EXPERIAN... The final battle commences

[Goldlady]

Subbing. This will be my next big mission - have already got one of four relating to the same debt removed by Experian. Quite a few more to go!!

 

Best of luck:p

[boss lady]

Hi All

 

Just read this great thread. Lloyds TSB bless them have recorded two defaults on my credit record without even sending a default notice. I am now ready to join the battle.

[finlander]

car 2403... thanks for that and I have had a read through this and alot of other threads. My thinking is that we tend to get to tied up dealing with the lenders and experian. My plan is simple.

 

the IOC own guidelines says that if there is a reasonable dispute then the info must be removed. I intend to prove there is a reasonable dispute. If they don't agree and refuse to remove the default I will take experian NOT the lenders to court. The lenders can say anything they like against me in the privacy of their own office it is only when the CRA's publish it that it becomes so damaging. If the lenders have stated an untruth (which I think the ICO own guidelines will help prove they have) it is upto experian to stop publishing. I think this will work.

 

If the daily mail published an article saying finlander molests guinea pigs because barclays says so then that would be damaging. If I then challenged this and The Daily mails entire investigation consisted of asking barclays and excepting that their 'oh yes it's true' then I think you would agree they would be in serious trouble.

 

Thats what the CRA's and the lenders are doing. They then tie us up in the 'go speak to the lender' ploy

 

Concentrate on the publisher .. not the liar. thats my plan:grin:

 

NO letting of the hook...just experian... Justify your data or withdraw:wink:

[tifo]

subscribing .....

[tifo]

i assume this all applies to Equifax and Callcredit as well?

[BankFodder]

this is the last response i got back from them.

 

Thank you for your queries received on 13 and 16 June 2008. In view of your comments about the Barclays defaults, I am writing to them for you, as I cannot amend your report without their consent.

.

This is at odds with their obligations. It is not a question of consent. It is merely a question of whether the data is carried lawfully

[BankFodder]

Heads up

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/announcement.php?f=84&a=128

[tifo]

I included a reference to the Woodbridge Lease precedent leaving Experian in no doubt that they will need to be 100% confident of the DCA's assertions if they are to avoid litigation.Even "nearly right" could be very expensive for Experian.

 

What's the relevant part in this case law?

[finlander]

No answer or acknowledgement of my letter yet.

 

Thanks bankfodder for that link. i think that the banks that register a default when the claim is already in the court and stayed are on a really really stick wicket.

 

THE CRA's definately are. The ICO definately says that if there is a dispute all information should be deleted. How much more of a dispute can you get?

 

Im hoping this tactic I am going to try will work for bank charges defaults and CCA requests. Both of these must be considered serious disputes. One is subject to a test case and the other is an allegation of a breach of consumer credit law.

 

I'm not sure how effective it will be for those without a dispute getting the entries removed and I wont be able to find out as all mine are in dispute.

 

But for those people I would say that the ICO still says that the CRA's must be able to prove that the correct procedures were followed , default notices etc.. so it's still worth a push....

[tifo]

i will make a start as well on CRAs. It's about time i think.

[Sparkie1723]

i will make a start as well on CRAs. It's about time i think.

 

 

Yes tifo, The more people who really challenge the CRA's the more likely we will get fairer treatment instead of being ignored and "walked over".

 

 

sparkie

[tifo]

Yes tifo, The more people who really challenge the CRA's the more likely we will get fairer treatment instead of being ignored and "walked over".

 

 

sparkie

 

Thanks sparkie,

 

I've read with interest your posts on CRA entries and have had some success previously (only marked for 28 days then re-instated in full) but have not taken further action.

 

I'm like many people here who has made CCA requests and got nothing back, yet the DCA maintains defaults and harasses for payment.

[tifo]

is there any requirement to send TWO forms of ID to a CRA if they ask in response to a credit report request (£2 fee)?

 

why do they ask when all we want is the info to be sent to the name and address they have on the system, confirmed by the electoral register, which matched the request details anyway?

 

experian always seem to ask and i've had about three reports from them last year, spoken with them by telephone and corresponded by email, when they were happy to talk and provide all the info i asked for.

 

i don't want to send these as i don't want their 'clients' getting this information, such as my driving license or passport, but they keep asking.

 

s.7(3) DPA 1998 states :

 

(3) A data controller is not obliged to comply with a request under this section unless he is supplied with such information as he may reasonably require in order to satisfy himself as to the identity of the person making the request and to locate the information which that person seeks.

Edited June 25, 2008 by tifo

[Sparkie1723]

Thanks sparkie,

 

I've read with interest your posts on CRA entries and have had some success previously (only marked for 28 days then re-instated in full) but have not taken further action.

 

I'm like many people here who has made CCA requests and got nothing back, yet the DCA maintains defaults and harasses for payment.

 

Hi tifo,

Every time the CRA removes the dispute notice file another one ......each time you do the CRA must contact the supplier and they must record that contact so ......if you think they haven't at any time SAR the CRA to proove they have..........because what happens sometimes is the CRA will tell you they have ...when they haven't........if this happens then the CRA is in breach of the DPA..and the CCA.

 

sparkie

[Sparkie1723]

A CRA does not need such specific identification such as you state.......... only who you are your address and any previous address's date of birth and stuff like that.

The ony time they can ask for items as you say is IF they suspect fraud.

 

sparkie

[tifo]

The ony time they can ask for items as you say is IF they suslect fraud.

 

As i said, they've been happy to send it before, and talk to me about it on phone and email.

 

Even if fraud, all they're being asked to do is send the info to the name and address they have on file, which has been verified by the electroral register.

 

I may provide my bills once, showing my name and address, but then not every time. I'm not sending anything else.

[finlander]

For experian I just wrote my SAR and got it... no other requests for extra ID... so that may be a new thing to slow you down... being honest I would give them all the ID they require. They know most of it anyway as the DVLA database has been sold as has the electoral role etc ...etc..

 

Equifax came up with a very dodgy questionaire which was alot more intrusive. Told them to s:)d off and have written to the ICO and told him this is just a veiled info harvesting scheme. See what they say

 

[finlander]

I think wj=hen it comes to correction notices then that is the point we are about to enter the lake of treacle and get tied up by the CRA's and the lenders.

 

Thats why in this statagy I have one tactic... 28 days correction.. fine... aftetr 28 days if info isn't deleted.... court action.. no more requests ..prevarication etc etc...

 

If they are posting wrong info then it is wrong. No amount of correction notices , letters or blind refusals will make it go away. it's either removed or the claim is on it's way. Avoid the treacle trap by refusing to step into it!!!!

 

remember the ICO's advice to the CRA's....

 

 

Credit reference agencies potentially have a defence against action through the courts by individuals who successfully challenge the accuracy of data received from a lender. However, this defence is only available if the agency takes reasonable steps to make sure the data is accurate and, as soon as they become aware of the challenge, takes steps to mark the file accordingly7. Records where the accuracy is challenged can be marked as ‘under query’. This marker alone is unlikely to be sufficient to provide protection against claims, including those for compensation. Agencies should therefore ask the lender to substantiate the disputed information within a reasonable time frame, for example, 28 days, and, if the lender is unable to substantiate the disputed information in that time, should suppress the information from the file.

If we conclude that there is a genuine, reasonable and unresolved dispute between the borrower and lender, then we are likely to find that personal data have been processed unfairly if a default has been filed. Defaults filed in these circumstances may also be inadequate for the purpose of credit referencing in that they do not provide meaningful information about the creditworthiness of the customer.

Ignore the 'lets write loads of letters auntil hell freezes over' tactic.

[tifo]

here's what i meant :

 

[TideTurner]

Are these people having a laugh? What planet do they think you're from - Pluto? During the times of identity theft, do they honestly believe that people would forward such information.

 

In order for them to verify it, they must have it available to them, else they are simply collating data. If the former, where did they get the data from, under what authority, what right have they got to store / provide it? Is it stored securely? Who has access to it?

 

This is not a Government department, and therefore have no right to provide your information.

 

Mad:mad:

[tifo]

Are these people having a laugh? What planet do they think you're from - Pluto? During the times of identity theft, do they honestly believe that people would forward such information.

 

I know, but then i don't get my credit report from them.

 

There are other ways they can verify me, i.e. by debit/credit card, questions on phone etc.

 

I may SAR them, but they will ask for the same ID again. Banks do this, they're happy to talk to you, offer refunds, send statements, even send cheques, yet when you do a SAR they want proof of ID. Why?

[tifo]

to order a report online, they ask "Please tell us Why you are applying for a copy of your report?"

 

Do i have to say Why? Does there have to be a reason to see my own report. I was thinking of putting "because i want to sue you after i get my report".

 

to order by Tel, they charge an extra £1.50. Why, when they already make money from the phone call? "Your statutory report costs £2 and the fee for ordering your credit report by phone is £1.50, total £3.50."

[TideTurner]

Under the DPA 1984 / 1998, there is no requirement for you to provide proof of your identity, but they must provide your details on request. This is an attempted kop out.

 

They must provide this information within 40 days or they are committing a criminal offence.

 

Tide

[tifo]

They must provide this information within 40 days or they are committing a criminal offence.

 

That's for a S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) and i posted s.7(3) Data Protection Act 1998 in a previous post which states they can ask for ID to satisfy themselves.

 

But, they are only being asked to send to the name and address they hold on record.

 

Online, they require last 3 addresses even if you've been in the current one for over the usual 5 years. That's too much info and not required i think.

[BankFodder]

You can be certain that if you provide them with a new recent address for the delivery, they will update their records with that new address and circulate that information to DCAs etc.