I have two items from a credit union that are showing as "Charged Off" instead of "included in bk". The cu didn't report anything to the credit reports for the longest time, and now they show this. I've already disputed with the credit agencies. But I was curious to know if a "Charged Off" effects a credit score more than the "included in bk"???
-
-
Credit score wise it doesn't make any difference. They are "negative" items and one way or another have the same effect on your score.. The only thing that you should watch out for is if the CU sells bad debts to a junk buyer, in which case that junk buyer/collection goon might start hassling you. If they do, just send them a copy of your discharge paper, the creditor listed in your petition, and tell them to jump into shark infested waters/anything to that effect.Originally posted by teddy26 View Post -
Not correct! Having accounts listed as past due, which is what the charge-off reflects is much worse than IIB. If someone is planning to get their scores back up the charge-offs need to get cleaned up. Yes, the BK is negative, but having past due balances is worse.Originally posted by magyar123 View PostComment
-
It does look worse than what the other creditors listed. The CU has the charge off with the amount (so not listed as 0)....Also, it showed the 90, 120 day late and then KD in Nov and KD in Dec.....so I just assume until it is cleaned up that each month going forward will show KD. All other creditors just have the one KD, balance showing 0 and saying whatever to the effect included in BK. I agree that a charge off is as bad as a bk, but it seems like a "charge off" is not as a "clean slate" like a Bk.Comment
Comment