On my EQ report, 3 of my student loans have the status "too new to rate"

These 3 loans are OLD incarnations of the same student loans that I have now. (Sallie Mae added a couple of letters and "poof" I have a new TL)

The same 3 TLs show an open date of 1996 and a last reporting in 1999. (Current incarnations of same loans are reporting fine...)

3 years seems like a sufficient time to rate me... On top of that, I have (legitimate) lates on all of the 3 accounts. So the rating probably isn't even that great, but I have (overall) "paid as agreed" I never defaulted or anyhting like that, just had some problems in 1999...

Does it hurt my FICO? I don't want to waste my time chasing ghosts. I assumed it was no big deal until I read an earlier post. Now, I wonder...

I'm confused. How is it actually reporting?

SLMA LSCK (Individual)

Credit Grantor Contact Information: Not on record

Account Number: XXXX
Account Type: Installment
Credit Limit (High Credit): $1,860
Minimum Monthly Payment (Terms): $14

Date Opened: April, 1996
Date of Last Activity: September, 1999
Description: Student loan Account transferred or sold

Last Report on October, 1999
Balance: $0
Current status: Too new to rate
Past Due Amount:

90+ days late: 6

Same loan is also reported as:

SALLIE MAE (Individual)

Account Type: Installment
Credit Limit(High Credit): $1,860
Minimum Monthly Payment (Terms): $16

Date Opened: April, 1996
Date of Last Activity: January, 2004
Description: Account transferred or sold

Last Report on February, 2004
Balance: $0
Current status: Pays account as agreed
Past Due Amount:

No Lates

And is now included in my consolidated loan:

US DEPT OF ED (Individual)

Account Type: Installment
Credit Limit(High Credit): $87,075
Minimum Monthly Payment (Terms) $867

Date Opened: February, 2004
Date of Last Activity: August, 2005
Description: Student loan - payment deferred

Last Report on August, 2005
Balance: $87,033
Current status: Pays account as agreed
Past Due Amount: $0

No lates

The same pattern holds true for the other 2 loans that I am concerned about. They both have the extra TL that reads "too new to rate" and includes the late payments. (I was indeed late! It was 2/99-7/99, I can't wait for all those student loan "lates" to drop off!)

Thanks for looking at this!

Well, all I can suggest is that you dispute the original TL. It says that it's too new to rate because it hasn't changed since that last report. It's not going to change either, unless you dispute it, because SM doesn't go back to update old loans on their own (neither does any other lender).

The risk is having it updated with information that may be derogatory - more than you may have attached to that loan in the first place. Another thing is, depending upon the CRA it CAN affect you negatively if they update it with derogatory information - EQ is notorious for using the Date of Status to key your scores off of, instead of the Date of Last Activity.

The truth is, at this point it's a crap shoot. Most lenders who do a manual review will see that note and realize that it's old. I don't know that it's hurting you all that much at this point either.

Thanks for your quick and informative response.

I won't dispute it right now. I'll wait until next August when all the lates have fallen off and then I'll revisit the issue. I know that I have not been late since then, so hopefully It'll be safe at that point.

Does that sound like a better plan?

I might have missed it, but when was your payment late?

Oh, sorry, I wasn't clear.
I had serious financial problems in 1999. All of my late payments are from that year, all between Feb and August. You know how it is with the student loans... I missed one payment to Sallie Mae but it counts as 5... etc.!
Thank goodness the loans never went into default, but still, waiting for the lates to disappear has been, well, a long wait!
At this point, my reports show the following total number of late payments for student loans:

EX: 41
EQ: 31
TU: 20

The last late payment was in August of 1999. I have a whole spread sheet I created to track when these lates should disappear.

Dec 2005 - 2
Jan 2006 - 3
Feb 2006 - 10
Mar 2006 - 10
Apr 2006 - 10
May 2006 - 13
Jun 2006 - 18
Jul 2006 - 15
Aug 2006 - 11

Yes, I am way too excited about my soon to be clean report! I am quite sure that I have no lates after this. I went back to grad school at that point and faithfully filled out the appropriate forms. Since I got my graduate degree, I have faithfully made the payments on my Sallie Mae Private loan and Consolidated and deferred my other loans.

I suspect that Experian is correct regarding the number of lates from 1999. I don't have the records to dispute them if they are wrong... I am too scared to try to dispute any of the lates because I'm afraid that Sallie Mae, et al, will simply update and add more lates to the other reports. I've read too many horror stories here...

I'm not terribly afraid of losing history if I were to get any of these deleted. I have a few accounts that are older that still appear and have a perfect history. But I'm sure I don't have a complete understanding of how history is computed.

I also have 6 CCs with perfect history that range from 3-10 years old.

God Bless Pier One! I applied in 1986, in store, because I wanted the free mug. They are still reporting on all 3 reports, OPEN! Hee Hee! I'm not saying that they are MAKING my score, perhaps it doesn't help at all, IDK, I just think it's so cute, still just sitting there, $200 limit, anytime I want $200 worht of rattan, I'm all set!

Alrighty then.

I'm thinking about those lates ... hmmmmmmmm ...

You know that SM can be tricky to deal with, and it's just ... weird the way they do things. At this point, I'll go out on a limb and say that those six year old plus lates really aren't hurting you THAT much. I think you may do more harm than good by disputing them because, as you said, who knows how they'll be updated.

My advice would be to leave "well enough" alone. You really don't have that much more time until they're gone of their own volition, and you have lots to lose if you dispute in this particular case.



I can't believe I just said not to dispute something. This is like a FIRST ...

*looks for red pen to write note in planner*

Thanks for your input. That is exactly what I thought, and it's good to hear that you agree. In my case I do think it's better to just wait for those stinkers to age off. Sallie Mae scares me more than the IRS!

Then perhaps next August, when they're gone, I can ask Sallie Mae if they could simply help me straighten up my file. Maybe point out that those 3 "Too new to rate" are actually duplicates (They have the same dates and amounts...)
Perhaps Sallie Mae might even get rid of them if I ask them nicely, so long as there is nothing negative on them.

If not, then I can go to the CRA and dispute as duplicate, or at least NOT "too new to rate"

Well, actually, I guess I could even dispute the offending 3 as obsolete (Next September) right?

I assume that they will not contain negative information by next September, since the "lates" will be gone. So the accounts probably won't come off all by themselves... (My understanding is that a deragatory account must fall off in 7 years but a neutral/positive report can stay on 10 years plus)

But I could request that they be removed since the date of last activity was September 1999?

I know this is a year from now... I'm just trying to get my game plan in place.

Hope the weather is OK down there in Texas, it sure is storming like crazy here in so-called Sunny So Cal!