No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
Hello Friends,
I have a question regarding an old First Premiere card. It was charged off in 2013 and remained dormant since that time. In order to obtain an auto loan at an excellent rate my credit union required me to close it and either pay it off or settle. I did that because my mortgage broker I am working with essentially told me the same thing. I've tried all the 'repair' techniques on this card in the past.
Anyhow, EQ/EX are reporting this as late in October/November/December of 2017. Keep in mind this was still before I even had discussion with them about settling which took place about two weeks ago. Despite the fact that this was closed/charged off several years ago I am wondering how the reporting of recent lates may be affecting my overall FICO scores which are listed below. Can they report late payments after a charge off??? My first thought was my score wasn't affecting it too much since in the last 2 weeks I recieved an AMEX, C1QS, ad WFCashwise all with 4k limits and my current situation is a less than 5% utlization with no lates. However, one of the other cards I applied for declined me because of recent late payments.
Any thoughts on how to handle this account or possibly even dispute it for reporting differently on each bureau would be appreciated.
Eq: 650 (from 634 on 10/1/17)
Tu: 680 (from 648 on 10/1/17)
Ex: 667 (from 636 on 10/1/17)
Unfortunately, my experience with First Premiere is that they (and a few others) will continue to report lates even though the card has been charged off. The only way to get it to stop is to pay them off and have them close the thing down. They're not the only ones I've seen do it that way - Bank of America is another.
What's not clear to me is which of the following two scenarios you are talking about:
(1) You pay off the charged-off account, and then even after the payoff (and years after the charge-off) you still end up having late payments listed on the report (the late payments from 2012/2013).
(2) Although the account was charged off in 2013, the creditor has claimed that you were late on the account recently. (I.e. as if the account were still open and you recently missed a payment.)
You use the phrase "reporting of recent lates" which would be #2. This would be an error on their part. Additional new delinquencies cannot happen on an account years after the account was charged off. You should not have recent lates.
I am guessing, however, that #1 is what you mean, which is "recent reporting of lates." This is completely accurate. Even months after the account is paid off or settled, and years after it was charged-off, a recent report will still (correctly) show that you were once late on that account (specifically back in 2012 or 2013).
Thus, the charge-off (back in 2013) does not wipe away lates associated with it, nor will the account being settled/paid.
And the lates will indeed have an effect on your score. The negative impact of a Day 30 late payment gets softened over time. Severe lates (like a Day 90 or Day 120, which may well be associated with this account) tend not to be softened over time. So the Day 90 and Day 120 from several years ago are still hurting you.
Number 2 would be correct.
1. Account charged off in 2013.
2. Still reporting random lates in in 15, 16, & 17.
3. Paid/settled very recently and reporting as such a result of the aforementioned loan.
I would seek the advice of contributor RobertEG. My understanding is that after an account is charged off, a creditor cannot report new delinquencies (certainly not years later) as if the account were still opened and you were missing payments.
But I have limited experience with derogs. (My last derog fell off my reports in 2006, before I really knew anything about reports and scores and so on.) RobertEG knows more, and he knows much much more about what creditors are legally entitled to do. Also a good person to advise about next steps.
IN order to continue reporting lates after a charge-off, the creditor would have to continue regular billing, and thus establish a billing due date upon which to calculate the length of time since first delinquency, such as a 180+ late.
What they routinely do after a charge-off is to discontinue regular monthly billing statements, which are no longer requried under the FCBA after taking of a charge-off, and then report current delinquency status broadly as CO rather than a specific monthly delinquency level based on a billing due date.
Stated differently, reporting status as a CO is an update of the delinquency status, as it states the debt continues to be delinquent.
However, rather than state a specific level of monthly delinquency, reporting as a CO states that its delinquency is major, and also not expected to be paid. It is kinda moot as to whether they report current status and payment history as CO or 180+ late. Both are major derog status, but just stated in different terminology.
If they had reported a CO status for the recent months, that would be a more serious major derog than a monthly 180+ late, so they are not causing additonal score damage. It is, as an unpaid CO, as bad as it gets regarding OC reporting.
To further demonstrate the essential equivalence of reporting either 180+ late or charge-off, both must become excluded from your payment history profile based on the date of first delinquency, with the CO required to be excluded no later than 7 years plus 180 days from the reported DOFD (per FCRA 605(c)), and any 180+ monthly delinquencies being excluded no later than 7 years from the DOFD (per FCRA 605(a)(5)).
The DOFD is prior to the date the CO was taken or reported, and is the only pertinent date for determining the degree of delinquency and the ultimate credit report exclusion date. I would let it be, as they could properly respond to any dispute by updating the payment history to show CO rather than 180+ late.......
wrote:
... To further demonstrate the essential equivalence of reporting either 180+ late or charge-off, both must become excluded based on the date of first delinquency, with the CO required to be excluded no later than 7 years plus 180 days from the reported DOFD, and any 180+ lates being excluded no later than 7 years from the DOFD.
The DOFD is prior to the date the CO was taken or reported, and is the only pertinent date for determining the degree of delinquency and the ultimate credit report exclusion date. I would let it be.....
Above is the big idea I would take away from RobertEG's very helpful response. The charge-off happened a long time ago. Therefore it and all associated lates will fall off your reports in the near future. From a practical perspective, you do not have any recent lates.
wrote:
To further demonstrate the essential equivalence of reporting either 180+ late or charge-off, both must become excluded from your payment history profile based on the date of first delinquency, with the CO required to be excluded no later than 7 years plus 180 days from the reported DOFD (per FCRA 605(c)), and any 180+ monthly delinquencies being excluded no later than 7 years from the DOFD (per FCRA 605(a)(5)).
The DOFD is prior to the date the CO was taken or reported, and is the only pertinent date for determining the degree of delinquency and the ultimate credit report exclusion date. I would let it be.....
Robert,
I have an account that has 3 120 day lates in a row showing that the first would be 7 years old in September of this year. From what you are saying should all 3 of them drop off in September or do they drop off one at time each month.
I also have a 30 day late that is about a year younger than the 120 day ones. Since I was current before that 30 day late I assume it's DOFD is different from the 120 day lates.
Did I understand what you were saying correctly?
The FCRA only explicitly defines the required exclusion based on DOFD to apply to charge-offs and collections.
See FCRA 605(c), which amends the exclusion provision of charge-offs and collections as set forth under FCRA 605(a)(4).
The exclusion of monthly delinquencies is covered separately under FCRA 605(a)(5), which requires exclusion of other adverse items of information no later than 7 years from their occurence.
The CRAs interpret the initial account delinquency to be the relevant date for exclusion of delinquencies, and does not interpret each monthly delinquency as begin of a new delinquency, but rather the same delinquency with a longer time since initial delinquency.
Thus, the CRAs exclude all monthly delinquencies in a consecutive chain of delinquency at the same time, which is 7 years from the date of initial account delinquency.
They essentially use DOFD for exclusion of monthly delinquencies in the same chain even though it is not explicitly stated in section 605(a)(5).
Presented below is the policy statement from the EX web site, explaining their interpretation of the exclusion of monthly delinquencies:
_____________________________________________
"When Does the 7 Year Rule Begin For Delinquent Accounts?
June 13, 2017
Dear Experian,
I had a 30-day late payment in April 2011 and one 90 days late in September of 2011. When would the seven-year rule start? April or September?
– BAJ
____________________________________
Dear BAJ,
Late payments remain on the credit report for seven years. The seven-year period is based on when the delinquency occurred. Whether the entire account will be deleted is determined by whether you brought the account current after the missed payment. If the account was brought current, the late payments that have reached seven years old will be removed, but the rest of the account history will remain.
If you had a single late payment in April of 2011, that late payment will fall off by April of 2018. If the account was brought current between April and September of 2011 and then the second series of late payments occurred, those late payments would be removed seven years from the first missed payment in that series.
How to Calculate When Late Payments Will Be Deleted
Late payments, called delinquencies, are deleted seven years from the original delinquency date of the debt after which it was never again current.
That means that if you have 30-day late payment reported and then bring the account current the next month, the late payment will fall off seven years from when it was reported.
If you miss three payments in a row, your account would be reported 90 days late. The seven-year period would begin with the first payment you missed in that series. All three payments would be deleted seven years from that date. The date is called the “original delinquency date,” or sometimes the “date of first delinquency.”
If you have a late payment and never bring the account current, it will eventually be written off as a loss. The debt then could be sold or transferred to a collection agency. In this case, the entire account will be removed seven years from that original delinquency date, along with the subsequent collection account.
You didn’t indicate whether the 90-day delinquency began with a first missed payment in September of 2011, or a couple of months earlier in July. If the account became 30 days delinquent in July, then 60 days delinquent in August, and 90 days delinquent in September, that series of late payments would be removed seven years from July of 2011.
If the initial 30-day late payment was in September of 2011, that string of delinquencies would be removed by September of 2018.
Experian removes late payments automatically after seven years, so you won’t have to request they be deleted when the time comes.
What Happens to Your Account Once Delinquencies are Removed?
If your account has been current ever since, the status will change to show “never late” when the last series of late payments falls off, and the account will appear as positive. However, if the account was never brought current, then the entire account will be removed seven years from the original delinquency date.
Thanks for asking.
The “Ask Experian” team. "