String of 15 '120' Days Late - Question

[Anonymous]

The cool thing is Experian's site states both ways - entire account comes off 7 years from DOFD even if it was paid in full. It also says the string comes off even if paid in full. So either, way one is right and the account is being reported wrong.

[RobertEG]

The issue pertains to the exclusion of reported monthly delinquencies only.

It is a common question with an "it depends" answer, as it is depends upon interpretation of the statute

The FCRA does not explicitly and expressly provide a definition of when the exclusion period for reported delinquencies begins, and when subsequent delinquencies in the same chain of delinquency must become excluded.

More specifically, FCRA 605(a) provides the definition of when any type or adverse item of information must become excluded by the CRA.

It includes subsecions 605(a)(1) through 605(a)(4), which define the exclusion provisions for certain specific types of adverse information (i.e, bankruptcies, civil judgments, tax liens, collections, and charge offs).

Any other adverse item of information is then relegated to the catch-all provision of subsection 605(a)(5).

That is the statutory exclusion provision that applies to the exclusion of monthly delinquencies, and is a generic definition that applies to any other adverse item, and only refers to the date of the item, and thus does not include a specific provision defining the date that the 7 year exclusion period begins for subsequent monthly delinquencies.  It is thus subject to interpretation.

A first interpretation is that each reported monthly delinquency has its own begin date for exclusion, which is the month/year of the reported delinquency.  Under that interpretation, each reported delinquency would have its own exclusion date of 7 years from the date of occurence or that individual delinquency. 

A second, and more common interpretation, is that delinquency begins on the date of initial delinquency, and continues until brought back into good standing, and thus the date of initial delinquency (DOFD) sets the same exclusion date of 7 years from the DOFD for all subsequent delinquencies in that same chain if delinquency. 

The second interpretation has precedent/merit as it is the official policy statement provided by Experian as to how they interpret the exclusion of monthly delinquencies.  That interpretation is clearly set forth in writing on their public web page.

However, the other two major CRAs do not always consistently follow that same interpretation, and thus there can be differing exclusion between the big-3 CRAs as to delinquencies in a common chain.

There is not, to my knowledge, and precedential case law that legally clarifies which of the two interpretations of FCRA 6705(a)(5) are proper, so there is no legal requirement for use of one over the other.

You could always dispute if a CRA applies interprettion one, and hopefully obtain a favorable ruling if a court supporting interpretation two, but that is costly and time consuming, and likely would not provide a decision until after the interpretation one period had already expired for all delinquencies, thus rendering the time and expense kinda moot.

The only clear use of DOFD is if the adverse item is a collection or charge-off, which then imposes the exclusion provision of preceding subsection 605(a)(4), and thus the clarifying requirement of subsection 605(c) which mandates use of DOFD for setting the exclusion period for collection or charge-off.  Section 605(c), unfortunately, does not additionally apply to the exclusion period under subsection 605(a)(5), and thus not requrie use of DOFD for exclusion of monthly delinquencies.

[Anonymous]

Let's see if I understand this correctly, I have some 120 day lates from an old BOA credit card during the time I was laid off from work.  This card was never charged off as I set up a payment plan with BOA.  I closed the account in 2012 and set up the payment plan.  I pulled a very old Equifax credit report from 2014 and it shows 120 day lates starting with 07/2012 to 07/2014 when the account was brought current (it only shows back two years though).  The account was fully paid off on 01/2015.  The account first went dilenquent in 06/2011 and was never brought current until 07/2014 and fully paid off in 01/2015.  BTW, I about $8000 so a lump sum payment was not possible which was the purpose of the payment plan.

Equifax is the only CRA still reporting these lates.  Experian NEVER reported these lates and always listed the account as in good standing.  It never reported the lates and always listed 07/2012 to 07/2014 as OK....not that I am complaining.  Transunion USED to report this account and the lates, but now Transunion does not report this account at all.  Starting in 06/2018 the delinquencies started to fall off my report.  They deliquencies fell off through 11/18 when the account was removed altogether.  Like I said my old Equifax credit report from 2014 showed 120 day lates from 07/2012 to 07/2014.  My most recent Equifax report shows NR for 01/2013 (old resport reports this as 120 days late) and then shows 120 day lates for 02/2013 to 07/2014 when the account was brought current before being paid off in 01/2015.  Do I potentially have an argument to have these 120 day lates removed from Equifax since the date of first deliquency was in 2011?  Or since I was paying on the account the entire time, does that actually hurt me?  My scores stand as Equifax: 708, Transunion: 741, and Experian: 769.

[FireMedic1]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

Let's see if I understand this correctly, I have some 120 day lates from an old BOA credit card during the time I was laid off from work.  This card was never charged off as I set up a payment plan with BOA.  I closed the account in 2012 and set up the payment plan.  I pulled a very old Equifax credit report from 2014 and it shows 120 day lates starting with 07/2012 to 07/2014 when the account was brought current (it only shows back two years though).  The account was fully paid off on 01/2015.  The account first went dilenquent in 06/2011 and was never brought current until 07/2014 and fully paid off in 01/2015.  BTW, I about $8000 so a lump sum payment was not possible which was the purpose of the payment plan.

Equifax is the only CRA still reporting these lates.  Experian NEVER reported these lates and always listed the account as in good standing.  It never reported the lates and always listed 07/2012 to 07/2014 as OK....not that I am complaining.  Transunion USED to report this account and the lates, but now Transunion does not report this account at all.  Starting in 06/2018 the delinquencies started to fall off my report.  They deliquencies fell off through 11/18 when the account was removed altogether.  Like I said my old Equifax credit report from 2014 showed 120 day lates from 07/2012 to 07/2014.  My most recent Equifax report shows NR for 01/2013 (old resport reports this as 120 days late) and then shows 120 day lates for 02/2013 to 07/2014 when the account was brought current before being paid off in 01/2015.  Do I potentially have an argument to have these 120 day lates removed from Equifax since the date of first deliquency was in 2011?  Or since I was paying on the account the entire time, does that actually hurt me?  My scores stand as Equifax: 708, Transunion: 741, and Experian: 769.

---

If I got this right. Lots of back and forth with dates. Not really on these dates 02/2013 to 07/2014. They'll fall off 07/2024   Anything older than 7 yrs old shouldnt be on your reports. Probably why you see NR where there used to be a late on 01/2013? Kinda lucky its only on EQ if I read this correctly.

[Anonymous]

I have gone back through all my older credit reports for this year (2019) and Equifax is reporting 120 day lates from 02/2013 to 07/2014.  The account was then current unitl is was paid off in 01/2015.  My credit report with Equifax for this account has not changed since, at least, 01/2017 (so over 2 1/2 years).  I did have 120 day lates before 02/2013 but the reports only show the last two payment years.

I have an old  07/2014 credit report that I dug out that showed 120 day lates from 07/2012 to 07/2014 (again only showing last two years of payments) even though the loan went dilequent in 2011.  I do not dispute that I had lates on this account.  I was laid off and set up a payment plan with BOA so the account was not brought current until after 07/2014 and then fully paid off in 01/2015.

My question is how do lates fall off when the account was never charged off and you kept making payments on the account.  Some people seem to suggest that the lates drop off monthly so my last 120 day late would drop off in 07/2021 (7 years from last late).  However, some people say that the lates should drop off starting with the first in the string of lates in which case they should have already been removed, correct since the account went late in 2011?  I am wondering if this is what happened with Transunion.  The lates dropped off and then they removed the account altogether?  And I have no idea why Experian never reported these lates....lucky for me 

I know charge offs hurt your credit but it would already be gone off of my report if I had let it charge off.  But the 120 day lates are definitely hurting me by about 60 points or so.  If the account had charged off, it would have charged off in 2011 and have been gone off my CR in 2018.  I could have contacted the collection company and set up a payment plan with them instead of setting one up through BOA.  And my CR would be baddie free now.  So I am being penalized for a longer period of time for actually paying down the account and not letting it charge off