• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

credit card account question

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

can a credit card account be re-reported/re-aged?

FLORIDA

After a charged-off credit account has served it's 7.5 year reporting period and has been automatically deleted from a credit file in accordance with the FCRA, can the original creditor of that account continually re-report it?

I had a charge-off in 1997. It was automatically removed from all 3 of my credit reports back in November or December of 2004 in accordance with the FCRA. This month I was shocked when I received an equifax alert showing that this account has again been re-reported to my consumer reports with a history that is absolutely incorrect.

For instance, the new account this creditor has now reported shows that in 2003 the account was "paid as agreed" whereas in 2004 and 2005 it was 180+ days late. It also shows the last payment as being made in February of 2005. There hasn't been a payment made on the account since the beginning of 1997. The activity description field shows that the account was "SOLD/TRANSFERRED" but the original creditor, Suncoast Schools Federal Credit Union still shows as the owner of it. Additionally, there are no collection accounts that are on my file(s) to perhaps indicate someone recently bought it.

- Can the original creditor re-report the account after the 7.5 year allowable reporting time period has been exhausted?

- Would selling the account to a collection agency before the expiration of the allowed 7.5 year time period permit the clock to "reset"? What if this account was sold after the 7.5 year time period expired, such as between November/December of 04 til current?

- The information they're reporting is obviously friviolous. None of the historical payment activity they're showing is correct. What must I do per FCRA "required resolution procedures" before I can bring suit against the creditor for reporting fraudulant account information?

PS - There are no law suits, judgments, or other parties involved. This is an individual account that was held by me which I originally opened in January of 1997 with Suncoast Schools Federal Credit Union. The charge-off amount was in either 2000 or 2001 in the amount of $1900.

Thank you.
 
Last edited:


Ladynred

Senior Member
After a charged-off credit account has served it's 7.5 year reporting period and has been automatically deleted from a credit file in accordance with the FCRA, can the original creditor of that account continually re-report it?

No, they cannot, it would be a violation of the FCRA to report an obsolete debt.

Would selling the account to a collection agency before the expiration of the allowed 7.5 year time period permit the clock to "reset"? What if this account was sold after the 7.5 year time period expired, such as between November/December of 04 til current?

No, and No ! The account cannot be put back on - not legally. If they are changing dates, they are illegally re-aging the debt - sue them for it !

The information they're reporting is obviously friviolous. None of the historical payment activity they're showing is correct. What must I do per FCRA "required resolution procedures" before I can bring suit against the creditor for reporting fraudulant account information?

Dispute it first as obsolete. Attack every bit of the tradeline that is incorrect. If you have an older report showing the CORRECt dates, use it.

The charge-off amount was in either 2000 or 2001 in the amount of $1900.

When, EXACTLY was it charged-off and when did it first go continuously delinquent ?
 
I'm afraid it's no longer about the 7.5 year reporting period. Disputing it will most likely result in the information being deleted. It's principal, accountability for the actions of a creditor to unrighteously (and I believe to have intentionally) inflicted damage to my credit state even after I served my sentence as handed down by the FTC/FCRA. Of course I'm interested in having the information removed, that's a given. The chances of my success with doing so are only in my favor. The information this creditor reported can remain on my report until a court deems it invalid and orders it removed. I believe I can seek damages for the complications caused by their stacked violations of the FCRA. I'm doing my homework little by little and will consult an attorney soon.
 

Ladynred

Senior Member
Yes, you have the right to seek damages, but only under 623(b), not under 623(a), a distinction many people screw up.
 

cyana24

Member
SCREWCREDIT said:
um in that case the plantiff lost.. so you're telling me I have no right to seek damages?

Unless this decision has been overturned (again) since 2-11-04, Linda Johnson (plaintiff) won - in other words, MBNA lost their appeal of Johnson's approx. $90K award. That's why it's considered a landmark case of a consumer's right to sue under 623(b):

APPEALS COURT REJECTS MBNA VERIFICATION PRACTICES

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has ruled
that creditors must perform "reasonable" investigations after
receiving a customer dispute under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. In
this case, MBNA America maintained a computerized customer information
system that reported that the plaintiff was responsible for $17,000 in
credit card charges. The plaintiff had disputed the charges, but MBNA
continued to furnish information about the debt to credit reporting
agencies. MBNA claimed that the FCRA only required a cursory review
of customer disputes, and that the company usually did not analyze
documents or any other information outside the computerized customer
information system. The Fourth Circuit rejected MBNA's arguments and
let stand a $90,000 actual damage award to the plaintiff: "It would
make little sense to conclude that, in creating a system intended to
give consumers a means to dispute -- and, ultimately, correct --
inaccurate information on their credit reports, Congress used the term
'investigation' to include superficial, unreasonable inquiries by
creditors."
The case is likely to change dispute processes nationwide
by requiring creditors to more fully investigate consumers' claims
that incorrect information has been provided to a credit reporting
agency.

Linda Johnson v. MBNA America, No. 03-1235 (4th Cir. Feb. 11, 2004)
 
SCREWCREDIT said:
um in that case the plantiff lost.. so you're telling me I have no right to seek damages?

Don't be discuraged. It is sometimes hard to keep track of the good guys and bad guys in these cases and appeals.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
Top