Search the Community

Greeting Everyone, I am a new member. I want to thank all of you for your sincere efforts and guidance. Devoting time to help others is actually a best good some could offer. Thank you all. Now about me. I am working to clean up my credit. I have a student loan that is currently under deferment until 02/2016. Back in 2014, When it went to repayment phase, I was overseas. By the time I cam back in Aug 2014, the loan was already 180 Days late. I applied for Econ Harship that was granted and back dated to Feb 2014(The original date when the repayment was due). I have recently noticed that it is being reported to my Credit File as 180 days late despite Econ Hardship Deferment back dating.I disputed with the CRA but it came back as "updated" with same late data. I think my question is how I can resolve this with the CRA. The OC does not seems to understand that Econ deferment means as if the loan is being paid as agreed, and unwilling to report a removal of late status. My understanding is that when deferment is back dated it reads as no default has been occurred and loan is being paid as agreed. Is it possible that contest it of justify it through precedents are legal aspects. I may be misunderstanding. Please help me.

Well, I'm on my journey to try and buy a house. My scores are currently EQ 635, EXP 585, TU 601. One of the major things hurting me are my student loans. 15 months ago I allowed them to go 90 days delinquent before I got smart and decided to fix my credit. I paid one monthly payment to Nelnet, but at the time there were 9 different accounts, but only 1 bill. So, the dilemma is, I paid one payment, received one bill, but the delinquencies show as 9 separate delinquencies. I am hoping that in November I may see a bump in the credit, as the delinquencies will all be over 12 months old. But, is there any way to get the credit bureau's to show this as one delinquency in stead of 9? I received one bill, and made one payment. I didn't even know I had 9 different accounts until I looked up my credit report. Help!

I need some clarification: How long does it take a TL to fall off a credit report? 7 years from date of first delinquency or date of last delinquency? I am looking at my TU report, hard copy right now. I have a [30] from 03/2008, that would be date of first delinquency or not? (that is my first missed payment of this account and it says under account summary the date closed is 04/2008!?!) After the [30], there are 3 months of [60] then [OK] until 7/2009. From 7/2009, it goes [30], [60], [90], [120], [120], then 8 straight [CO]'s, with the last [CO] being 07/2010. DOFD or DOLD are not listed under account summary. However, date of last payment is listed at 05/2009. (even though i have an [OK] at 06/2009). The estimated month and year for it to fall off is listed at 05/2016... 7 years after date of last payment. Sorry if this is confusing... but according to this data... when should this TL fall off?

I think I got the title wrong but I don't know how to edit it, it should read: First day of default being reported as first day of delinquency I have 3 loans with Department of Education, originally they were Direct Loans in 2007, now they are called Direct Stafford Subsidized. I have consolidated them last year, they show "paid collection" as of now. Also, these 3 loans share the same first day of delinquency since I never paid for them once they got out of forbearance initially (other than through tax offset). Now, the problem with the first day of delinquency. I am waiting for these loans to fall off this year and I found an error that will prolong them further than they must stay on. When I go to the nslds.ed.gov to view my loans, even the past paid ones, I can see detailed info of each loan. The details say REPAYMENT started on 7/2007 and then DEFAULTED 5/2008. However, on all credit reports it says that first day of delinquency is 5/2008. Correct me if I am wrong, but first day of delinquency is not equal to first day of default, right? Especially that non-educational institutions have 120 days before it becomes a default, I think. But here it is 270 days difference that pushed my hopes and dreams of having a clean report by another 9 months. Unbearable! I have already waited for a while... I can see that the first day of default was calculated correctly (see image below): Per Higher Education Act of 1965 Sec. 435(i) it says that the loan becomes in default after 270 days since non-payment, that is ~9 months. So, if the due date is on or about 07/2007 and the first day of delinquency would be 30 days late (I am reaching here), about on 08/2007, I'd say. Then add 9 months and you get about 05/2008. Sure, it is possible I fudge the numbers, let me know if I am, just my line of reasoning. If I am incorrect, please let me know. This is a screen show for one of the 3 loans, others are the same date wise, just $$$ differs. Point is, something is up and it might be affecting you too, do check! Instead of these negatives falling off this year, because of incorrect reporting it is being pushed up another 9 months for no good reason. I called Dept. of Edu. today, people I spoke to have said that they have no idea who is reporting it internally, evidently Direct Loans were distributed to many different sub-departments within the Dept. of Edu (once Direct Loans ceased to exist). However, the people I spoke to did see that the first day of delinquency is set at 5/2008 in the system, they don't care why or who set it. They are unwilling to change, say they cannot do that even if they wanted. All they could advise me was to stop tying their phone lines and start disputing this info with the credit agencies. So, I did with all 3 credit agencies, sent them all a fax with a letter, included my math (hope it is solid), and printouts from the website that show dates I am falling back to as my proof. Well, what are your thoughts on the subject?

I request advice with the following situation (reported in order of facts): The wife's credit report showed a 120+ day delinquent payment. She called credit bureau and was told it was probably information mix-up She called creBank of America that reported late payment, and was told her balances were all $0 and all her accounts closed. She called again and was told the same She requested a letter showing this She received a letter regarding 8/5, stating one of her accounts was closed She received another letter 8/9 saying investigation showed her accounts were overdue She called 8/12 and representative noted she had a balance due of $200, that has grown with late charges to $400. Representative noted that they see she attempted to pay off and close the account in May, but there was a digit missing, and so payment did not go through. Credit card representative said they probably mailed notices to her address -- for which wife used an old address not currently in use. Wife explained that she never got a phone call at any point. Credit card representative did not dispute this. Call with representative was not recorded. What to do now? Her credit score is 100pts lower for a $200 bill. Credit company shows an attempt to pay and acknowledges no phone call, but may have plausible deniability on sending monthly mailers noting account was delinquent. I'm not sure where this mail ever went to, and whether it was just returned to credit card company. I am more concerned with 100pts score vs. the insane late fees (how do they got to $200 in late fees for 120 days?). The credit card company ha NO INCENTIVE to get the amounts paid current if they can just rack up these late fees and hold you hostage over your credit report. This seems like it should be illegal (i.e., you shouldn't be able to charge both $200 in late fees + damage someone's credit report without a phone call) What to do now?

I just signed up to this website today, and I am still not quite sure how it all works. I tried looking through some of the posts for the answer to my question, but the site was so big it was kind of overwhelming. Anyway, my question is, is that I just viewed my credit report and found that I have a medical account for $1000 that was first opened in november 1 2007. it was then updated november 1 2008. I never made any payments to this account (I was not aware of it until now). I read that after 7 years any delinquent account is deleted from your report. Is this true? and if it is, would it be from 2007 or 2008? with there only being 1 year left before it is deleted, would it even be worth trying to pay off? I only have 2 open accounts that I am paying off on my report, and have paid off a car. one of the accounts is a couple of months away from being paid off, and the other is a revolving account. my score is pretty low right now, but I figure it would go up significantly when I pay off one of the accounts in a few months. is this true? I know I have lots of questions, but I am really just starting out with a family and just now paying attention to my credit. i'm a little overwhelmed!!

Some of you may have read my post about helping my friend with an issue concerning how US Bank is reporting the account history. When I compared the online credit reports, TU and EX have it differently, but a month apart. So let's use an example going back to 2011, TU has it:July (90), August (30), September (OK), October (30) while EX has it: July (60), August (90), September (30), October (OK) In other words, the Experian is always a month behind TU. As my friend has no other baddies in the last 24 months, nor do I or my GF, I have no way of knowing if this is a common thing for there to be differences on dates between the CRAs, or if this is a one of a kind issue? Anyone else see this? Also, I did not have friend's paper reports with me, so not sure if this is simply an online thing or if it holds true on paper as well.

Five years ago, I fell into some credit trouble, but came out of it. I got 60 days late on several credit cards. All were paid off in full, then closed. Two of the credit bureaus show these accounts as having hit 90 days, while the other correctly shows 60. My question is, after nearly 5 years, I am sure I could dispute based on the accounts never having been 90 days late, and they would likely be removed altogether. As they are closed accounts, are they helping me at all just by being there? Is the status (90 days late) even hurting my score anymore as it was 5 years ago and the accounts are closed? In other words, is it better to leave them alone, to try to have them removed, or does it make no difference at all given how much time has passed? Dave