watching with interest...all the best

I found some guidance, but not the detailed stuff from the ICO This 1 late payment marker, for a very small amount, has ruined all my hard work over the last year. I'm writing to the bank to see if they will remove it as a gesture of goodwill (common sense). ho hum...it's hard to stay ahead of these banks, i tell ya

Hi There I'm looking for guidance on credit reporting for current accounts. I've checked with the FOS and ICO and cannot seem to find anything. The reason I ask is this. Recently, within the last year or 18 months, my first direct current account started to appear on my credit file, which is fine. However, a few months ago a payment was returned (for £9.87) right at the end of the month. All other DDs and payments were fine. So first direct posted a late payment marker for that month. The payment was taken again a few days later. So it now looks like I've missed a payment on a credit agreement. Since then this has happened twice, with a DD being returned and then paid a few days later when re-requested. I personally think this is heavy handed and doesnt actually reflect the account behaviour for that month. Anyway, that's a different discussion. What I am looking for is the guidance provided to banks etc on when is appropriate to post late payment markers. I know it's somewhere as I've seen it myself, but cannot track it down. Any advice much appreciated.

I say maybe in case I get sued! Ok, here it is. I used to subscribe to all 3 credit reference agencies (CRAs) in order to keep track of things and because I was taking a former bank to court, so needed access to my files. Once that was over (I didnt win or lose, but got what I wanted, after 3 years), I opted out of paying these guys and suspended the accounts. I should mention that during the 2 years I had regular access to the CRA reports, I spent a huge amount of time having things corrected. I would say they were only about 75% accurate at any given time. Fast forward a year or so and I need to see my reports again. Lo and behold, the innacuracies are pretty amazing. I feel that this could be isolated to me, but I'm not so sure. This time around and I'm correcting so much information again, it's not even funny. There seems to be a co-dependency between the financial institutions and the CRAs that benefits only them and not the consumer. If we get declined for credit, they dont tell us why, but ask us to access our report, which we have to pay for. Why cant they just tell us the reason? There's no legislation that suggests they cannot be transparent about this. So now I'm running around asking the CRAs to correct various bits of information, for them to go back to whichever clown got it wrong and ask their permission to change it! It doesnt make any sense. The reason I went to court years ago was because there was false and damaging information on my credit file. The CRA refused to remove it, despite me showing them evidence it was wrong. The bank refused to change it, despite being unable to prove it should stand. 3 years later we end up in court and the judge recommends we come to an agreement or go to full hearing. Only then did the bank back down and correct the information. It could have saved everyone thousands if they'd taken a common sense approach and corrected the info. I'm rambling, but I'm sick of this $h/t, spending hours correcting errors from the banks which make my credit profile look bad. The system needs reviewing as it heavily favours the CRAs and banks, and leaves us scratching around with little idea of how to change things. Thoughts?

don't lose heart just yet, it all depends on what they did and in what order did they default you after you claimed charges back or before?

they dont need a default notice for a bank account, trust me, I've been through this. however, if they repaid you the charges some time ago and then defaulted you on the same account, you do have a chance...that's how I got the judge's attention in my case if they repaid you, it doesnt make sense that they can then default you...or should invalidate the original default I will keep reading your posts and try to help. You absolutely must take them to court, they wont take you seriously otherwise

lo and behold, 5 months after the court date and the default has still not been removed from the CallCredit file, despite an order of the court. what next? go back to the court and make them aware this has been ignored? Of course I've contacted Abbey, who sent me a standard letter about my 'complaint' amazing really, I dropped all monetary claims for a quick resolution, but I'm now tempted to claim the whole lot for an additional 5 months damage to credit etc. i think i will just go back to the court that made the order and open up the case again...the judge will be immensely displeased that we're back there!

reading with interest French. word of warning, even though you get judgment by default, this can be set aside at any time. I sincerely hope it isn't, but it happened to me months after I got judgment by default. although, if you make it to court for restitutionary damages and they still havent put in an appearance, or response, it's highly unlikely the court will sympathise with them. all the best

did they default you on the account that they returned the charges for? was it an overdraft? you may need to go through some steps to get some sense out of them. Do you still have the letters relating to the refunded amounts?

i will post up more detailed legal info, asap, if that will help others

Here's what happened, in brief as it ended up being a 3-hour hearing, scheduled for 2. I went to court to get a default removed from my credit file, added due to a disputed overdraft debt of, wait for it, £108. See here for backstory.. First of all this was a set aside hearing, as the defendant, Abbey, had failed to respond to my initial claim. So I got Judgment by Default. They wanted this judgment set aside. So that was the first order of business, after which they wanted my claim struck out altogether for having "no real prospect of success". The judge agreed that the Defendant should state her case, and she asked if she should do it just for the set aside request, or for their entire argument, which included my initial case being thrown out. The judge asked for all of it. At one point during the opening I tried to chip in, being unfamiliar with the process, and a Litigant in Person. The judge dismissed me with a wave and said I would get my chance to speak. My heart sunk at this point as he was quite cheery with the 'learned counsel' and quite abrupt with me, so I thought this would be another one down to the judge lottery. The defendant tore apart my Subject Access argument, plus s87 of the CCA, saying they had exemption from part 5 and therefore did not require any signed agreement for the overdraft. However, when I got my chance to speak I asked to see the Part V exemption, which they didnt have. The judge was satisfied that it did indeed exist. He was also satisfied they had sent me default letters and notices, despite not being required to, which I found odd. It was all going badly wrong! Then we came to the issue of the defaults being posted with the CRAs. Abbey did post one with CallCredit in Dec 2006, when they allege they had rightfully defaulted me. The defendant also claimed they had posted this with Experian at the same time. They hadn't. The default only appeared on Experian last year, when I first noticed and queried the CallCredit one. Anyway, I finally had the judges attention. I had completely muddled my POCs and arguments, with the key one being buried. Back in 2007, I challenged Abbey over bank charges, still ignorant of the fact they had defaulted me the year before. They settled out of court and paid me about £2500. In 2009, I spotted the default, queried it, and their response was to post the default with another CRA, Experian. 3 years after the account had closed. So, this all come out in court and moments before throwing me out, I think the judge decided I did indeed have a case, just not exactly the one I had presented. He was a man of few words and wanted me to take the initiative and decide what to do. I said I would push forward, refocus my POC and arguments and, if the court allowed it, press ahead to a full hearing. He didnt say anything except that he would retire for 5 minutes leaving me and the defendant alone. So, despite their also being a compensation element to my claim for damage to creditworthiness, I simply wanted the defaults removed and have been fighting for that for 3 years through reasoned, polite negotiation, the FOS and ICO...which got me exactly nowhere. So, I said to the defendant, this will go to a hearing as you can see, but if you guys just remove the default we can all get back to our lives and not waste any more time on this. One phonecall to the client and all was agreed. The judge seemed pretty amazed their was no claim for costs by either side...i think his view of me changed right there, too late! What have i learned from this? I was amazed this even went to court considering no money was owed. The CRAs are entirely within the control of their masters, the various financial institutions, who give them reason to exist. I battled for months with Experian to remove this wholly false default, posted 3 years later! I have about 12 email exchanges with a senior manager there who flat out refused to even consider removing the default, despite seeing no evidence from Abbey that I defaulted. Well, they will be removing it now by order of the court. It's completely stunning I had to go to court to prove my innocence, as the assumption is that all credit information is perfect, unless the banks tell them otherwise. I'm considering my next steps with Experian. If you believe you've been wrongly defaulted, take it to court. You really have nothing to lose, aside from the off fee of £75. More to follow...

Ok, here goes... Nobody won or lost, as it was a set-aside hearing. But I got what I went there for, so it's a victory in a sense. The default has been removed from all CRAs after a 3 year fight! I will post up more details as soon as I've finished my work!!

am in court in 2 hours, although i feel like I'm drowning now. Hope I can hold it together.

you dared challenge the banks over bank charges? well, this is their most effective response to that...they do their nest to default you, to teach you a lesson n'all! same happened to me, am in court on Tuesday. what you need to do next is this: get copies of all correspondence AND the default notice or even default warning letter (letter of intention to file a default) you can do this by issuing a Subject Access Request...see info here and do your research there will be a number of options open to you, but it depends on what paperwork you have, or what will be sent to you by them If they defaulted you when the account was in dispute, or the default amount was comprised partly or wholly of bank charges, you have a case If the default letter or notice didnt give you sufficient time to respond, you have a case. read all you can on this site, try to settle it amicably, and when that doesnt work (which it wont!), start legal proceedings when I have more time I can provide better guidance, but follow the link above, cos that's where i learnt everything anyway (thanks CAR!)

I CANT BELIEVE I MISSED THIS!! Just checking and double checking my paperwork for court on Tuesday, and managed to decipher the system codes and notes from Abbey. From the dates, it looks like they gave me 28 days to settle the account before they would issue a DN and report to CRA. I paid, despite never receiving a letter of intention to file, within 19 days...and they still defaulted me!! I'm not sure what to do now? Do I submit a letter to the judge that new information has come to light that could expedite a speedy resolution..? Don't know how I missed this. System notes say: 21/12/2006 - Sent letter of Intention to File a Default 08/01/2007 - Account settled (£108) and closed 22/12/2006 - Default posted with CallCredit 05/05/2009 - Default posted with Experian (yes, 3 years later) According to their template Default Intent letter, they gave me 28 days to act...I acted in 19 days and still got defaulted!