EX says neg info can be reported after filing BK

[gogogophers]

Hi All,

 

I know this is kinda BK related but I'm going to post it in the credit forum because it involves a reporting question.

 

I filed a complaint with the CFPB after trying to get Experian to clean up some late payments that were reported by credit cards after I filed BK. Experian actually made the problem worse by adding inaccurate information every time I disputed the lates, which is why I finally pulled the CFPB into the picture. The response from Experian/NCAC says:

 

"Although an account is included in bankruptcy, the creditor may also show the payment history of the account until the bankruptcy is discharged."

I have always heard that things like late payments cannot be reported after the BK is filed, as that is when the protective injunction starts. Admittedly, I have not tracked down the specific statutes myself (but plan to).

 

Have I been off base all this time? EQ and TU were quick to suppress post-filing reporting so I guess I just assumed it was the norm. Is EX just blowing smoke up my skirt?

 

[hrguy]

I have to pull up the specifics on this as well, but no - Experian never suppreses payment history even on IIB accounts. The only way is to make the creditor manually remove them and that is hit or miss. I have only had success with a few of them. This is quite a common experience for BK filers with Experian.

 

Maybe enough complaints to the CFPB will make them follow suit like TU and EQ.

[gogogophers]

I'm really surprised by this... I've done plenty of research and still managed to "miss" this issue. Wow. How disappointing. I don't know why I was so entrenched in the idea that they couldn't report the lates after filing.

 

For anyone looking for more info, here is a good article that puts the issue in layman's terms. It is dated 5/3/2013 and recaps a recent court challenge (and failure). EX was specifically noted but was not part of the lawsuit. I'm guessing the ruling will strengthen EX's stance and may even inspire EQ and TU to toughen up a bit.

 

http://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/reports-of-late-payments-to-credit-repor-69240/

 

Hope it is ok to post the link.

[hrguy]

Interesting article

[wow]

This is correct. The CRA's will not remove the pmt history until the BK is fully discharged. Once it is discharged, all accounts should immediately change to IIB and then pmt history should be changed. You may have to dispute some things to clean up what is missed. This actually makes sense bc why would they report 0 balances if the BK is not fully discharged i. e. may still be dismissed and you may still owe the debts.

 

Have you done any reading in the BK forum?

[ArchonInitiative]

I agree with Experian (wow!) on this. Not all bankruptcy filings become final,i.e. fully-discharged.

[hrguy]

This is correct. The CRA's will not remove the pmt history until the BK is fully discharged. Once it is discharged, all accounts should immediately change to IIB and then pmt history should be changed. You may have to dispute some things to clean up what is missed. This actually makes sense bc why would they report 0 balances if the BK is not fully discharged i. e. may still be dismissed and you may still owe the debts.

 

Have you done any reading in the BK forum?

I do not think you read the question that was posed;

 

It was not statusing the accounts to 0 - this is pertaining to AFTER the BK is over, and leaving negative payment information PRIOR to the BK. Experian does not remove payment history, Equifax and Transunion does, this is what we are talking about...not PRE-BK.

Edited May 22, 2013 by hrguy

[wow]

 

This is correct. The CRA's will not remove the pmt history until the BK is fully discharged. Once it is discharged, all accounts should immediately change to IIB and then pmt history should be changed. You may have to dispute some things to clean up what is missed. This actually makes sense bc why would they report 0 balances if the BK is not fully discharged i. e. may still be dismissed and you may still owe the debts.

 

Have you done any reading in the BK forum?

I do not think you read the question that was posed;

 

It was not statusing the accounts to 0 - this is pertaining to AFTER the BK is over, and leaving negative payment information PRIOR to the BK. Experian does not remove payment history, Equifax and Transunion does, this is what we are talking about...not PRE-BK.

 

I wasn't talking about Pre-Bk either, I was talking about pre-discharge...

 

EX will remove and or correct pmt history once the BK is discharged, OP will just have to fight them on it or go through the reporting company.

 

OP should be sending letters to each company that is reporting during the automatic stay. The letters should state that they cease reporting bc this is considered continuing collections which is against Federal BK laws. OP should also threaten to sue and file violations with the BK court if the TL's are not corrected within 10 days. Mailed CMRR. Most companies will not want to play with the BK court and will correct the TL's immediately. Some will just delete the TL altogether especially if it's old.

[hrguy]

 

 

This is correct. The CRA's will not remove the pmt history until the BK is fully discharged. Once it is discharged, all accounts should immediately change to IIB and then pmt history should be changed. You may have to dispute some things to clean up what is missed. This actually makes sense bc why would they report 0 balances if the BK is not fully discharged i. e. may still be dismissed and you may still owe the debts.

 

Have you done any reading in the BK forum?

I do not think you read the question that was posed;

 

It was not statusing the accounts to 0 - this is pertaining to AFTER the BK is over, and leaving negative payment information PRIOR to the BK. Experian does not remove payment history, Equifax and Transunion does, this is what we are talking about...not PRE-BK.

 

I wasn't talking about Pre-Bk either, I was talking about pre-discharge...

 

EX will remove and or correct pmt history once the BK is discharged, OP will just have to fight them on it or go through the reporting company.

 

OP should be sending letters to each company that is reporting during the automatic stay. The letters should state that they cease reporting bc this is considered continuing collections which is against Federal BK laws. OP should also threaten to sue and file violations with the BK court if the TL's are not corrected within 10 days. Mailed CMRR. Most companies will not want to play with the BK court and will correct the TL's immediately. Some will just delete the TL altogether especially if it's old.

You must not have read the article....

[wow]

 

 

 

This is correct. The CRA's will not remove the pmt history until the BK is fully discharged. Once it is discharged, all accounts should immediately change to IIB and then pmt history should be changed. You may have to dispute some things to clean up what is missed. This actually makes sense bc why would they report 0 balances if the BK is not fully discharged i. e. may still be dismissed and you may still owe the debts.

 

Have you done any reading in the BK forum?

I do not think you read the question that was posed;

 

It was not statusing the accounts to 0 - this is pertaining to AFTER the BK is over, and leaving negative payment information PRIOR to the BK. Experian does not remove payment history, Equifax and Transunion does, this is what we are talking about...not PRE-BK.

 

I wasn't talking about Pre-Bk either, I was talking about pre-discharge...

 

EX will remove and or correct pmt history once the BK is discharged, OP will just have to fight them on it or go through the reporting company.

 

OP should be sending letters to each company that is reporting during the automatic stay. The letters should state that they cease reporting bc this is considered continuing collections which is against Federal BK laws. OP should also threaten to sue and file violations with the BK court if the TL's are not corrected within 10 days. Mailed CMRR. Most companies will not want to play with the BK court and will correct the TL's immediately. Some will just delete the TL altogether especially if it's old.

You must not have read the article....

Was it in the original post/question?

[hrguy]

3rd post -

[hrguy]

 

After filing for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, a consumer discovered that her credit report listed delinquent payments to a bank even though she had been current with her payments up to the date she filed. After disputing the report without correction by the bank, the consumer sued the bank for violations of federal and state fair credit reporting laws and the state unfair competition law. The bank filed a motion to dismiss. The federal district court granted the motion, noting that federal and state laws do not prohibit reporting of late payments during bankruptcy proceedings. (Giovanni v. Bank of America (Slip Copy, N.D.Cal., April 17, 2013).

[wow]

 

 

After filing for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, a consumer discovered that her credit report listed delinquent payments to a bank even though she had been current with her payments up to the date she filed. After disputing the report without correction by the bank, the consumer sued the bank for violations of federal and state fair credit reporting laws and the state unfair competition law. The bank filed a motion to dismiss. The federal district court granted the motion, noting that federal and state laws do not prohibit reporting of late payments during bankruptcy proceedings. (Giovanni v. Bank of America (Slip Copy, N.D.Cal., April 17, 2013).

No I didn't see that, I was responding to the original post. But according to this, she filed under FCRA reporting laws, wouldn't it be different under Federal BK laws, through the BK court specifically?

Edited May 22, 2013 by wow

[hrguy]

 

 

 

After filing for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, a consumer discovered that her credit report listed delinquent payments to a bank even though she had been current with her payments up to the date she filed. After disputing the report without correction by the bank, the consumer sued the bank for violations of federal and state fair credit reporting laws and the state unfair competition law. The bank filed a motion to dismiss. The federal district court granted the motion, noting that federal and state laws do not prohibit reporting of late payments during bankruptcy proceedings. (Giovanni v. Bank of America (Slip Copy, N.D.Cal., April 17, 2013).

No I didn't see that, I was responding to the original post. But according to this, she filed under FCRA reporting laws, wouldn't it be different under Federal BK laws, through the BK court specifically?

Well - you bring a good point there, that could be possible but I wonder if the federal ruling would spill over. The Goodfellow Vs. Discover case provided sanctions in BK Court but this was 10 years ago;

 

http://www.brokencredit.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/Goodfellow.pdf

[wow]

 

 

 

 

After filing for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, a consumer discovered that her credit report listed delinquent payments to a bank even though she had been current with her payments up to the date she filed. After disputing the report without correction by the bank, the consumer sued the bank for violations of federal and state fair credit reporting laws and the state unfair competition law. The bank filed a motion to dismiss. The federal district court granted the motion, noting that federal and state laws do not prohibit reporting of late payments during bankruptcy proceedings. (Giovanni v. Bank of America (Slip Copy, N.D.Cal., April 17, 2013).

No I didn't see that, I was responding to the original post. But according to this, she filed under FCRA reporting laws, wouldn't it be different under Federal BK laws, through the BK court specifically?

Well - you bring a good point there, that could be possible but I wonder if the federal ruling would spill over. The Goodfellow Vs. Discover case provided sanctions in BK Court but this was 10 years ago;

 

http://www.brokencredit.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/Goodfellow.pdf

And it looks like Discover was reporting after the discharge as well.

 

If I were OP, I would still send the letters to the DF's. That is what I did (successfully, although it was a few years back) and I think it would still be a valid argument now based on BK laws specifically.

[gogogophers]

Yep, I was talking about payment information being reported after filing BK, not the payment info reported prior to filing. Sorry if I muddied that up.

 

I'm definitely going to keep the possibility of using BK laws with the individual creditors in my back pocket. First I'm going to try a different strategy: the dispute was initiated from a report that I pulled after being denied credit and Experian took longer than 30 days to investigate before I escalated it to the CFPB. I'm hoping I can use that to get some info deleted. I normally don't mind negative info reporting (as long as it is accurate) but this one just rubs me the wrong way so I'm going to keep working on it.

 

The CFPB complaint was not really about the lates being reported. It was about the fact that EX had been dinking around with this and making the info more incorrect with each dispute for many months, plus did not respond within an appropriate timeframe. I just wanted EX to get a little slap on the wrist for their sloppiness.

 

And yes, I did my research witih BK forum. Lots of it, actually, 2-3 years ago. That's where I came away with the firm understanding that late payments could not be reported after filing. Now I know better. After looking at recent cases, I just wanted to post the above-linked article for anyone who might be confused about what to expect, just like I was.

 

Thanks for all of the input and ideas... it is very much appreciated.

[art]

This is correct. The CRA's will not remove the pmt history until the BK is fully discharged. Once it is discharged, all accounts should immediately change to IIB and then pmt history should be changed. You may have to dispute some things to clean up what is missed. This actually makes sense bc why would they report 0 balances if the BK is not fully discharged i. e. may still be dismissed and you may still owe the debts.

 

Have you done any reading in the BK forum?I

I am going through the same issues but my Bk is discharged.I have documented proof wherebI disputed this several times. Experian is violating the FCRA, and I do plan to sue. They have seferal of my accounts listed as chargeoffs-Im going after them and the creditors.