[msgtjtrob]

I co-signed for a car in 1999. In 2000 the person I co-signed for began to make late payments and eventually quit paying all together. In 2004 she filed for bankruptcy. In 2007 I was contacted by a collection agency to pay the outstanding debt. Since I did co-sign I paid. I know that negative remarks will be on my credit report for up to 7 years. My question is, when does the clock start ticking? In 1999 when the first negative report showed up up on my credit report, or in 2007 when everything was settled?

[Loan_Guy]

The clock starts ticking on the date of last activity. In your case, it sounds like 2007.

Sorry...

LG

[TheCleaner]

No. The clock starts on the Date of First Delinquency DOF
This is the first missed payment that leaded to the actual delinquency.

If you quited paying in January 2000 and after that you never got the account current again that is the start ticking date

That account should be off your report at least one year ago. Dispute it with the CRAs

[Loan_Guy]

In 2007 I was contacted by a collection agency to pay the outstanding debt. Since i did co-sign I went ahead and paid.

If the account was paid on in 2007, the clock starts ticking AGAIN.

msgtjtrob,

Although it is probably too late to ask, you may want to contact the CA that you paid and see if they would agree to delete the account, since you were nice enough to pay them. You have nothing to lose, and that might help the situation.

LG

[msgtjtrob]

Thanks a lot for the info guys.

[TheCleaner]

Loanguy read the FCRA 624(a)(5) and 605(1) you are confusing it with the statute of limitations.

Carl.-

[Loan_Guy]

Carl,

Sec. 624 deals with affiliate sharing, which is not what this is.

Sec. 605 is more of the "what and when" it can be reported. I don't see a reference to an update to the file.

I'm not an attorney, but I have a pretty good idea of how credit is reported and the effects of a score. In this case, the date of last activity was in 2000 when the last payment was made and the borrower stopped paying.

Although some people claim that the clock starts on the first late, missed payment, etc. if you continue to make payments after that, you are essentially resetting the DLA on the report to that current month. My guess is that they do that to stop people from saying "oops, I was 30 days late, I might as well not make any more payments since I will be punished for it longer. Of course, we know better, but a large number of consumers have no idea how the system works.

In 2007, when that payment was made, it reset the clock (the DLA) to 2007, which means that the tradeline CAN continue to report for another 7 years. It doesn't have to, but it can. In fact, the SOL may have been up and the derogatory may have already dropped from the CR. The CAs are slick and make millions of dollars each year that they ARE NOT legally allowed to pursue due to threats of liens, garnishments and lawsuits. They take advantage of peoples morals and ethics to pay their creditors.

Sorry to say, but msgtjtrob may not have had the legal liability to pay this collection. Now it is going to show up for another 7 years just because of the updating of the DLA. Maybe they will delete it or forget to update it and it will then fall off, if it hasn't already.

Unfortunately, I see things like this on credit reports every day!

LG

[TheCleaner]

Sorry I misstyped I wanted to say 623(a)(5) States that the furnisher must report the date of first delinquecy, this is so important because the seven years clock start right then and nothing can change that 7 years. I know that for a fact, it was one of the issues in my last lawsuit the CA came in with the same BS about last activity and reporting, the judge didn't want to hear it just told them that the laws states otherwise

Only if you for instance get let's say 90 days late in a credit card but suddenly you get some money and pay the account to current again and the acount still open and usable, then and only then the clock resets.

That account should had been deleted last year. The only reason I can think of for the account being listed in 2008 is that bankrupt filed in 2005 but that is in the best case questionable, he did not file bankrupt, the reporting of the bakrrupt must go in the other person's report. And the account is too old to be reported.

Carl.-

[Loan_Guy]

Carl,

Sec. 623 (a)(5) deals with the re-aging of an account as far as I can tell. That is to protect a consumer from having a CA buy an account and re-age it so that it stays on the CR for several more years.

Example: You stop making payments to CapOne in May of 2001. The clock starts ticking. 12 collection agencies buy the account and try to collect on it. They are not allowed to reset the clock to when they purchased it, it must stay at 5-01 UNLESS YOU INITIATE A PAYMENT. If you decide to send them $10, you have caused the DLA to become current and your score to drop depending on how long ago the previous DLA was.

It sounds like the basis of your suit was that you did not make any payments. In that case, they cannot reset the clock. Since the consumer paid the CA, it resets the clock and can tank the score.

Again, I see this every day because people got poor advice from their loan officer, Realtor, friend, dog, etc. If you feel you need to pay an old collection, ask for a pay-for delete. It's SOOO much easier.

LG

[TheCleaner]

[QUOTE=Loan_Guy]

Carl,
... stay at 5-01 UNLESS YOU INITIATE A PAYMENT. If you decide to send them $10, you have caused the DLA to become current and your score to drop depending on how long ago the previous DLA was.


You got that wrong in part, if you pay $10 the account stays delinquent but you re-start the clock for the statute of limitations, you will loose the legal inmmunity and they can sue you the next day, at the same time they can legally report the account with a new DLA wich will make a dent in the score (No so big as you think) but the original DOFD remains and the seven years allowed for reporting count only from that DOFD 5-2001

In case of a collection account or charge off and for reporting purposes it does not matter what or when you pay, it is negative information and at that point it can never be current or paid as agree even if you pay in full, only can stay in your report for the next seven years counting since the date of first delinquecy

Just do a little investigation on the internet, you'll see I'm right, yours is a very common mistake.


--------------------------
Again, I see this every day because people got poor advice from their loan officer, Realtor, friend, dog, etc. If you feel you need to pay an old collection, ask for a pay-for delete. It's SOOO much easier.

That's right is always a bad idea to pay a junk debt buyer or even some times an original creditor charge off, if you pay a collection it will not help your score at all unless they delete it after payment, if pay the original creditor it will help a little but the account will hurt your credit for the next seven years from the DOFD unless they delete it.

Carl.-

[msgtjtrob]

OK guys let me throw this out there. The loan was through Ford Morot Credit and the last action on the account was in 2000. I didn't pay ford, I paid the collection agency so it sounds like this negative mark should have already fallen off my report right?

[TheCleaner]

Right, just dispute it with the bureaus as too old to report