Assistance would be really appreciated. Here is my story:

I disputed lates on my closed Citibank student loans. in June 2004 with TU. These lates were a result of a "miscommunication" with Citibank telling me I did not have to make payments on my loans since I was consolidating. I am unsure if they told me this because they thought I was consolidating with them, when in fact I consolidated with the William D. Ford program.

After investigation, not only were the lates not removed but now all these lates were being reported that never happened, i.e. my loans were paid by a consolidation loan in 2/2001 and now all of the sudden I have lates on my loan accounts for 2003. This very problematic because I had like 15 loans with them. So, basically, I have 15 accounts with multiple lates on them after the loans were paid off. Now, if it was just TU's report I would blame them, but my Experian report also is reported the multiple lates after 2001 when the loans were paid off. Additionally, there is a discrepancy with the pre-consolidation lates not being reported consistenly on the reports. For example, I had a couple of lates in 1998 when there was a lag on my forebearance approval. TU is now reporting these in 1999. Experian is reporting these in 1998.

In an ideal world, I would like to have the TL's either removed or at the very least have them reported properly. Obviously, Citibank is at fault. How do I deal with this so as to not make it any worse?

THANKS MUCH!!!!!

self-interest bump!

I have the same problem with Citibank. I have lates at the end of 2003 and the middle of 2004 30, 60 days late. The account was closed in 2001 due to consolidation. The balance shows as zero but yet they keep adding these late to my credit file. wassup with that? I disputed with the credit agencies and hoping this will take care of it.

This again is the way student loans are reported. If you were 60 days late when you consolidated, it will continue to report that 60 day late but closed. It will probably come back as verified.

That is fine and dandy but if the loan was consolidated with someone else in '01, how can they report it 60 days late in 03/04? (2/3 years later after it was paid/transfered? At least that is how I'm reading it.

They are simply reporting that you had or were "60 days late" at some point.

What it looks like this person was saying is

OP had X number of loans. We'll go with 3 (A, B, and C respectively) since I don't know for definate.

A, B, and C were consolidated into loan D in 2001.

Loan B however shows a 0 balance (as it should) since 2001 but 60 days late in '03 and '04 which of course is not possible since there was 0 balance since it was consolidated.

At least, that's what I got from the OP's posts.