Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
mmalone120

Authorized User: Late Payments

Recommended Posts

Does getting removed from someone's account as an authorized user remove the record from my credit report entirely?

 

I'm listed on two accounts (Amex Blue and Best Buy Visa) of a family member and they just had two 30 day late hits. If I ask to get removed as an authorized user on these accounts, will the negative credit hits be removed from my credit report? Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My experience was I had my wife remove me from her CSP this summer. Then the next month disputed with TU as not mine / not responsible and it completely disappeared from all three in about 2 more weeks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My experience was I had my wife remove me from her CSP this summer. Then the next month disputed with TU as not mine / not responsible and it completely disappeared from all three in about 2 more weeks.

 

My experience mimics this. Easy as pie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice, thanks all. Not even sure if the late payments will appear on my report. But if they do, it's good to know I'll be able to get rid of them.

Edited by mmalone120

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was an AU on one of my wife's old cards, and she was behind on it before our BK back in '11. It did report as late, but (oddly enough) not IIB.

 

Like others have said, I just disputed it as "not mine", added a note that I was just an AU, and they pulled it off in a matter of 2 or 3 days (both EQ and TU -- it wasn't on EX).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are reports here on CB with EX refusing to delete AU tradelines.

Even for someone who is no longer an AU on that account? That would be an FCRA violation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There are reports here on CB with EX refusing to delete AU tradelines.

Even for someone who is no longer an AU on that account? That would be an FCRA violation.

That's what some have posted.

 

How do you figure it's an FCRA violation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

There are reports here on CB with EX refusing to delete AU tradelines.

Even for someone who is no longer an AU on that account? That would be an FCRA violation.

That's what some have posted.

How do you figure it's an FCRA violation?

What? Really?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

There are reports here on CB with EX refusing to delete AU tradelines.

Even for someone who is no longer an AU on that account? That would be an FCRA violation.
That's what some have posted.

How do you figure it's an FCRA violation?

What? Really?

How do you figure it's an FCRA violation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

There are reports here on CB with EX refusing to delete AU tradelines.

Even for someone who is no longer an AU on that account? That would be an FCRA violation.
That's what some have posted.

How do you figure it's an FCRA violation?

What? Really?

How do you figure it's an FCRA violation?

15 U.S.C. § 1681e and 15 U.S.C. § 1681i, for starters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

There are reports here on CB with EX refusing to delete AU tradelines.

Even for someone who is no longer an AU on that account? That would be an FCRA violation.
That's what some have posted.

How do you figure it's an FCRA violation?

What? Really?
How do you figure it's an FCRA violation?
15 U.S.C. § 1681e and 15 U.S.C. § 1681i, for starters.

Do you mean § 607 ( b ) ?

 

Accuracy. Were you an authorized user on the account on date certain? On or before that date were there late payments? Seems accurate to me.

 

And § 611 ?

 

Dispute procedure. I don't see where it says they have to remove AUs from your credit reports.

 

Or at least maybe that's what EX was thinking.

 

It might pretty much suck if the CRAs decided not to remove negative AU tradelines, but I'm not sure anything forces them to. That's why they always tell people to be careful who you AU with. You can get positive benefits, but you can also shaft yourself.

Edited by PotO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not the account reporting.. it's the continuation of the account reporting after disputed.

 

The FCRA violation is to report the account after the dispute when the reason for the dispute is specifically "Not Responsible" or "Not Mine".

 

Section 603 of the FCRA identifies only those who were issued credit are allowed to have the account reported.

 

An Authorized User is not issued credit.

 

If a consumer disputes the account reporting, the CRA must apply this rule.

 

If the CRA ignores the rule and continue to report the account, that is the violation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not the account reporting.. it's the continuation of the account reporting after disputed.

 

The FCRA violation is to report the account after the dispute when the reason for the dispute is specifically "Not Responsible" or "Not Mine".

 

Section 603 of the FCRA identifies only those who were issued credit are allowed to have the account reported.

 

An Authorized User is not issued credit.

 

If a consumer disputes the account reporting, the CRA must apply this rule.

 

If the CRA ignores the rule and continue to report the account, that is the violation.

603 deals with definitions. I might have missed something, but I don't see anything that pertains to this topic. Can you give me a specific paragraph?

 

If only those issued credit are allowed to have it reported, why are AUs even reported in the first place?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
An authorized user does not fall within any of the following definitions as to which credit accounts are allowed to be reported..


FCRA Section 603. Definitions; rules of construction [15 U.S.C. 1681a].


(l) Firm offer of credit or insurance. The term "firm offer of credit or insurance" means any offer of credit or insurance to a consumer that will be honored if the consumer is determined, based on information in a consumer report on the consumer, to meet the specific criteria used to select the consumer for the offer, except that the offer may be further conditioned on one or more of the following:


The consumer being determined, based on information in the consumer's application for the credit or insurance, to meet specific criteria bearing on credit worthiness or insurability, as applicable, that are established


(A) before selection of the consumer for the offer; and


( for the purpose of determining whether to extend credit or insurance pursuant to the offer.


(2) Verification:


(A) that the consumer continues to meet the specific criteria used to select the consumer for the offer, by using information in a consumer report on the consumer, information in the consumer's application for the credit or insurance, or other information bearing on the credit worthiness or insurability of the consumer; or


( of the information in the consumer's application for the credit or insurance, to determine that the consumer meets the specific criteria bearing on credit worthiness or insurability.


(3) The consumer furnishing any collateral that is a requirement for the extension of the credit or insurance that was:


(A) established before selection of the consumer for the offer of credit or insurance; and


( disclosed to the consumer in the offer of credit or insurance.

Edited by fury1995

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It's not the account reporting.. it's the continuation of the account reporting after disputed.

 

The FCRA violation is to report the account after the dispute when the reason for the dispute is specifically "Not Responsible" or "Not Mine".

 

Section 603 of the FCRA identifies only those who were issued credit are allowed to have the account reported.

 

An Authorized User is not issued credit.

 

If a consumer disputes the account reporting, the CRA must apply this rule.

 

If the CRA ignores the rule and continue to report the account, that is the violation.

603 deals with definitions. I might have missed something, but I don't see anything that pertains to this topic. Can you give me a specific paragraph?

 

If only those issued credit are allowed to have it reported, why are AUs even reported in the first place?

 

To answer the question though..

 

AU accounts are allowed to report because as we know the CRA"s don't sift through the information being furnished by the data furnisher to insure the data is accurate or allowed.

 

It's what we look for when we have the accounts removed. Works both ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An authorized user does not fall within any of the following definitions as to which credit accounts are allowed to be reported..

 

FCRA Section 603. Definitions; rules of construction [15 U.S.C. 1681a].

 

(l) Firm offer of credit or insurance. The term "firm offer of credit or insurance" means any offer of credit or insurance to a consumer that will be honored if the consumer is determined, based on information in a consumer report on the consumer, to meet the specific criteria used to select the consumer for the offer, except that the offer may be further conditioned on one or more of the following:

 

The consumer being determined, based on information in the consumer's application for the credit or insurance, to meet specific criteria bearing on credit worthiness or insurability, as applicable, that are established

 

(A) before selection of the consumer for the offer; and

 

( for the purpose of determining whether to extend credit or insurance pursuant to the offer.

 

(2) Verification:

 

(A) that the consumer continues to meet the specific criteria used to select the consumer for the offer, by using information in a consumer report on the consumer, information in the consumer's application for the credit or insurance, or other information bearing on the credit worthiness or insurability of the consumer; or

 

( of the information in the consumer's application for the credit or insurance, to determine that the consumer meets the specific criteria bearing on credit worthiness or insurability.

 

(3) The consumer furnishing any collateral that is a requirement for the extension of the credit or insurance that was:

 

(A) established before selection of the consumer for the offer of credit or insurance; and

 

( disclosed to the consumer in the offer of credit or insurance.

I do not see firm offer of credit having anything to do with reporting a tradeline.

 

This more has to deal with a condition under which a potential creditor can access your credit report (permissible purpose) even though you haven't overtly applied for credit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

It's not the account reporting.. it's the continuation of the account reporting after disputed.

 

The FCRA violation is to report the account after the dispute when the reason for the dispute is specifically "Not Responsible" or "Not Mine".

 

Section 603 of the FCRA identifies only those who were issued credit are allowed to have the account reported.

 

An Authorized User is not issued credit.

 

If a consumer disputes the account reporting, the CRA must apply this rule.

 

If the CRA ignores the rule and continue to report the account, that is the violation.

 

603 deals with definitions. I might have missed something, but I don't see anything that pertains to this topic. Can you give me a specific paragraph?

If only those issued credit are allowed to have it reported, why are AUs even reported in the first place?

To answer the question though..

 

AU accounts are allowed to report because as we know the CRA"s don't sift through the information being furnished by the data furnisher to insure the data is accurate or allowed.

 

It's what we look for when we have the accounts removed. Works both ways.

If AUs are allowed to report because CRAs don't know they are AUs, why are tradelines specifically labeled "authorized user" by the data furnisher and why is "authorized user" a specific designation allowed by the CRAs? If you read the manual about how data furnishers provide data, they cannot just write anything they feel like in that field. The CRAs give them a sort of drop-down menu from which to choose certain designations, which include "authorized user". The data furnisher specifically selects and CRAs specifically allow the reporting of authorized user tradelines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yep DW was a AU on her moms card but mooma kept the card maxed and that util was killing the DW first called the card issuer DW requested to be removed as a AU they removed contacted credit Bs the whole account was deleted easy peasy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The AU is not in any way legally responsible for the debt... That in itself means they should have the negative TL deleted as all info reported must be totally and completely true.

The fact that the AU gets positive results of the TL never goes bad is just a great byproduct of the credit reporting system

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole idea of an AU being calculated in credit scores seems odd, and IIRC FICO tried to remove them but had to add them back because it was viewed as discrimination against stay at home spouses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  




  • Today's Birthdays

    No users celebrating today.
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      178,212
    • Most Online
      2,046

    Newest Member
    NathanP
    Joined

About Us

Since 2003, creditboards.com has helped thousands of people repair their credit, force abusive collection agents to follow the law, ensure proper reporting by credit reporting agencies, and provided financial education to help avoid the pitfalls that can lead to negative tradelines.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Guidelines