That's a very useful and interesting set of points you make. It looks like if you have money - e.g. one half of a couple with debts and other "clean" - then there is all kind of scope for "doing deals", probably about 5 minutes before the court case starts. Of course, a deal could see you getting a substantial discount on the alleged debt AND a clean bill of health on your credit files. However, to return to the subject of this thread, surely you can see the advantage of trying to force the creditor to either produce the agreement or admit to the court that they don't have it. (You don't have to actually bring any action after the CPR 31.16 hearing) Then you could pay off, say, 10p in the pound for full and final settlement with all the defaults removed. Knowledge is power!

Go get 'em!

Subbing also.

Is this true? I have been trying to get definite confirmation on this point for some time in other places on this forum. On my friend's credit files, the date of the default is clearly listed as the month and year it happened. As this is 2005 but she is on a 10 year payment plan, are you saying that a default will still show until 2025? If so, how? I would have thought that a CCJ would be a bigger black mark than a default when trying to obtain credit (for example for a competitive current account, before people say they don't want credit anyway). Don't CCJs prevent you from joining certain professions and types of companies as well? Plus of course if you lose in court and it was not small claims then you are going to see potentially £thousands added onto your total debt for legal fees, etc.

And another thing. This breaches a very important concept in law - that of not appying legislation retrospectively. Yes, but not for pre-2007 agreements. You reall have to wonder if a judge would take such a bone-headed view on this.

If that is the view being taken by the ICO then I am not surprised that people think that they always side with the banks! Yes, making payments would tend to suggest that a credit facility existed. Yes, an unenforceable credit agreement may still have a term in it where the debtor consents to sharing of their information with third parties such as Credit Reference Agencies (CRAs). But doesn't a default in fact terminate the credit agreement anyway, and therefore no further information should be shared after this time. And what if no copy of the agreement exists at all? How does the fact that you made some payments prove that you consented to data sharing? I am no expert on the Data Protection Act, and perhaps I am missing something here. But surely any data passed to CRAs should be true. And how can it be true if the amounts cannot be confirmed? Sorry, but that is very lazy thinking from the ICO. If a so-called "debt" actually consists even partly of unlawful bank charges, wrongly calculated interest, or any other inappropriate sums, how on earth can these defaults be appropriate? If I was acquitted of theft in a court of law, would it be right for an agency to keep a database showing that I was guilty? Would it be right for these details to be passed onto my prospective employer, causing me to miss out on a job? Would I be entitled to damages for this?

21...20...19...18...17...16...15...14...13...12...11...10...9...8...7...6...5...4...3...2...1.... Looking forward to hearing what the postman brings tomorrow, SMT!!!

Not to mention inaccurate news by the sound of it.

Because you don't know if they have a copy of the agreement or not. You don't want to play Russian Roulette here. If they DO have the agreement, and they issue proceedings, then the day that the Court Claim arrives on your doorstep, it is too late. Even if you use CPR 31.14 and get the agreement, they will press ahead with the Claim, they will defeat you in Court, they will get a CCJ against you, and then you will have the problem of this serious black mark against you for 6 years. Plus the payment plan ordered by the Judge will be legally binding and they can send in the bailiffs if you fall behind on your payments at any time. Ok, so maybe they don't have the agreement, in which case then your suggestion will work fine. But why take the risk? Surely far better to keep paying for a few months until you get a positive result under CPR 31.16 like this one: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/165349-smt37-morgan-stanley-goldfish.html Then they have to either send you a copy of the agreement, or admit in writing that they don't have it. Then you can stop paying, safe in the knowledge that you can never be chased for the "debt" again. And of course you may be able to stop your credit file being trashed any further - no CCA agreement = no right to pass your data to 3rd parties.

Subbing. And hoping they might stop harrassing people for debts they've written off anyway.....

More from the Synectics website:- National Fraud Initiative (NFI) The Audit commission's National Fraud Initiative (NFI) is a computerised data matching exercise to detect housing benefit, payroll and other frauds perpetrated upon local authorities, NHS bodies and other public and private sector organisations. Run every two years, here is a summary of NFI 2006; • 1333 participating authorities. • 4994 submitted data sets. • 230 million rows of data in total. • 13.3 million matches to possible frauds. New for NFI 2006 was the introduction of online results delivery, comprising of a secure web based application handling up to 30,000 concurrent sessions from 5,029 distinct users. NFI 2008 will see further increases in the number of datasets causing exponential growth to the size of the project. This project has saved in excess of £300m of public money. SIRA Mail Order Syndicated Intelligence for Risk Avoidance (SIRA) is an operation based around a shared database for the mail order sector which is designed to prevent fraudulent claims for Goods Lost In Transit (GLIT). This solution is provided for the country's largest mail order companies. Containing over 18 million customers, 24 million accounts, 380 million orders and processing over 250,000 new product orders every day, many of these with detailed parcel tracking information. This system is a proven implementation of web technology which has been performance tested with over 1 billion transactions. Each customer is scored for risk. Any customer who claims for goods lost in transit which require investigation are referred to the Mail Order fraud investigators by a set of rules which have been agreed with each organisation. All matching and analysis reports are provided securely over the Internet through browser based software applications. SIRA Financial SIRA Financial builds on the work of SIRA Mail Order. It's a new browser based software application that is being used in the finance industry to detect fraudulent applications. Users have the ability to create and configure business rules which are used to check new applications for financial products (such as mortgages, bank accounts and loans) against known previous fraudulent and suspicious applications. The system allows the users to access prioritised lists of applications to investigate. The priority is determined based on the needs of the business so that applications requiring a quick turnaround are investigated first. The view for each user can also be configured to allow access only to those applications which they are qualified to investigate. Land Rover Since 1995 Synectics Solutions have provided the database management service behind the multiple award winning Land Rover UK direct marketing activity. The database holds details of customers and prospects, their vehicle ownership history and all inbound and outbound contacts. Working together with Land Rover management and their marketing agencies Synectics Solutions help identify the key target groups for a range of strategic communications from prospect generation to customer welcome packs, in service communications, driver events and repurchase follow up. In addition, a full range of campaign tracking reports are produced to help monitor the success of all communication activities. Co-op The Co-operative Group (tCG), based in Manchester is the largest consumer co-op in the UK. It now owns over 1600 food stores in the UK leading the top-up food shopping sector with their Welcome and Market Town stores. Synectics Solutions have been helping tCG with ordering seasonal lines since 2001 by providing a centrally run, sales based web browser solution aimed at ordering an appropriate product range and volumes. The new streamlined allocation process has given the organisation much closer control over seasonal allocations, and has reduced the time that local store management have needed to spend on seasonal allocations. The system has allowed tCG to provide allocations to over 600 newly acquired stores with little additional load on staff resources. For Christmas 2003, the system allocated 827 product lines with a total retail value of £53.5 million.

I just called Synectics on the number in Alliance & Leicester's terms and conditions (01782 664000). Finding anything out was a convoluted process and I had to call them twice and I was then passed around a few people. So I don't think they are too used to receiving these kind of requests. Anyway, I was told to write a letter to Steve Sands in the Finance & Legal Department, setting out exactly what data I would like to see, enclosing a cheque for £10 and a copy of some photographic ID to confirm my identity. I will send this off asap, and I will post a copy of what I receive back on this thread.

Registration Number: Z6791784 Date Registered: 10 July 2002 Registration Expires: 09 July 2009 Data Controller: SYNECTICS SOLUTIONS LTD Address: SYNECTICS HOUSE THE HOLLIES THE BRAMPTON NEWCASTLE STAFFORDSHIRE ST5 0QY

About Synectics Solutions Ltd Synectics Solutions is an independently owned data management company which was established in 1992. ..... We operate from two secure sites and run managed database services solutions for many blue chip clients. We have billions of rows of data under active management in our secure data centres which are regularly audited by our customers, our suppliers and third party data security consultants.

Thank you for clarifying that, Sumbuddi. I did not intend to cause you any offence. I was only asking because sometimes people come on this forum and others, defending banks, etc. with all sorts of nonsense arguments, and it later emerges that they work for the bank in question! By the way, I have a relative who works for a financial institution, and your comments about automatic versus manual processes are in line with what he/she has told me. It's always less advanced than people assume. I have read the Wikipedia article and thank you for creating it. I am not a conspiracy theorist but I am suspicious by default. The N Hunter report on MoneySavingExpert is only one example, and I would like to see a few more before coming to a view on whether they tned to hold a lot of data or very little. This is one of the reasons that I decided to pay £10 for a copy of my file (which I only sent off yesterday). What also concerns me is how many other "secret" databases there may be out there, which is why I set up a new thread. So far I have contacted just one bank (Alliance & Leicester) and they have given me a list of 6 companies that they may have shared my personal information with: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/credit-reference-agencies/197936-just-how-many-secret.html

Hi Sumbuddi, Sorry to repeat myself, but I notice mine was the only comment you didn't respond to. Are you connected in any way, or have you ever been connected in any way, to the National Hunter database? If not, how come you know so much about it? Especially considering that you say you're not sufficiently interested to fork out £10. Personally, I am sufficiently interested and that's why I sent them a letter and a cheque yesterday. I will certainly post up what I find out for the benefit of others. By the way, I'm not trying to start a fight with you, I am just interested in why a new user would suddenly appear on CAG with an interest in only one subject - N Hunter Limited. And not for the same reasons that most people are interested.

Hi sumbuddi Do you have some experience or information on N Hunter? Are you, or have you, been connected to them in any way? Not accusing you of anything, but when a new poster appears and only posts on one subject (and not one of the main threads on CAG) it raises an obvious question! Thanks for clarifying.

So Tesco for example? (who are both a bank and a lender and, guess what, have a loyalty card as well). I do agree with you - there is no point in making stuff up. That's why I wrote to N Hunter yesterday to see what data they hold on me. I am also going to subject access request any other companies I come across in my investigations. I will post all the results here:- http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/credit-reference-agencies/197936-just-how-many-secret.html

The point is that if this went to court they may have to disclose details of this process - you have to disclose everything at court. Reason enough for them not to want it to go that far.

N Hunter's website (Problems gaining credit) says: However, Section 7 of the Data Protection Act only says: I am already concerned about these companies holding too much information about me, and I have no intention of sending them even more information myself. If they already know everything about me, I fail to see why they need all this - I particularly don't understand why they need to see a document with my photo on it. Let's see who wins the argument about what they "reasonably require".

Here is a copy of the letter which I have sent to N Hunter today. -------------------- The Data Controller N HUNTER Limited PO Box 2756 Stoke-on-Trent ST6 9AQ Dear Sir / Madam, It has come to my attention that your organization may hold information about me. I wish to apply under section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998 for a copy of ALL such information, and I enclose the statutory fee of £10 made payable to N Hunter Limited. Here are my personal details: Title: XX Forename: XX Middle name: XX Surname: XX Current Address: XX Date of Birth: XX Other addresses where I have been resident in the past 6 years: XX I look forward to receiving this information within the 40 day statutory period. Yours faithfully

I have just called the above number given for Experian Decision Analytics. I was told that the company "Experian Decision Analytics" was previously known as "NCL Software" and that they developed a computer program called "Hunter". It was stressed to me that "Hunter" the program is not the same as "National Hunter" the database. I was told that Experian Decision Analytics ("we") do not hold any data on customers. I was then given the number 0115 941 0888 as their 'Head Office'. This turned out to be Experian's standard customer help centre for idiot questions about credit files. The woman I spoke to insisted that there were only 3 companies who share customers' personal data, and that Experian Decision Analytics are "the same company" as Experian Limited". She had never heard of National Hunter.

From the N Hunter thread

I think the key excellent point here is that you are going to be able to show proof of a loss - which is crucial in a successful court action for damages. If it went to court, the car finance company would be obliged to reveal their decision making process, and you would get to find out what rate you would have achieved without the default still showing. Of course, that doesn't mean they aren't allowed to keep data on your file for 6 years + 28 days. That is a separate question, which somebody may be able to advise on. CRAs are carrying on how they like with no risk of challenge - we are long overdue some test cases!

I contacted my bank (Alliance & Leicester) and found they do not use N Hunter Limted. But there are a few other names, so I set this new thread up here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/credit-reference-agencies/197936-just-how-many-secret.html