Remove AU reporting from CRAs?

[Anonymous]

My friends company (small biz) gave him an Amex, had added him as AU. He is concerned now that if they screw up (late, etc.) his credit will suffer?  Can't he just ask Amex to not report to his CRA or at worst just tell CRAs 'Not Mine' since he is an AU and not repsonsible?

[haulingthescoreup]

He's either going to be an AU, or he's not going to be an AU. I wish I could get companies not to report AU's by request, because they can really injure those with better credit, but that doesn't seem to happen. He can try with AmEx, of course.

IMO, he'd be pretty dumb to dispute with the CRA's.

[Anonymous]

---

@haulingthescoreup wrote:
He's either going to be an AU, or he's not going to be an AU. I wish I could get companies not to report AU's by request, because they can really injure those with better credit, but that doesn't seem to happen. He can try with AmEx, of course.

IMO, he'd be pretty dumb to dispute with the CRA's.

---

Why would he be dumb to dispute? First of all he didn't ask to be AU, secondly in actuality he is not the owner/resonsbile for the account, so if he requests/demands not reporting they should comply.

[RobertEG]

The CRA is not the party to resolve the AU  designation, so what is there to dispute with them?

Have him go back to the card holder, and request deletion of AU status.

[CreditAble]

nyccc2 wrote:
Why would he be dumb to dispute? First of all he didn't ask to be AU, secondly in actuality he is not the owner/responsible for the account, so if he requests/demands not reporting they should comply.

---

Does his employer require your friend to use the account?

If he never uses the account he can have his employer remove him from the account. Once he is removed from the account as an AU, he can dispute the tradelines off of his credit reports. If your friend actually uses the account, why would he feel entitled to remove the tradeline from his reports.

 If he never used the account at all, he could simply dispute it off of his reports. If he does it that way however, he might have some problems with his employer.

There is more to this story.  Possibly a lot more. 

Some of the possible factors to be considered.

Employers might require all expenditures to be made on company (AU) credit cards for accounting purposes. An employer might simply want all of the miles and cash back perks to go to the business. That is the employer's right. It is also the employee's right to reject the conditions of employment and quit the job.

There have been cases of Amex going after (AU) employees for balances owed by deadbeat employers. The employees claimed  "not mine" and disputed the tradeline.

The problem is that it might be a little difficult to choose to simply say not mine, refuse to use the card, and still expect to continue to work for the employer.

Your friend can politely ask the employer to allow him to do his job without being required to use a company (AU) credit card. That would be the smart move.

He could dispute the tradeline directly with the CAs without first consulting with the boss. That would be (as Hauling said) "pretty dumb"  

[haulingthescoreup]

My husband has a corporate American Express card. It doesn't report to his reports, although if he wanted to pay the fee, it would (and he'd get the points.) He's responsible for it, in that he gets the bill and he pays it off, but it is nowhere on his reports. So if his employer hit some sort of problem, it would not affect his credit in any way.

If your friend is required to use a company card, they need to set it up this way, so that his credit is independent of the company's.

As for disputing through the CRA's, as others said, they're not the ones responsible for it being there; the employer is. And I've seen too many posts here by people saying that weird things started happening on their reports after disputes were filed. I'm the least conspiracy-minded person I know, but I do get suspicious about the possibility of retaliation by a CRA, or more likely, by a p.o.'d employee.

[Anonymous]

---

@CreditAble wrote:

@Anonymous wrote:
Why would he be dumb to dispute? First of all he didn't ask to be AU, secondly in actuality he is not the owner/responsible for the account, so if he requests/demands not reporting they should comply.

---

Does his employer require your friend to use the account?

If he never uses the account he can have his employer remove him from the account. Once he is removed from the account as an AU, he can dispute the tradelines off of his credit reports. If your friend actually uses the account, why would he feel entitled to remove the tradeline from his reports.

 If he never used the account at all, he could simply dispute it off of his reports. If he does it that way however, he might have some problems with his employer.

There is more to this story.  Possibly a lot more. 

Some of the possible factors to be considered.

Employers might require all expenditures to be made on company (AU) credit cards for accounting purposes. An employer might simply want all of the miles and cash back perks to go to the business. That is the employer's right. It is also the employee's right to reject the conditions of employment and quit the job.

There have been cases of Amex going after (AU) employees for balances owed by deadbeat employers. The employees claimed  "not mine" and disputed the tradeline.

The problem is that it might be a little difficult to choose to simply say not mine, refuse to use the card, and still expect to continue to work for the employer.

Your friend can politely ask the employer to allow him to do his job without being required to use a company (AU) credit card. That would be the smart move.

He could dispute the tradeline directly with the CAs without first consulting with the boss. That would be (as Hauling said) "pretty dumb"  

---

There is really nothing more to the story. Employer got him a card w/o asking first.  In any event, there is a world of difference between AU and 'Joint'.  My friend worked for a large consulting firm that went Chapter 11 where he was a joint holder on Amex, then had a very hard time getting approved for joint on next account because of the MILLIONS owed on his first. In both cases he was required to apply/sign as Joint Card Holder. They do this of course so employees don't rack up charges and leave them with the bag.  Joint holder means you APPLIED for and were APPROVED for credit and charges. AU simply means the owner is allowing you to use their card.  So if you don't want them to report to YOUR Credit Report as far as I have researched you can simply tell them not to, whether you are an AU or not.  It is not credit extended to you, not credit you are responsible for.

[CreditAble]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

There is really nothing more to the story. Employer got him a card w/o asking first. 

---

Actually there is more to the story ... Does he or does he not use the card? It doesn't matter if he was asked before the employer obtained the card for him. No offense, but why don't you address that simple question? If he doesn't physically use the card he can cut it up and ask the employer to cancel the AU status.

 If he is using the card, disputing the card directly with the bureaus is asking for trouble. The possibility of fraud investigation comes to mind. Amex the King of Adverse Action can conceivable suspend the whole business account while it tries to find out why an employee seems to be claiming that he has no knowledge of a card obtained in his name.

The credit bureaus do not provide the following option for filling out a dispute form.

I am using the credit card, but since I am not responsible, I don't want it to appear on my credit reports.

---

@Anonymous wrote:

(1)  In any event, there is a world of difference between AU and 'Joint'.  My friend worked for a large consulting firm that went Chapter 11 where he was a joint holder on Amex, .............

Joint holder means you APPLIED for and were APPROVED for credit and charges.

(2) AU simply means the owner is allowing you to use their card.

(3)  So if you don't want them to report to YOUR Credit Report as far as I have researched you can simply tell them not to, whether you are an AU or not.  It is not credit extended to you, not credit you are responsible for.

---

(1) As you say, there is a world of difference between Joint and AU. Your friend had problems because he was JOINT not AU. If he has simply AU he could have disputed the defaulted tradeline off his reports. Furthermore, if the current tradeline was not in fact currently reporting to the bureaus, the account could still be inserted later if it should default.

(2) A credit card with the AU's name is issued. It is an instrument for making purchases on credit. It is up to the bank if it wants to report the tradeline to an AU's report.

(3) Could you provide me the source that you have found that states that one can simply "tell them not to" (place an AU entry in a credit file). Who would "them" be?  Are you suggesting that people can tell credit bureaus to remove the tradeline simply because it is an AU tradeline. You can't tell credit bureaus to do anything without quoting the legal authority behind your "demand". 

Generally your points are well taken. An Au is not responsible, and in some cases can have success by simply asking that the tradeline be deleted if he is no longer an authorized user. The problem arises when the card issuer refuses to go along with the "request" since it knows that the AU is still using the card.

I am not saying that one shouldn't try to have the AU status cease being reported. That should be a request made to Amex however. I stress that it should be a request not a "demand".

Before contacting the employer's credit card company, I would still talk to the boss about my concerns.

Message Edited by CreditAble on 12-17-2008 03:35 PM

[Anonymous]

Well that is why I said there is nothing more to the story;  friend's company 'gave' him a corp card.  he didn't ask for it nor did he use it. he was concerned because they are small and not generally responsible people. so he called amex who said 'you are not responsible for charges'.  I explained this probably means he is an AU and to call back and ask 1) if that is in fact true 2) if he can have the account not report to his CR and 3) if they won't do that can they take him off now please.

When I was added to my parent's card, that asked for me and for my permission. I can't see how an employer can add an employee as an AU just because they have their info.  THAT seems fraudlent to me if in fact the reality is that they are adding a tradeline to someone else's credit report.  They could have done it AND never told him as well.  I am going to look into that whole AU thing now so I have some caselaw to back things up.

[haulingthescoreup]

If he just has a Corporate card, then he is probably NOT an authorized user.

Sorry, I've lost track --has he pulled his reports, and does the card show? If not, it's like my husband's situation: access to the card, but it doesn't report.

I don't think that most people with a corp card are actually AU's. or at any rate, that term is not used.