Re-Aging
“Re-aging” is when a debt collector changes the “date of last activity” on a debt to a more recent date than is accurate.
In Minnesota, most consumer debts are collectable for six years from the date of last activity on the account (generally the date of last payment), and may be included on a consumer’s credit report for seven years from the same date under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. A collector who “re-ages” a debt likely does so to make its date of last activity appear more recent than it is actually is, which in turn lets the collector act as if they can legally report and collect the debt for much longer than allowed by law.
In Minnesota, most consumer debts are collectable for six years from the date of last activity on the account (generally the date of last payment), and may be included on a consumer’s credit report for seven years from the same date under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. A collector who “re-ages” a debt likely does so to make its date of last activity appear more recent than it is actually is, which in turn lets the collector act as if they can legally report and collect the debt for much longer than allowed by law.
The above debt, for example, went into default sometime in March 2007, as indicated by the payment history, which shows the debt as 60 days late in May 2007. The payment history also shows that the debt remained in default ever since— meaning the date of last activity was probably sometime in March 2007.
However, notice that the date for the “Estimated month and year that this item will be removed” is February 2019. Since the Fair Credit Reporting Act allows a collector to report a debt for seven years from the date of last activity, this reveals that the collector has bumped the date of last activity from March 2007 to February 2012. In this case, the consumer had disputed the debt in February 2012, and the collector took the opportunity to change the date of last activity to the present in response to the dispute. As a result, a debt which became uncollectible in March 2013 and should have fallen off the consumer’s credit report in March 2014 looked to the world to be collectable until February 2018 and as if it would remain on their report until February 2019.
In most cases, the only activity which triggers the “last activity” date is payment on an account. Disputing a debt is not considered activity on the account.
Falsifying account information like this may be a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act or the Fair Credit Reporting Act. If you see any activity like this, please discuss the possibility of hiring a consumer attorney with your client.
However, notice that the date for the “Estimated month and year that this item will be removed” is February 2019. Since the Fair Credit Reporting Act allows a collector to report a debt for seven years from the date of last activity, this reveals that the collector has bumped the date of last activity from March 2007 to February 2012. In this case, the consumer had disputed the debt in February 2012, and the collector took the opportunity to change the date of last activity to the present in response to the dispute. As a result, a debt which became uncollectible in March 2013 and should have fallen off the consumer’s credit report in March 2014 looked to the world to be collectable until February 2018 and as if it would remain on their report until February 2019.
In most cases, the only activity which triggers the “last activity” date is payment on an account. Disputing a debt is not considered activity on the account.
Falsifying account information like this may be a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act or the Fair Credit Reporting Act. If you see any activity like this, please discuss the possibility of hiring a consumer attorney with your client.
