Charge Off listed 08-07 ~ 07/08?

[mskido]

I had a Victoria's Secret credit card account go to charge off on 08/26/07 which I paid in full on 11/27/07.

On my credit report from EXPERIAN, it lists the account as:

"Charge Off as of Aug 2007 to Aug 2008"

with Date of status/reported: 09/2008

EQUIFAX shows the same account on their 81-month Payment History chart as:

(Sept 07) CO - CO - CO - CO - CO - CO - CO - CO - CO - CO - CO (JULY 08)

with the following:

Date reported 08/2008
Date of last payment: 11/2007
Date first major delinquency reported: 08/2007

Is this right? I contacted Vic Scrt and they mentioned I should dispute that as they only report it on CO on 08/07. (no luck having VS take it off Goodwill)

Thanks for any help!

[mskido]

PS: My 3 credit scores are: EFX - 694 XPN - 711 TUC - 723 and I had a 3yo medical collection removed yesterday.... should I even bother?

[Lian]

A charge-off is an internal bookkeeping measure taken by a creditor to remove uncollectible assets from their receivables, thus more accurately reflecting their real assets, and of course, permitting them to claim the loss of asset as a tax write off.

If they did the CO prior to payment of the debt, and the account was in arrears at the time, then the charge-off would apparently be legitimate. A charge-off is a one time event. A creditor can include, in subsequent reporting to a CRA, a complete summary of their reporting to date, or only updates to items that have changed. Including or not including the fact of the CO in subsequent reporting has no effect on the occurrence of the one-time event, and is not the reporting of a new CO. I see nothing improper, particularly since the creditor states that they only reported it once.
It is kinda a non-issue as to the event itself.

[mskido]

Yeah I have a good understanding of charge offs. However when I my refi guy pulled my credit report recently, the VS account reported on the report as date of last delinquency was 09/08.

Now I know time heals all (credit) wounds, so in essence I lost a whole year of "distance" from this major ding. I know it'll be gone in 2014 but keeping my distance from it until then is lessening its impact. The way it's reporting right now I'm losing one whole year.

Thoughts?

[JoeMurphy]

MsKido,

Your credit score is high enough that this should not be too big of a constraint on any part of your life. Mortgage rates are at very low levels and your score is high enough that you should not have any problem purchasing or refinancing. For example, an FHA home loan requires 3.5% down and a 620 credit score... Pretty easy. In your case it seems as if you do have a case but I'm not sure how effective disputing it will be. They have already verified the information as correct. What is your ultimate goal with this? I don't think you're going to get it fully removed so set some realistic expectations and move on from there.

Hope this helps.

-Joe

[mskido]

Joe,

Thank you for your reply. I 100% agree with you. My scores have rebounded enough to where there are very little restrictions I am facing in regards to my past indiscretions (no bankruptcies or foreclosures, just 3 paid charge-offs at the worst with a flurry of late payments), all of which have all occurred in '05-'06, with the above mentioned account being the last derogatory item reported to the CRA's.

The refi of my current home is set to finalize in the next week (@ 3.875%!!) with the plan to rent it out and purchase our long-term home in the upcoming months. The only debt I currently have is the current mortgage and 100% of all past debts have been paid in full.

**SOAPBOX ALERT**

I guess the reason for all the time I have invested in the recent weeks is more based on the principal belief that the CRA's and creditors should do the right thing as they have a tremendous amount of influence on a person's quality of life. With that much influence, they need to be very precise in the way that they collect, and more importantly, disseminate the information to potential creditors & employers.

My apologies for the comment I made above about "...should I even bother?" Simply being "close enough" does not cut it with me just because I am nearing the "light" at the end of the 7 year tunnel. If we use the same "close/good enough" yard-stick to grade the ability of a doctor to treat living human beings, we'd be back to the ages of "blood-letting" and "smelling salts" in a heart beat (pun intended.)

And before anyone balks at my comparison between doctors and the CRA's, look into how many cases of depression, divorce and suicides are tied to financial matters...but I digress.

Being a human being you are destined to make mistakes and with that we all deserve second chances. While I cannot change the 7-year window that adverse accounts are reflected on my credit reports, I sure as hell can try my hardest to ensure that these bureaus abide by the rules and not prolong the effects of these past mistakes.

Not sure how "realistic" these expectations are, but if my 32yrs of being on this planet has taught me anything, it's that sitting idly and doing nothing gets you nowhere.

Thanks for reading this far...

Happy New Year & God Bless!