I did my time!!

[bigfoot_22]

I'm very depressed here in Arizona. I have a debt with a "charged off" date of 3/99. I was looking forward to getting back on track this March. I recently looked at my credit reports and saw where Sherman Acqusitions and LVUN have listed the debt as "opened as of 10/02" whereas it nows says this debt will not be removed until 4/2012!!! How in the heck can this debt which is 7 years old be listed as a new debt and why does it now show 10 years before it is cleared? It has the same # as the original debt. Both Trans Union and Experian have this debt listed twice on my report(the original from First USA and the new collectors). I have disputed and both CRA's say it stays. I have the original credit report from 1/2000 which shows this debt as charged off 3/99 from First USA. I have never made any contact with anyone other than the CRA's regarding this debt. How do I make this disappear from my reports when the 7 years are up (march 2006)????

Happy New Year to those who have something to be happy about!!

[justalayman]

The fact the original creditor "charged off" the debt does not mean it is gone, excused, cleared, or forgiven. It merely means they have stopped trying to collect it. It sounds like they sold the debt to somebody else.

Hang tight it is New Year's Eve and the board is slow. There are a lot of good folks that can give you proper advice as to how to proceed.

[url]http://www.creditinfocenter.com/rebuild/statuteLimitations.shtml#1[/url]
[url]http://www.bankrate.com/brm/news/cc/20040116a1.asp[/url]
[url]http://www.credit.com/slp/chapter9/Statute-of-Limitations.jsp[/url]

Peruse these websites while you wait.

[Ladynred]

Sherman Acquisitions - AKA LVNV Funding/Resurgent Capital and a host of other names have illegally re-aged the debt. NO collection can outlive the obsolescence of the ORIGINAL DEBT. The date of first delinquency that MUST be reported by the original creditor, and which starts the 7-1/2 year reporting period can NOT be changed - not legally. The 'date opened' means nothing, that's when Sherman got it. The 'date of last activity' is the date most people go by and THAT MUST be the same as the DOLA from the ORIGINAL debt tradeline.

When you disputed with the CRAs, did you include a copy of the old report showing the original charge-off /dola date ?

YOu have the right to dispute this directly with the furnisher of the information per FACTA. They're lower than low and illegal re-aging is a nasty habit of theirs. Make sure you file a complaint with the FTC.

[bigfoot_22]

Thanks for the advice, ladynred. Should I write the original creditor (First USA) and ask for the DOLA? Being that the date closed is 3/99, I have to assume my last activity was priior to that. I'm afraid of contacting Sheman Acq.; I'm afraid they may try and twist this back on me. I know I'm past the SOL, but these guys are jerks. Do you think it wise for me to write the CRA's (with a copy of the original date closed) and ask them to either remove these reaged debts or should I ask them to reset the debt date to the original date closed 3/99? Is it legal for this debt to be showing up on my credit report twice (the original from First USA and the reaged debt from Shermen are both on my reports, yet they both have the same debt # attached to them)?

Once this is all back on track and I know they can't jerk me around, I will file a complaint with the FTC.

[Ladynred]

Should I write the original creditor (First USA) and ask for the DOLA?

No, FUSA - now Chase - will not be able to help you at all. They SOLD the debt some time ago to Sherman/LVNV. Call the CRA and ask them to tell you what the 'date of first deliquency' on the FUSA tradeline. That date is REQUIRED reporting per the FCRA.

The date closed is fairly meaninless here. THE important dates are the date of first deliquency and/or the date of last activity. Charge-off date is helpful too IF it was reported accurately. If you're going to dispute again with the CRA, send a copy of the old credit report with the original dates highlighted, then go on to point out Sherman's illegal re-aging of the account with their bogus dates.

Is it legal for this debt to be showing up on my credit report twice (the original from First USA and the reaged debt from Shermen are both on my reports, yet they both have the same debt # attached to them)?

Yes, its legal. The original FUSA and then the collection by Sherman is typical. The FUSA should be showing 'sold or transferred' and a zero balance though.
There really can be no DOLA for Sherman, you 've never paid them anything so what 'activity' are they reporting ??? The DOLA SHOULD be the same DOLA as FUSA reported - again - illegal reaging of the debt. This is EXACTLY the reason why the FCRA was amended in 1996 - to prevent negatives from being kept on your reports indefinitely.

Dispute with the CRA first. If they don't fix it, or 'verify', dispute directly with Sherman, you're allowed to under FACTA.

Do NOT wait until anythings 'back on track' - file your FTC complaint NOW. The ONLY way to put a stop to Sherman's illegal actions and to get the FTC to take action is to file complaints when violations happen. Sherman cannot exact any retribution on you for it !

[bigfoot_22]

Just wanted you to know I took your advice and filed a complaint with the FTC against Sherman/LVNV. I looked at my CR before doing this and noticed that Sherman had dropped off my Experian report, but the original was still on. Equifax showed the original off (DOLA turns out to be 1/99), yet LVNV was still on; trying to re-age the debt. I contacted Equifax and explained that LVNV was re-aging debt.Equifax was very hard to work with; they didn't speak very good english and I didn't know their language. All in all, it felt good to report Sherman to the FTC. Thanks.