BK experts...Can creditors included ...

[cyana24]

What is the name of your state? DE

in bankruptcy continue to update the tradeline? I was discharged December 2002.

I recently ordered a new credit report + FICO score from Equifax Personal Solutions and both MBNA and Discover Card have added new damaging information. The DOLA's are correct but for DC the date for "First Major Delinquency reported" is given as 10/2004, "Date Reported" as 11/2004. For MBNA the corresponding dates are 1/2004 and 11/2004. This "Date of first major delinquency" is a new category and was not present on the report I ordered in May 2004, nor were there new dates reported (status). Because of these updates and one new baddie that's "not mine" my score has dropped nearly 70 points since May.

Is this a problem that should be addressed with the CRA (similar info appears on my TU but not identical) or the OCs, Discover Card and MBNA? Thanks for any responses.

I'm going to post the same question on creditboards.

Everyone have a safe and Happy New Year!

 

[ihatearizona]

What is the name of your state? DE

in bankruptcy continue to update the tradeline? I was discharged December 2002.

I recently ordered a new credit report + FICO score from Equifax Personal Solutions and both MBNA and Discover Card have added new damaging information. The DOLA's are correct but for DC the date for "First Major Delinquency reported" is given as 10/2004, "Date Reported" as 11/2004. For MBNA the corresponding dates are 1/2004 and 11/2004. This "Date of first major delinquency" is a new category and was not present on the report I ordered in May 2004, nor were there new dates reported (status). Because of these updates and one new baddie that's "not mine" my score has dropped nearly 70 points since May.

Is this a problem that should be addressed with the CRA (similar info appears on my TU but not identical) or the OCs, Discover Card and MBNA? Thanks for any responses.

I'm going to post the same question on creditboards.

Everyone have a safe and Happy New Year!

I'm having similar problems. The answer is NO. They cannot report anything negative on your reports AFTER your BK Filing date. They really should read "Included in BK" with a zero balance.

Are the TL's you posted showing IIB or are they still showing as collection/charge off?

 

[cyana24]

I'm having similar problems. The answer is NO. They cannot report anything negative on your reports AFTER your BK Filing date. They really should read "Included in BK" with a zero balance.

Are the TL's you posted showing IIB or are they still showing as collection/charge off?

No, both tradelines are reporting correctly as "IIB", $0 balance. It's just FUSA that's still reporting "charge off with a past due balance" on all three of my credit reports. The DOLA's are correct so there's nothing to dispute as far as that goes. It's just this new "Date of first major deliquency" that's way wrong. My accurate DOLA for MBNA was 10/2001, not 01/2004, and for DC my accurate DOLA was 07/02, not 10/2004. I was alerted to the changes by MCK, that's what caused me to get a new MyFico TU and a new EQ Personal Solutions (I had two left that I prepaid for).

 

[ihatearizona]

I'm having a similar fight over at creditboards. I'm being told that isn't reaging even though I'm sure it is. Not sure what to tell you, other than to send off a nasty letter to the OC to accuse them of reaging.

 

[cyana24]

I'm not sure if technically this is "reaging" since the DOLA's are correct. All I know is both my TU and EQ scores (possibly EX, too, but haven't ordered a new report since nothing changed on MCK yet) are in the toilet now because the OC's are still "updating" this way. I don't know whether to write EQ first so EQ has a record of this disputed info or write the OC's first (whch is why I asked the question). Sometimes the order of disputes does matter to preserve your rights. BTW, I did send my bk paperwork to EQ already (early June 2003) so EQ should know better.

 

[ihatearizona]

I'd write the OC's. They are in violation of the BK discharge for reporting negative items AFTER the filing date. Use the FTC Cass opinion letter as your proof.

 

[cyana24]

The Cass opinion letter falls under the FDCPA and DC and MBNA are both OCs - not third party debt collectors - unless DC and MBNA can be defined as "Debt Collectors" in this case. The Cass letter is often cited by "credit cleanup boards" for use against any futher reporting by OCs, (once disputed), after bankruptcy (as continued collection activity). But has anyone had success in citing that letter with OCs? The Cass letter doesn't say a word about accounts included in bankruptcy. Rhetorical question, of course.

 

[cyana24]

A Happy New Year's Day bump .

 

[ihatearizona]

Other than the Cass letter, I'm not sure of anything else that would explain further collection efforts. There must be come caselaw out there??? The FTC wouldn't explain anything in regards to bankruptcy (although, I think it's about time that they cleared up the whole thing on correct BK reporting!)

 

[cyana24]

If there is case law regarding creditors reporting after bankruptcy when they have the corrrect DOLA and $0 owed I can't find it. Major creditors like FUSA, MBNA, DC, Citi and others seem be able to violate the FCRA with impunity, rendering the FTC and the OCC toothless.

Any other bk experts/bk lawyers out there care to comment because 'Zona and I seem to the blind leading the blind (I hope you don't take offense, 'Zona)?

 

[ihatearizona]

No offense taken. I hope someone has something on this, but as this seems like a pretty common problem, I think we're going to be out of luck. The FTC really needs a section on the FCRA about BK!