The Credit Reporting Agency has been re-aging the credit accounts reported on my credit report and has caused older negative accounts to look more recent which has adversely effected my employment. I have maintained a XXXX for over 25 years and I never ignored my financial obligations, but after I was XXXX I requested the SCRA financial protection from my creditors and my all creditors began filing adverse credit reports, increased the interest rates, closed all of my accounts within 4 months and reported I had requested the closures. I had been making my payments and have had to document my payments and disputed the information for years, but the Credit Reporting Agencies always said the creditor has verified the information. Equifax has provided my credit information to the XXXX and based on that information, the XXXX intended to terminate my ability to maintain my XXXX while I was XXXX in XXXX. This has resulted in me being unqualified to continue working in my field of expertise, as I had for the past 25 years. I have found evidence that Equifax has been re-aging the original accounts reported by my creditors and this is the negative account information that was provided to the XXXX. Accounts that transferred or sold from one debt collector to another, and the date of first activity on the accounts make the delinquency look more resent, the dates of the first delinquency should not change. The date of first delinquency determines how long a negative account can remain on your credit reports and a negative credit item, such as a charge-off can only remain on my credit report for 7 years from the date of first delinquency. Section 623 ( 5 ) ( A ) says : " In general. A person who furnishes information to a consumer reporting agency regarding a delinquent account being placed for collection, charged to profit or loss, after furnishing the information, notify the agency of the date of delinquency on the account, which shall be the month and year of the commencement of the delinquency on the account that immediately preceded the action. '' This means that if a debt collector reports a date of first delinquency to the credit bureaus and the original creditor previously reported it, the dates must be the same date of first delinquency. Any different date constitutes illegal re-aging. This re-aging of my accounts has cause serious damage to my credit files, I 'm hoping that this will be corrected quickly since I am provided my previous credit reports as attachments as evidence of the original dates of the first delinquency reported. The Credit Report I received from Equifax would be empty if not for the re-aging of the remaining accounts on your credit report, because the FCRA requires that information reported be in compliance with the date of first delinquency and the name of the party who reported the date of first delinquency. XXXX XXXX filed their first notice of delinquency when I requested that the SCRA interest rate adjustment to the account because I had been making payments in access of the required amounts and the balance of the account was n't reflecting that. Their attorney stated that XXXX XXXX was n't required to grant my request for the SCRA because the contract interest rate was below 5 % and any excess payments were applied to the other fees and charges. XXXX does n't have the legal right to deny mt SCRA request without first having a court order granting them the right not to comply with the Federal Statutes of the SCRA Financial protections and the SCRA Interest Rate provision requires a creditor not to accelerate the account for non payments of the obligation until the SCRA requirements are in compliance, ignoring my SCRA request is n't permitted without a court order and the attorney should have known.