I just pulled a new report from TrueCredit - I'm expecting on paid derog to drop off, more on that later. What I discovered was that there is a new entry that is a negative - new within the last 2 days. It's only on one of the CRA's and it dropped my score by 43 pts - so now my EQ score is only 600!

I need to know how to handlke this one.

It is a gas bill opened in 1996! I'm pretty positive I haven't received anything from them recently (I mean within years, I think for a while early on I did, but not for years) But it has a "reported Date" of 1/07. It is listed as a charged off account and also says "Unknown - credit extension, review, or collection Collection/Chargeoff "

The total is just under $200. But as I said, I'm failrly certain I hadn't recieved anything from them in a long time (it's possible I overlooked something, but I don't know) This appears to be a bill from a place I lived in at that time. I lived there for under a year, then relocated out of state. Honestly, I'm not sure I ever got a notice from them - if I did, it's been so long I don't remember, or maybe I don't remember because I never got one ever.

Why would this show up after many years? It was opened fall, 1996 and I moved by Aug, 1997. Is this too old to be put on CR now? My guess is, like I said, I'm expecting one TL to be removed, and it hasn't yet, but maybe the activity to my CR woke someone up??? Should I dipute as 'not mine'? I don't have a notice to request validation with. Maybe I didn't recieve a notice because they couldn't find me, but if I dispute or request validation, then I provide them my current address for them to use - that would suck!

What is the best way to handle this? I can't finacially do a PFD.

PS: I was able to get a TL removed - it is a paid derog (medical) that is listed on all 3 CRA's, so this one item will make a big difference. I wrote a goodwill to the CA asking for deletion - denied. I wrote a goodwill to the person in the department that handles this, but after 2 months, I had not gotten a response. I finally wrote a goofwill to the CEO and sent along copies of the other letters I wrote to show I had taken other steps before bothering him about this. I got a letter back saying it would be removed, as a one-time courtesy. It's only been a week and it's still there, but I do have a letter. I was looking for an improved score, and I got another negative hit! Sometimes it feels there's people out there who work really hard to make sure I don't succeed. Having this removal would have my CR with EQ clean - no derogs. It's like someone's out there saying "no we can't let that happen. We can't have her become successful. I want to think positive, but I feel one smackdown after another.
Glad to hear they topok it off Suzie.
I hope I wasn't confusing here.

My post speaks of 2 different accounts. One account that was a paid medical that I finally was able to get removed after many months and several steps. the other is a new TL about an old account, and that is my question - how to handle this.

It is very frustrating that just as I am about to see a clear CR, another neg pops up from way back in the past.
Are you sure this is the account you think it is from 1997?

"I don't have a notice to request validation with."
You don't need a notice in order to request validation. Even if they fail to send you such notice, you still have those rights.

If it first went delinquent in 1997, it should not even be reportable in 2007. In fact, if the CA had the original delinquency date, they should not even have submitted it. If the correct original delinquency date was provided when the TL was submitted, it would not have showed up. Under FCRA, whoever is reporting has 90 days to report the original date of delinquency, at which point if it is reported accurately, the CRA should remove it.

What CA is reporting this? Do they have a history of re-aging, or have they settled with FTC or any state AGs for re-aging or other violations?
Thanks, Ontrack, for responding. It is not a CA that is reporting this on CR - it is the gas company itself. This item was never on my CR before, not ever. I know the name of that gas company, and what state it is in. I left that state in 1997, and have been in 2 other states since then.

The only info I have is what is on my TrueCredit CR. There isn't much listed. In fact, it is not listed on the CR in "derog" section, but it is negative, it is new (I had puuled a report on the 11th and it wasn't there, when I pulled it on the 13th, it was there. I was looking for that deletion on another account, I saw my score dropped a lot, and checked the new report - the only thing that is different is this new account.
Here is the info I have from the truecredit report:

Acct. # - xxxxx (it gives the number, I'm not listing it here though)
Condition - Derogatory (although it isn't placed in that section)
Balance - <$200 (it gives the exact amount; I won't post that here)
Type - Unknown - credit extension, review, or collection
Pay Status - Collection/Charge-off

There is a clickable link for more info. It has much of the same info, and adds a little more:

Opened: Fall/1996 (it gives the month, but I don't want to disclose too much specifics here - I never know who's reading this)
Reported: 1/2007
Responsibility: Individual
Past Due: <$200
High balance: the same amount as past due
In the "notes" section it says: Charged off account Amount in high credit original charge-off amount

That's all I know. Except, like I said, I know that this gas company only exists in one state that I lived in, and wehn I left that state (1997) I don't know if this account is from just before I left, or from years before I left (I have lived in that state all my life until 1997, so it could many years older that 1997 - I don't know) I can't cross reference it with an old CR, since it was never listed. But the funny thing is, I may still have an old bill with account numbers on it. When I moved, some things never got sorted out and just got packed and moved. It's possible I may be able to find the account number but still, at the very least, the newest it could possibly be is 1997.

If they are wrong to put this on my CR at this time, what can I do to get it removed? I don't understand what "time barred" is - I have a general idea, but not quite clear. I think this may be too old to sue over, but they can still try to collect? But I havn't been aware of any collection attempts. Does time get "frozen" if I left the state, and does that mean I am still in a time they can sue? Shoulkd I request validation from them, or dispute with CRA as not mine and make them validate that way, or if they can't validate they will remove? This is only listed on one CRA - EQ. But that CR with EQ was going to be 100% clear of derogs once that other account gets deleted any day now. i worked very hard for a loong time, keeping things off my CR, paying on time, writing letters and just as I'm seeing a clean report, something likes this pops up afrter 11 years. It's not an accurate credit picture of who I am now, so this sucks.
Suzie:

TrueCredit may not be reporting the true reporter.

It's complex, but merge reports try to consolidate accounts so sometimes CA reports are displayed by the OC name.

To know exactly who is reporting, you need the real report from the CRA.

Also, if it is reporting by the OC, validation as typically referred to isn't an option. However, you can dispute it under the FCRA; with the proper carrot and stick, you can get them to provide more than enough information to prove or disprove what they are reporting. Johnson v. MBNA provides a nice enough stick. :)
Time Barred = Older than the Statutes of Limitations for a particular type of debt for your state.

If your state has a 4 year SOL, you have an affirmative defense of Statutes of Limitations if they try to sue for the debt.
Thanks, Jam, I'll look up that case info you mentioned.

Until then, is this something that can be removed? It is 11 yrs old! But reporting like new. Should I dispute with CRA? Also, I found out that this entry didn't make me lose all those points - a cc high balance did - I got a MyFico alert about that with the high point loss. I think this entry cost a about 5-10 pts.
You'll want an official hard copy of the report before disputing...

Then you'll want to draft a dispute based off of Johnson v. MBNA... demanding conclusive verification of the account from the original account documentation, and not from a cursory review of their computer records...

If you downplay (but include) the verdict amount, you've provided a nice carrot, and a stick at the same time.
RE: time barred. The neg. TL in this case occured in state #1, and I moved out of that state within a few months after. Does that freeze time for a time barred thing? If it does, or if it doesn't, does that have an effect on how long the company has to report this item? Does the fact that the gas company may not have been able to reach me (since I left the state) have any effect on time limits to report as a derog with CRA?

Is there any explaination as to why old things suddenly pop up like this? This never showed up on a credit report anytime during the last 4-5 years, I have many copies of my reports that go back to about 4-5 years ago and up to recently, and this was never listed before, so it wasn't listed, dropped, and re-listed - it was never listed. But all of sudden, after 11 years, it comes out of nowhere. How does that happen? Because I'm wondering if when I started to "rock the boat" by disputing items if there is someone who isn't happy about that and 'fights back', so to speak, by digging up something and adding it to my CR. I swear, it feels like someone at the CRA wants to hold you back! They just can't let people get ahead, can they?
Various states have laws that limit the time a creditor has to sue on a debt. That is known as a Statute of Limitations (SOL). The running of that period might be frozen by events such as leaving the state, or might even be reset by events such as paying on the debt or agreeing to pay the debt, but that would depend on state law.

The credit reporting period is an entirely separate issue. It is determined by FCRA, and is essentially 7.5 years after the date of original delinquency (the next due date after the last payment you made), from which the debt is not brought current. If your account went delinquent in 1997, even if you had made some payments in the intervening time, the reporting period would start in 1997, so it would have expired by now.

Presumably a CA has bought the account, and has re-aged and reported it in violation of FCRA, if it is even your account. What dates show on the TL, and does it show the CA's name? Have you disputed it thru the CRA?
Thanks, ontrack, for responding, and boy could I use your help, I'm very frustrated!

I am getting this info from TrueCredit. The only name listed on this is the OC's name, the name of the gas company.

Date Opened is Fall, 1996.
Date Reported is 3/07.
Type is "Unknown - credit extension, review, or collection"
Pay status is "Collection/Charge Off."
Amount = less than $200

It doesn't appear that a CA has this - it appears to come from the OC, 11 years after it was opened, and about 10 years since I left the state. This was never, ever on any CR before, but it suddenly is now. Can they do that? Did they just re-age this? What approach should I use?

Here's where I am very frustrated. I just pulled my report today, and since the last time (about a week ago), there are 2 new negative entries! They are for the same account, an old cell phone I had approx. 2000 or earlier. They are both from the same CA which is Palisades, and it is listed 2 seperate times, one listing for EQ as a Revolving Account, and one for EX as a Collection Account on CR. EQ doesn't list a date opened, and lists as 3/07. EX lists a "date opened" as 8/06 and a Reporting Date as 3/07. this account was an old CR, and the funny thing about this is back about 1 1/2 yrs ago, before I knew any better, before I found this site, I grabbed a CR and started to pay things off, thinking that would help my CR and score. I TRIED to pay this one at that time! I could reach anyone at the cell phone company, and I left at least 1 message to contact me about this. No one ever did, so I thought it was a dead issue. Now all of a sudden it pops up. They knew how to reach me 1 1/2 yrs ago and it didn't pop up then.

Why all of a sudden am I having these things pop up? There are 3 new entries in this month! I did apply for and receive a small loan recently, but these weren't listed at that time, and the last 2 (both from palisades, about the cell) were not listed at that time, and that was just a few days ago. It seems they popped up from my getting that loan, or is that just a coincidence? The loan is one of those easy to get, high interest loans.

Now I just had a negative removed recently, and after that, I had only 1 paid negative on my reports. I swear i think that CA was not happy about being forced to remove that TL, because I asked them to remove using a goodwill letter, they said no, and then I wrote to the CEO and asked for removal (usuing goodwill, the item was paid), so the order for the CA to remove came from the CEO of the OC, and I don';t think they were very happy about that. In fact, I had to call the CEO when after 6 weeks it still wasn't removed, and that made a boss at the CA have to get involved, so I do think they were pissed and may have contacted other CA's and gave them my info, like I now think my name is being spread around a a target. Could that happen?

My score has taken a big hit. Here's the recent history:

TU EQ EX
Mar. 6 639 600 558

Mar. 15 644 592 596 (that 1 item was removed)

Mar. 24 644 583 527 (2 new neg. entries)

Last year (June, 06), I did my first dispute and got many old negs. removed, and I've tried to be very careful since then. My CC balances have been a bit high at times (right now they are too) and I know about utilization, but had some financial hardships in the last several months (no job) It seems that as things improve, new things crop up, as if there is someone monitoring it and they can't let someone get in a good way, like it's someone's job to hold people back. I've had scores in the mid 600's and I was looking for the 700 with the passage of time and continued good credit. these scores are ridiculous!

Why do old things pop up after many years? And what is the best approach - dispute? Or something else? To answer your questions, I have not made paymets or arrangements with that gas company nor have I had any contact with them at all since I left that state 10 years ago. These 2 new ones, I mentioned above that I tried to contact 1 1/2 yrs ago, couldn't reach them, they never contacted me, so no arrangements (except my attempt a while back). That cell phone was also from another state, and is a min. of 8-10 years old. That bill is under $100. I have a job now and for under $300 I could do a PFD, but if they are wrong to pursue this so many years later, I want to challenge them. What should I do?

Thanks.
Go to the site of the actual credit reporting agency and file a dispute on those entries. You may have to buy credit report (yeah, it sucks) to do that, but once you have the report number, you can file disputes against any of the entries in that report that are not valid.

I hope I'm not speaking too soon, but I've been having some pretty good luck getting some late/old accounts cleaned up without having to get too worked up over it. My scores haven't gone through the roof because of this (like I've only gone up about 15 points so far) but every little bit helps.

For example, I had one late payment removed because it came when I moved so I missed a statement. I paid it when I got the next statement but it was still reported as 30-days late. When I disputed, I said that it was late becuase of a change of residence and the 30-day late was removed.

On another account with "closed by credit grantor" and a couple of 60-day lates, I just challenged everything and it magically disappeared.

Sometimes you get lucky, I guess.

OTOH, it looks like I'm going to have to go to court to get a CA off my back.

So it goes.
So really, I'm highly suspicious of why I had 3 old things pop up this month. Actually, there are only 2 things, but the one has 2 seperate entries, so 3 total new entries, 2 companies. Why all of a sudden now, all in March?

I do feel it's backlash from another CA. I tried to get them to remove a paid entry before and they wouldn't, and eventually, afrter following the chain of command, I wrote to the CEO of the OC (medical) and they said yes, they would contact the CA and have them remove. I don't think the CA was happy about this. Two weeks goes by, no removal. I called the CEO office (talk to the secratary, very helpful). She checked, and called me back and said they told her it would take 6-8 weeks to remove. I don't believe them, because in a dispute, it happens in 30 days or less, sometimes much less. But I said ok, I'll wait. Two whole months go by, still no deletion. (I had the letter, so I knew eventually they had to) She calls and speaks to a boss at the CA who said he'd take care of it right away and investigate. It was deleted right away (see, it can be done in less than 6-8 weeks!)

But I think they're angry, very angry, and I think they put the word out on me to dig up stuff. Even if it's old, they may hope I don't see it and it hurts my credit for a while, or that even if I see it, they make me jump through hoops to deal with it. This can't be a coincincidance that after 1-2 weeks from that deletion, that 3 new derogs popped up - all over 10 years old! because I've been good with my credit for a long time now, no new current stuff, and they have dig up something this old just to jerk with me.

Should I talk to a lwyer, if I feel they really are trying to undermine me this way? Could this be the case, as I think it is?
Have you recently applied for a mortgage, or had a mortgage lender pull your reports?
No, haven't applied for a mortgage, or have anyone like that pull my file. I looked at inquiries - nothing new, so no one pulled it before thes popped up. I just got hired at a new job, and i thought they might pull a report, but I don't see an inquiry from them, or anything newer. I apllied for a loan just after one was showing but not the last 2. Shortly after, the last 2 showed up, but the dates they say the added was before my loan app (It must have taken some time to make it's way to the file) It was a $2000 personal loan.
Any erroneous or old addresses, name variations, or alternative SSNs or DOBs show up?

Are these CAs already known to have engaged in "re-aging" debts? NCO, for instance.

Are the CAs related?
One of the accounts showed up about 4 years ago, listed as a TL from the OC. As I stated in an above post a few posts back, back when I didn't know any better, I actually tired to poay them - it's under $100. I called, left I think 2 messages, and when I couldn't reach anyone and they didn't call me back, I thought it was a dead issue. That was 1 1/2 years ago! Even then it was about 7-8 years old. Now that TL is using Palisades as a CA.

The one I started this thread about is a home gas company, and this TL is listed from that company, not a CA, and it was never on a CR before, ever and is about 11 years from the date opened. I moved out of state (not to avoid the bill - it is under $200) It never was on a CR and now all of a sudden it is.
(see my post before this one too)^^^^^^

I'm getting this info from TrueCredit, so I can't tell if there is any wrong info. But, when I applied for the loan, the 1st place said no, and I did get the denied letter saying because I was denied credit, I can get a free copy of my CR, so I'll do that and then I can have more info and be able to dispute, if that's the best course of action.
If you are likely to have to proceed to suing, you want a mailed copy of your credit report direct from the CRA. You then dispute the errors based on that report, and if they verify instead of removing, you are ready to sue for damages under FCRA.
If you are likely to have to proceed to suing, you want a mailed copy of your credit report direct from the CRA. You then dispute the errors based on that report, and if the OC or CA verifies instead of removing, you sue for damages under FCRA.
I don't understand what you are saying. I know I need a hard copy of my CR from the CRA to dispute or sue. And I know I need that copy to see if there are errors. Are you saying that if there are errors, dispute the TL and if it comes back verified, sue for damages? If that's the case, should I write (or have a lawyer write) a ITS letter and try to remove that way? Or just straight to suing?

What do you think about the backlash theory? Does it sound like that to you too?
"Backlash" might make sense if the CAs are related, especially if they have access to common company databases. The other source of multiple "re-aging" might be if some debt collector is selling portfolios of old debt that they are re-aging to defraud and get a higher price from other debt buyers. There is, after all, no honor among thieves.

It is, however, enough of an advantage to debt collectors trying to collect on old debt to both try to put it on reports past the 7 year limit, and claim it is within SOL, that the idea has no doubt occurred to more than one. Among that crowd, it is kind of the modern "philosopher's stone", turning cheap lead into valuable gold.

NCO claimed in their re-aging settlement with FTC that the re-aging actually occurred at the company that sold them a batch of debts, but since there are still new reports of NCO re-aging debts, and since their dispute and validation procedures did not adequately protect consumers from reported re-aged accounts (there are many consumer reports of their debt collectors evading attempts by consumers to dispute debts), they are hardly innocent.


You have multiple old accounts showing up re-aged on your reports. Once you have disputed the "error" thru the CRA, and you find it is staying, you have no reason to limit your response to just letters. They could have removed it if that was what they are going to do in response to letters. Your next move is whatever will bring this to a conclusion in a finite time, and that must necessarily include the possibility of suing.

To be most effective, it makes little sense once you can show damages or justify statutory damages for you to take on a second job of doing it yourself, as you are just saving them your legal fees for a task you have not trained for. Find an attorney with experience in this area, who is willing to take it on contingency, and pass the matter off to him. The fact that the courts can award attorney's fees on top of damages to you actually makes it more likely that the other side will want to quickly cave, and even if you are awarded only a small amount beyond your legal costs, it is worth it to get these accounts remove.
So this seems like just a re-aging thing, that these companies are rolling the dice and hoping they get paid, and the timing is just a coincindence? I don't know if the CA that I feel is angry and causing backlash is related to Palisades or not. I'm afraid to give too much specific info here, but if it's ok, I could email it to you. I thought perhaps CA's had connections to other CA's, maybe not all of them, but maybe have some good working (and sharing) relationships with each other, and that this was happening here.

You are suggesting handle this like a normal dispute - not mine, or SOL?
ontrack, I sent you a PM.