Chase account says charge off, not BK

[telco95]

My chase account is showing charged off on all three reports with a $0 balance. I was 10months delinquent and the account was charged off before I filed. It says nothing about BK, just sold and charged off. Is this correct? I am 1 yr post discharge. Thanks

[TBA]

Did you include the account in your BK? If it was on your schedule, it should be shown as discharged - especially if they sold it off to a collection company (you could have some issues with them reselling it over and over and over again...).

I dont know if i would go changing the status of the account though. As long as you have been rebuilding good credit and replacing the old bad, i wouldnt do a thing to it, but that is just me.

[tobee43]

we had a few on our report that were not listed IIB. we just contacted the credit agency with the correction and they were changed to IIB. however, keep a watchful eye on your reports, some times they continue to report incorrectly even after the line item was fixed.

[df04527]

Six of one, half dozen the other. I might just be inclined to leave it as the damage to your credit from a "charge off" versus "IIB" -- probably not enough difference to worry about and in fact a charge off might possibly be deleted before the BK is deleted. If it was me? I would leave it -- as long as it's zero balance.

[tobee43]

Six of one, half dozen the other. I might just be inclined to leave it as the damage to your credit from a "charge off" versus "IIB" -- probably not enough difference to worry about and in fact a charge off might possibly be deleted before the BK is deleted. If it was me? I would leave it -- as long as it's zero balance.

so true, really, nowadays someone out of bk it really doesn't matter much if it's IIB or charged off. they are still nasty blemishes on one's report. again, i really feel strongely that time is really what helps heal one's credit.

[df04527]

Yup - time is a credit reports' best friend...

[telco95]

Thanks for your replies. I had to dispute 1 acct on eq for still reporting as a CO with a balance, so I just included Chase to see what happens. I just dont want the reporting date to change, I've heard it can come back with the date disputed instead of the discharged date. Thanks again

[df04527]

The only date that matters is the date of first default. That date should never change, regardless. You will, mostly, only find that date listed from the actual bureau reports that come back from the dispute. Very few third party report providers show you that date.

[BobMango]

My chase account is showing charged off on all three reports with a $0 balance. I was 10months delinquent and the account was charged off before I filed. It says nothing about BK, just sold and charged off. Is this correct? I am 1 yr post discharge. Thanks

Since you indicate that the account was charged off before the bankruptcy filing, it is reporting correctly. As others have suggested, I'd let this particular sleeping dog lie.

[IBroke]

Since you indicate that the account was charged off before the bankruptcy filing, it is reporting correctly.

No, it isn't. The fact that it was a charge-off prior to filing doesn't mean it shouldn't show IIB. The creditor can still report "charge-off" - that's their choice. But they HAVE TO report IIB on any account that was part of the BK-filing if the debtor wants them to. I prefer an IIB reporting over and on a charge-off because "charge-off" - other than IIB - does generally mean that the debtor could still be liable for the account. "Charge-off" certainly doesn't mean "you don't owe us any more" - and that's why the IIB-notation is better.

So the reporting of charge-off AND IIB the same time is accurate - only reporting a charge-off isn't.

[BobMango]

No, it isn't. The fact that it was a charge-off prior to filing doesn't mean it shouldn't show IIB. The creditor can still report "charge-off" - that's their choice. But they HAVE TO report IIB on any account that was part of the BK-filing if the debtor wants them to. I prefer an IIB reporting over and on a charge-off because "charge-off" - other than IIB - does generally mean that the debtor could still be liable for the account. "Charge-off" certainly doesn't mean "you don't owe us any more" - and that's why the IIB-notation is better.

So the reporting of charge-off AND IIB the same time is accurate - only reporting a charge-off isn't.

You are absolutely right, I missed the part about the IIB and thought the OPs chief objection was the charge-off. Thanks for the clarification.

[IBroke]

You are absolutely right, I missed the part about the IIB and thought the OPs chief objection was the charge-off. Thanks for the clarification.

You're welcome! It happened and still happens to me, too, that I miss some info when "flying" over somebody else's post..

[JessMN]

I have the same issue on 2 accounts - I disputed and the CRA says that they are verified. Now what? Write a letter to the OC?

[dcvalentine7]

I have the same issue on 2 accounts - I disputed and the CRA says that they are verified. Now what? Write a letter to the OC?

Bump this, what should you do if CRA reports as accurate? as a matter of fact, chase not only verified 4 accts as accurate, 2 new collection accounts appeared on my report associated with the 2 accts with them that were included in BK filing! This was month AFTER all collection accts were completely wiped off my credit report immediately after discharge over 6 months prior. The collection accts only popped up AFTER disputing the "charge off" status instead of being a "IIB" status. What should I do about getting these charge off statuses removed as well as the old associated collection accts?

[df04527]

They won't remove comments. Been there, done that. You can try letter campaigns but don't hold your breath. Just being gut honest.