EXPERIAN... The final battle commences

[Mistermind]

deleted

Edited July 18, 2008 by Mistermind

[redsue]

Finlander I salute you

I've the same problem with MBNA, no enforceable agreement and no default notice - oh yes and no court action from them. They say silence is golden but it's not when the keep registering the default on your credit file month after month.

I think I'll start the ball rolling myself with the CRAs - best of british to you all

[angry cat]

car2403 & Mistermind are probably correct with their warnings.

However, the British Consumer (The Electorate) cannot be toyed with.

The British/UK Consumer has "RIGHTS' under the Data Protection Act, CCA, UTTCR'S & The European Convention of Human Rights; let us not forget this!

 

Perhaps a 'Class Action' may prove a better and less risky route for the individual.

At the end of the day, what is ocurring re:unchecked, unvalidated processing of consumers data for money; is both wrong, immoral and a scandal to this country.

Furthermore, many people are suffering hardship and great difficulties that, has been/is caused by this wanton processing of personal subject data by the credit reference agencies.

 

AC

Edited June 30, 2008 by angry cat
spelling

[finlander]

tom brennan case was about compensation for his bank charges... he had already been refunded the charges plus interest but decided to take the back to court for compenstation.

 

Judge Cooke had no choice in his ruling..he asked the claimant 'do you think you breached your contract?' he answered 'no'...

 

Some would say.... and did at the time..that Toms case wase ill judged and at one point the judge openly showed his contempt for his arguements after Tom said he couldn't go out on his birthday for a pint because of the charges... The judge and others thought that it was deliberately contrived to get the case to court.

 

I agree that the OFT were probably spurred on by these case's. But that must surely be that they could see the importance and didn't want a high court case ill prepared. They are after all winning for us now.

 

As for the CRA's 'giving into me'. I dont believe they have a choice. Their own guidelines say that if a dispute is proven all entries MUST be removed. I have two in court (how much more disputed could that be) and the three CCA accounts have me, in effect , alledging that the three banks have comitted a criminal offence. Now surely that counts as a dispute?

 

That is the facts. I have told you the retreat i have offered..its no secret. Remove the defaults I go away. Their own rules say they should. where is the loss of face?

 

I have not asked them to 'give in without checking' But I do expect them to check. And when they do they should find that what I told them is the truth. What I will not allow is the 'We asked the lender and he said it was all true' rubbish.

 

As for Equifax and Call credit... as I said at the begining once EXperian have done what their own code says they should do.. I will move onto them.

 

I'm not trying to get the small claims court to re-write the magna carta or rule on 'cause celebre' I am asking them to enforce the data protection act... their job.

 

To all the Doom sayers..... lets thrash this out in this forum then.

 

My case.

 

1.two pending trial

2 no CCA's no default and perfect payment till this breach of the law

 

3.the ICO says.

 

'if dispute no default.

 

4.I say to Experian that all these lenders false info is unimportant till you publish it. They fail to investigate and simply take the lenders word.

 

That is where we will be by the time of the court action.....

 

Ok now we .. the thousands on here must be able to think as much as their clever lawyers... what is our defence if we are Experian?

[Mistermind]

deleted

Edited July 18, 2008 by Mistermind

[finlander]

while we are at it...lets discuss who has been backed into a corner....

 

My fixed rate mortgage runs out in november...with these defaulst I can't get another. If the recession deepens and intrest rates rise.. I could lose my house.

 

My bank withdrew my cheque book the other day..the reason ..these defaults...

 

I can't open another bank account... the reason.. these defaults...

 

starting to see the pattern?

 

As i said in a previous post.. I have thought about this.. obtained legal advice and asked if my insurance will cover it... the answer was yes... I am willing to go all the way rather than serve a six year sentence.

 

All experian have to do is look at the vidence I have sent them and ask the lenders to disprove my story..

[Mistermind]

deleted

Edited July 18, 2008 by Mistermind

[Sparkie1723]

Hi finlander,

There is another issue involved with CRA's taking the creditors word over yours (ours) .....discrimination..... because of position they take the word of an "institution" over the word of a living person...they must obtain the word of a "person" i.e an actual name that you can point at and say .....proove it.

 

If they can't ....sue that person for libel....then it would be you against another person and not an institution......Just a thought!!

 

sparkie

Edited June 30, 2008 by Sparkie1723

[finlander]

cheers sparkie... I have your thread down to read ... will pm you back...

[Sparkie1723]

By the way the Privy council has ruled that CRA's cannot expect to be immune from actions of libel....and libel action can be initiated in the County Courts now.

 

sparkie

[Sparkie1723]

I am also sorry to disagree with Mistermind, I had a default entry on my file once with Experian and Equifax I forced them both to remove it because I threatened libel action against them because the creditor who made the entry could not produce a signed CCA agreement that included my Data Declaration consent to pass share data and info the agreement was unenforceable and therefore no contact and no consent failed in complying with schedule 11 and 111 of the Data Protection Act.

 

They backed down....they will not risk a libel action it is far too risky for them....the reason they do not 995% of the time is they know an individual will back down first I DIDN'T and wouldn't and they knew it especially Emma Watts at Experian.

 

Not sure if members know about libel but the first and foremost rule of libel is .....IF YOU CAN'T PROOVE IT DON'T PRINT IT.

 

 

 

sparkie

[foolishgirl]

Good post Sparkie - interesting angle to come from, will read it up more. Thanks

[Sparkie1723]

Good post Sparkie - interesting angle to come from, will read it up more. Thanks

 

The other point is you must start proceedings for libel within the 12 months from the ltime you were libeled,....... with a CRA last time you were libeled..... ie the last untrue default date on your credit file.

 

Got to add if you miss that deadline ..you can still go for defamation ....making negligent miss statements even that carries a 3 yr time limit ....not six

 

sparkie

Edited June 30, 2008 by Sparkie1723

[Mistermind]

deleted

Edited July 18, 2008 by Mistermind

[finlander]

sparkie.. thanks for that... constrctive..to the point and from experience...

[Sparkie1723]

No need to be sorry to disagree. This forum thrives on variety of information.

 

If as you say "99.5% of the time they know an individual will back down first" then they are assessing case by case the credibility of an adversary, whether he has the determination, knowhow and legal funding to call their bluff. Presumably in an eyeball to eyeball situation something about you convinced them to blink first. Perhaps others can learn from this.

 

As a matter of interest, were you sufficiently funded to take the case to libel court?

 

 

Hi Mistermind glad you took no offence as non was intended

As I said you can take action for libel in the small claims if you want £5000 damages for the libel then ...its on the small claims.

At the time I was not well off and I'm not now but CRA's also know it can be done in the samll claims ....of course if you want more then its fast track and multi and the High court its up to the individual.

 

But its there the rules of libel are very narrow not much scope for them to wriggle out of.

 

sparkie

[Sparkie1723]

Example of just one case in the county courts

 

sparkie

 

A former schoolteacher has won damages in an internet libel case against one of his former pupils who posted untrue comments on a message board of the popular Friends Reunited web site.

 

The site targets former school pupils, giving them an opportunity to contact each other and post information about themselves and their memories of schooldays. It has over 6.2 million registered users and receives 200 million page impressions per month.

Jim Murray, a retired teacher, successfully sued former pupil Jonathan Spencer, in Lincoln County Court in England.

Spencer, himself a teacher, posted comments to the site that alleged that Murray was sacked for making “rude remarks about girls” and for “strangling” a pupil. Friends Reunited itself escaped liability by immediately removing the comments when they were brought to its attention by Murray.

Murray won his case in February, but has now been awarded damages of £1,250 and £150 in legal expenses

[finlander]

Sparkie...

 

Pm me any other links you have...

 

It seems we are both of the same mind

[Mistermind]

deleted

Edited July 18, 2008 by Mistermind

[Sparkie1723]

Sparkie...

 

Pm me any other links you have...

 

It seems we are both of the same mind

 

Hi finlander,

 

Just google "libel county courts" there is a lot of info there, some failures but others sucess.

 

There was also an exremely good write up by the Gaurdian Unlimited a while back explaining libel in very simple basis terms I will try and find the link to that .....It was in that that I found out about the Privy Council Ruling of 1908 and that it had never been repealed so still stands today.

 

sparkie

 

Just found the link for everyone to read and then we can all discuss the strenghts and weakness's

 

NewsDesk-UK: THIS IS LIBEL

Edited July 1, 2008 by Sparkie1723

[Gez]

Hi, I too have started this process as I believe there are defaults on my file which I know nothing about.

I knocked up this S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) geared towards CRAs as I couldn't see any about. Those of you who did S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) the CRAs, did you send the genuine bills/statements & photocopies of birth certificates/driving licences? I simply sent in photocopies of bank & CC statements. Given that I'm requesting the info be sent to my address, surely this should be sufficient..

Best of luck finlander, I truly believe you'll come off best with this!

 

 

YOUR ADDRESS

YOUR POST TOWN

YOUR POSTCODE

 

CRAs NAME

CRAs ADDRESS

CRAs POSTCODE

 

Dear Sir/Madam

Please send me all data that your company holds relating to me. Please include details of every company, individual and organisation with whom you have shared data about me.

Where you have shared data about me with other parties, I require that you supply me with true copies of documents that show that you have done so in a lawful manner and with my written & signed consent.

Where your company holds and processes data for purposes of my credit file & credit report, I require that you provide documents to show that the data held is current, accurate and relevant.

 

I understand that under the terms of the Data Protection Act 1998, you are obliged to send all data that you hold on file for the past 6 years. However, if you hold data beyond 6 years, under the above act, you must supply it on demand. If you no longer hold data beyond 6 years, I would like a signed declaration from your data controller and a copy of all documents pertaining to its proper disposal.

Please find enclosed copies of recent bank statements (and/or other relevant documents). I am sure that these should suffice as proof of my identity. Should you require further proof, please let me know exactly what items or documents you need.

 

All data, including data held on a microfiche or other such storage systems must be provided within a reasonable timescale, a maximum of 40 days.

I enclose the statutory fee of £10

 

Yours sincerely

 

Your name

Edited July 1, 2008 by Gez
typo

[Sparkie1723]

HI Gez

you should not send such stuff as Bank statements even to a CRA, they are only required to ask you to produce the minimum data in order to comply with an S.A.R - (Subject Access Request).

 

sparkie

[Gez]

Cheers Sparkie.

 

Well, I only sent photocopies of one statement. However, they do ask for a real copy and a photocopy of your birth certificate or driving licence to get a credit report so I'm anticipating that they will make the same request for my S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)'s.

I don't intend giving them anything else so the 40 days will continue to run from 12 days ago when I sent them. My bank & credit card issuer both complied with no ID whatsoever because my address is where they send the data anyway. Whether to go to the Information Commissioners Office or court to force disclosure in the event of non-compliance might be my next decision (apart from making a new giant letterbox!). Anyway, I'll leave this thread to finlander, I just wondered if anyone had sent any proof of ID with their S.A.R - (Subject Access Request).

Edited July 1, 2008 by Gez
The earth would have imploded if I hadn't

[foolishgirl]

You shouldn't have to send full ID to CRA 'cos after all they hold your name, address (& LOTS of other personal ) details on their files & if the info. is incorrect, bang goes their Data Protection polices & so called compliance with DPA! So unless you've moved house recently & not updated CC, banks etc. (& by default therefore CRA files) why do they want extra proof of who they are sending that data to?

 

They are playing games but you may not get the data you want if you don't give them something for them to pass thro' their bureaucratic system; the alternative is to report it to ICO. And do you really want that hassle?! (and probably nil result)

 

However I def. would not send d. licence - it just gives them some more info. to pass on to their 'nice' DCA friends. BC doesn't matter - they have that info. anyway but would only send photocopy as you might not get original back. If they're not happy it's pucker they can check with Register Office themselves by simple tel. call.

[citizenB]

 

Just found the link for everyone to read and then we can all discuss the strenghts and weakness's

 

NewsDesk-UK: THIS IS LIBEL

 

Thanks for this link sparkie, very informative.