late payments applied to credit agency after ch 7 discharge for mortgage in WI

[DC73]

I did a search here and didn't find exactly the answer I needed. I'm confused.

We had our WI Chap. 7 discharged last December. We did not reaffirm our mortage, and let them know we wouldn't be staying/keeping our house and we moved out. We stopped making payments after we filed and before the discharge, just like the other bills.

About two months after discharge they started reporting new "late payments" to the credit agencies. I'm confused, because we didn't reaffirm and we didn't "ride it out." We told them we didn't want the house in our bankruptcy. They knew we were letting it go. The late payments just started two months after the discharge, not before.

Anyway, my pride is getting the best of me because we were never "late" on our mortgage payments before we filed. Never. They didn't start reporting new late payments until a couple months after discharge. Is the mortgage company required to do this in order to do the "foreclosure", or can I dispute this with the credit agencies?

Our lawyer said they can do anything they want to and foreclosure hurts your credit, so why are you surprised, yada yada. But I still don't understand why it is "late payments". Ten months later, they haven't filed for foreclosure yet. And every month we are another 30 days late. I think we are up to 6 months late now.

If they cannot do this, does anyone have a sample letter to help me fight this at the credit agencies?

[IBroke]

No, they are NOT allowed to report any lates if you were current 'til you filed.

Did you call the mortgage company? What did they tell you?

If calling doesn't help, send them a certified letter with return receipt, telling them that they are in violation of the permanent BK-injunction and unless they fix it ASAP, your attorney might re-open your case and sue them. Disputing with the bureaus is an option as well but generally, they only verify the wrong information. They call it an "investigation" - I call it a verification of information previously reported - no matter if right or wrong.

Unfortunately, your lawyer seems to be a BAD lawyer. The reporting (if any) which might occur would be the public record of a foreclosure - that is correct. But that doesn't entitle them to report derogatory information on the mortgage tradeline.

[DC73]

Thank you for your reply. The lawyer made it sound like the mortgage was different some how. Is a mortgage exempt from that? Is it something different in WI? I really don't understand why. But thank you for your reply. I'm going to try to call and find out what's up with them. Perhaps they don't have the bk department talking with the debt department.

[IBroke]

Thank you for your reply. The lawyer made it sound like the mortgage was different some how. Is a mortgage exempt from that? Is it something different in WI? I really don't understand why. But thank you for your reply. I'm going to try to call and find out what's up with them. Perhaps they don't have the bk department talking with the debt department.

You're welcome!

No, in CH7, ANY debt is included and the same regulations in regards to credit reporting apply. In addition to that, the regulations of BK and credit reporting are a FEDERAL issue - so State doesn't matter. What I put in bold could indeed be the reason. Keep us updated!

[malf1204]

I would disagree that it is solely a federal issue. Each state is different. Here in Maryland we have state consumer protections laws that mirror the federal laws on credit reporting. Why is this helpful? You can file a small claims suit and not have to deal with Federal court because it is a violation of a state statute and you only need to have emotional distress not actual loss to win an award of up to $5000 per incident.

[IBroke]

I would disagree that it is solely a federal issue. Each state is different. Here in Maryland we have state consumer protections laws that mirror the federal laws on credit reporting. Why is this helpful? You can file a small claims suit and not have to deal with Federal court because it is a violation of a state statute and you only need to have emotional distress not actual loss to win an award of up to $5000 per incident.

Well, of course, if you want to go ahead and sue, it certainly makes a difference. However, the State does not have an impact on the question if late payments can be reported after filing or not.

[malf1204]

In Maryland it does. We have a consumer protection act that makes it illegal "To knowingly report incorrect information on a consumer credit report" if they report late payments after filing and you dispute it they are in violation of the law.

[IBroke]

In Maryland it does. We have a consumer protection act that makes it illegal "To knowingly report incorrect information on a consumer credit report" if they report late payments after filing and you dispute it they are in violation of the law.

Bad example - because the information reported may not be "incorrect". Here's why: Technically, you still owe the amount on an account IIB - even after discharge. The creditor, however, is not allowed to collect it. And when the OP stopped making payments prior to filing, he/she's actually late. So what "wrong information" are you referring to? As you can see, your quoted law probably doesn't apply in the first place.

It is very critical that the correct law is applied. This is not an ordinary account where we are dealing with the question of incorrect or correct information. The account was included in BK and THAT is the deciding factor when it comes to reporting after BK. Reporting a balance and lates after discharge is a violation of the permanent injunction because it is considered an "attempt to collect a debt". This is the Federal BK-law. State-law and/or the FCRA won't help you much because it is focused on "accurate reporting" of an account. It is a very helpful tool - but not in this case.

[malf1204]

"We stopped making payments AFTER we filed" "We were never late on on Mortgage payment before we filed" did I miss something in the original post? I cannot seem to find the part where they were late before they filed. Could you please point that out to me where it says they were late before filing. And as far as state law not being applicable I see cases all the time and they go like this: Plaintiff: Your honor I filed bankruptcy, was never late on my payments, the creditor and the credit reporting agency have been notified and they are reporting as late/chargeoff/sold, etc hurting my credit. Judge: They violating the Maryland Consumer Protection Act....Guilty. Pay the plaintiff 5000.00 and correct the information on the credit report withing 30 days.

[IBroke]

"We stopped making payments AFTER we filed" "We were never late on on Mortgage payment before we filed" did I miss something in the original post? I cannot seem to find the part where they were late before they filed. Could you please point that out to me where it says they were late before filing..

Sorry for the typo - it should say "And when the OP stopped making payments AFTER filing....

And as far as state law not being applicable I see cases all the time and they go like this: Plaintiff: Your honor I filed bankruptcy, was never late on my payments, the creditor and the credit reporting agency have been notified and they are reporting as late/chargeoff/sold, etc hurting my credit. Judge: They violating the Maryland Consumer Protection Act....Guilty. Pay the plaintiff 5000.00 and correct the information on the credit report withing 30 days.

That's what I said before. The deciding factor is the BK - NOT the "knowingly reporting of incorrect information" as you stated before. I can't tell for sure if there is a section in the Maryland Consumer Protection Act dealing with credit reporting on accounts IIB - the section you previously quoted, however, has nothing to do with BK. Maybe you can provide us with a link, showing the handling of BK-accounts in the Maryland Consumer Protection Act.

[malf1204]

OK. Incorrect information is incorrect information. They filed Bankruptcy that is a fact. They were never late prior to Bankruptcy that is a fact. The credit reporting agency was notified that they filed Bankruptcy that is a fact. It does not matter if the Credit reporting agency is listing a wrong spelling of your name or a wrong social security number it is still a violation a state law as well as federal. State courts have taken judicial notice as to the rules of bankruptcy that is all that is required.

[IBroke]

OK. Incorrect information is incorrect information. They filed Bankruptcy that is a fact. They were never late prior to Bankruptcy that is a fact. The credit reporting agency was notified that they filed Bankruptcy that is a fact. It does not matter if the Credit reporting agency is listing a wrong spelling of your name or a wrong social security number it is still a violation a state law as well as federal. State courts have taken judicial notice as to the rules of bankruptcy that is all that is required.

Agreed!