yet...

[AndySoCal]

All three bureaus are reporting the account correctly. You have nothing to dispute. The account was charged off when the account was assigned to the law firm. When you settled the account the additional remark that was paid for less than full balance. The payment made after charge off is correct.

[creditchild]

to be honest pne of the things you should have requested with the settlement

was being done was ask that any and all negative get deleted from your cr.

i agree, at this point theres nothing to dispute.

[Anonymous]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

This is how it seems innaccurate to report the entire bal on the trade line as a "charge off"  when my underatnding was that the OC got a preyty good chunk back after it was all said & done. "Charge off" indicates to me the entire balance was sold, or whatever, written off, & they never recovered any of it. "Settled" seems fair & more accurate than charged off being that the OC got some thing back.  Perhaps this is just my way of looking at it, but if doesn't affect FICO, then admittedly the point is proably moot.

This ties into the other question as to whether "dirty words" on the report affect FICO, no replies to that one yet...

---

No, the account was charged-off when you defaulted. Because you later pay, doesn't change that status, unfortunately.

The comments aren't hurting your FICO score. The charged-off status is a major derog that's hurting your score. As IIecs suggested, you might try goodwill.

[RammaCredit]

You should have requested to have the account completely removed from your file. Since you have already settled then the deed is done. Best bet would be to contact the Lawyer who settled the account and see if they are sympathetic to you and will  nego after settlement to have the account removed.