EXPERIAN... The final battle commences

[thecteam]

Hi All first post here.

 

have been reading this thread for a little while and i have followed a few others before joining.

 

i have got as far as a written reply from Experian stating that the information will be kept on my credit file.

 

so on reading sparkies message about libel i have sent them a reply asking them now to prove to me that Cabot has proved under no shadow of doubt that they can put to print a statement on my credit report without the correct paperwork in place.

gave them 14days to reply even though they can ask for 28 i believe. or is that just for the first reply.

 

will keep you posted and subcribing to thread.

[sosumi]

Just to say I'm in awe here! Please just be careful Finlander, everybody... xx

... should add I'll start another thread here when head clears, one DCA has had an illegal Default on my credit files from last year... long story. Well it was removed entirely last month, then re-submirred. The time defaulted hadn't changed, but the actual input had changed completely. Big mystery...

Edited July 1, 2008 by sosumi
added a bit

[Guest Alison82]

Would the Freedom of Information Act work here to exactly what they have and how the verify the information?

 

 

I'm very interested in this, I recently saw my report, I have 5 defaults!! 1 the CCA is not properly prescribed, 2 were in relation to penalty charges, 1 was for a mobile phone contract that I was not notified about and the other one I knew nothing about and is fully paid off again no notice I think. Also I have a few other accounts that shows late payments but again I am sure there are no CCA's as one of them was a catalogue and I know I didn't sign a CCA for that.

 

 

 

Good Luck

[car2403]

The Freedom of Information Act only applies to Public bodies - the CRA is a private company, so it doesn't apply to them.

[thecteam]

> Thank you for your e-mail received 1 July 2008, which has been brought to my attention in the Directors' Office. Straight to the top, a few more of these and the Director will be earning his keep for a change.

>

> The response we received from Cabot was sent via e-mail. I can forward a copy of this response if you wish me to do so. Cabot stated in their response the following:

>

> 'Please request the consumer contact Cabot Financial directly to try and resolve this matter. We have sent a copy of the signed Credit Agreement signed by the consumer and therefore have fully cooperated with the consumers dispute.' I have been trying to resolve this issue for over 3yrs now.

 

>

> With regards to the sharing of this information and your interpretation of the Data Protection Act 1998 I presume you are referring to Schedules 2 (II) and 3 (III). Schedule 3 relates to the processing of 'sensitive' personal data. I have copied below Section 2 of the Data Protection Act 1998 that defines 'sensitive' personal data:

>

> 2 Sensitive personal data

>

> In this Act 'sensitive personal data' means personal data consisting of information as to-

>

> (a) the racial or ethnic origin of the data subject,

> (b) his political opinions,

> © his religious beliefs or other beliefs of a similar nature,

> (d) whether he is a member of a trade union (within the meaning of the [1992 c. 52.] Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992),

> (e) his physical or mental health or condition,

> (f) his sexual life,

> (g) the commission or alleged commission by him of any offence, or

> (h) any proceedings for any offence committed or alleged to have been committed by him, the disposal of such proceedings or the sentence of any court in such proceedings.

>

> With regards to the issue of consent, the common law holds that a lender has an implied contractual duty to keep a consumer's affairs private, but that duty is qualified under the Tournier principles. (Tournier v National Provincial and Union Bank of England (1924) 1 KB 461, CA).

>

> The case of Tournier v National Provincial and Union Bank of England set out four areas where a bank can legally disclose information about its customer. These principles still hold good today and are referred to in Section 11 of the Banking Code. They are:

>

> * Where the bank is compelled by law to disclose the information

> * If the bank has a public duty to disclose the information

> * If the bank's own interests require disclosure; and

> * Where the customer has agreed to the information being disclosed. think you will find the application form does not give them this right, i believe it is only the right to search the CRA files, not amend them.

>

> It is considered to be in the legitimate interests of financial institutions to share data on individuals who have not adhered to the terms and conditions of any agreements they may have held. This also complies with Paragraph 6, Schedule 2 of the Data Protection Act 1998:

>

> 'The processing is necessary for the purposes of legitimate interests pursued by the data controller or by the third party or parties to whom the data are disclosed, except where the processing is unwarranted in any particular case because of prejudice to the rights and freedoms or legitimate interests of the data subject.'

>

> All of our clients sign up to strict terms and conditions stipulating that they must only provide us with information that is compliant with the Data Protection Act 1998.

>

> Companies are also aware that if they do not comply with the relevant legislation this could threaten their licence to trade so it is not in their best interests to supply data to us that is inaccurate. Its never bothered Cabot one bit.

 

 

any idea what he is saying?

 

seems to me that he is saying they got an email from Cabot and they quoted that i have had the Original CCA. no i have an application form only signed by me.

it clearly states application form at the top.

there are no interest amounts showing on it. no agreed amount. just a application form that gives them the right to do a credit check.

 

what response does there reply warrant. i must add i sent them a threat of court action for libel. this was there response.

Edited July 4, 2008 by thecteam

[Dipply75]

Hi thecteam,

 

I am having the same ridiculous carry on with Equifax/Cabot just now. Basically I disputed it and Equifax asked them was is accurate - cabot said yes. I complained and told them actually check (cabot already admitted the info is wrong and never actually had the agreement, they are now going to ask for it after 5 years). Reminded them of my rights and their duties....

 

This is exactly what Equifax sent to cabot - consumer still disputing the default registered and the account information as not correct. Cabot said it is right.

 

So thats it - thats their 'verification' - what amounts to a verbal say so.

 

My question to everyone is - if I am paying for their monthly online 'service', does a contract exist - and if they are not doing what they clearly promised on their website etc - are they in breach of contract???

 

as for cabot asking equifax to get you to contact them direct - that is outrageous! A DCA is using the CRA to get sneaky comtact with you! The cheek of them - you asked the CRA to verify their records with their client - why do you have to contact them also? I would complain about that one big time.

 

Good luck, they are muppets

[Dipply75]

Oh, and reading through the directors letter - some very big holes:

 

He presumes you are talking about 'sensitive data' - well no, just your private data that was passed from company to company then published - the sensitive data section is irrelevant. Is he suggesting that your private financial data does not come under the protection of the DPA?

 

All the blurb about law is about the BANKS and the BANKING CODE, which I presume Cabot a: not a bank - a dca, different ballgame - and b: does not subscribe to the banking code (haha)

 

And if Cabot sign up to such a strict code, do Experian check compliance with and then enforce this code? I think not.

[stikky62]

I've an apparently unsettled default on my credit file (which hasn't been updated since November last year) and going through this process with Experian too, so...

 

Subbing

[finlander]

THECTEAM,

 

this is the kind of letter I will be waiting for. It's what I expect and the begining of treacle trap no2... get you argueing over data protection and with the DCA/bank and not the CRA. It is obvious the CRA hasn't taken reasonable steps to ensure the information is correct.

 

At this point I would be contacting the ICO. give him a chance to earn his money..(which i doubt he will) and make you look reasonable to the court.

 

Because the court WILL BE THE NEXT STEP.....

 

WOULD YOU TAKE THIS KIND OF DEFAMATION FROM ANY OTHER PERSON OR COMPANY? OF COURSE YOU WOULDN'T SO WHY DO YOU FROM THEM?

 

The time has come to say stop. Don't get dragged into a pointless time wasting arguement with these fools.

[lickthewallfatboy]

can I be assured of something regarding these parasites......if you S.A.R. them,and they come back asking you to jump through hoops to prove who you are-can you refuse and take them to the ICO to force them to stump up your info?

 

I can't be bothered arguing with them

[Gez]

The time has come to say stop. Don't get dragged into a pointless time wasting arguement with these fools.

I couldn't agree more! It looks like Equifax have now drafted themselves a nice gooey & sticky templated response to an SAR. They go on about "This might not actually be what you need", then request all the data that you hold about yourself since you were born in order to get anything from them, then try to sell you a credit report. I sent the £10 fee in the original SAR, yet regardless they have sent me forms to fill in, one of which is an SAR form requesting payment.

Needless to say, it is neatly filed away in the bin and a snotty reminder is in the post..

[finlander]

Lets look at this simply... it always helps I feel.......

 

I own a bank... you asked me for a credit agreement(a legal requirement to lend money). I havn't got it because my sale dept was greedy and bypassed your customer rights to get a quick sale. I send you some rubbish and claim that it satisfies the law. You complain (raise a dispute) and effectively accuse my bank of a criminal offence! I look into your dispute and decide, as I would, you are wrong. You say 'ok take me to court, let the judge decide'. Now I can't do that as that would be very bad for me. So what do I do? I tell my friend in a CRA that you have defaulted. He circulates this to the world and will keep doing so for 6 years. I know that the account is still not resolved. Not resolved means still in dispute. But I have decided that it is resolved because I couldn't get my own way. I won't let it go to arbitration because I will lose that. But I still say the dispute is resolved and your a defaulter. When you see this you complain to my friend. He should really check but instead he just asks me 'is it true?' I say yes of course. I dont want to get into trouble with my friend as well. I wonder if this goes to court the judge will understand?

 

 

 

[finlander]

thats what your up against.... forget the data protection act..., CCA etc etc and forget about argueing... have they lied? can they prove what they have published? if not then fight back.

[foolishgirl]

You're right Gez & LTW, not only CRAs using ID as delaying tactic - got it this week from a CC company.

 

They all have a duty to supply info. under SARs as long as they are sure of your ID. If you are requesting they send it to the name & address on their files (i.e. you've not moved recently) they have all the ID they need already so yes, you can report it to ICO.

 

This is extract from letter I sent off to CC this week

 

'please note that from XXXXX to date you have happily sent statements and correspondence containing extensive private information to my home address as noted above. I have not changed my name or my address & I have to ask if you are concerned that you are corresponding with the correct person why has it taken you so long to raise this matter?

 

As you are aware, disclosing data without adequate checks of identity is contrary to Schedule 1, Part 1 (7), The Principles of The Data Protection Act 1998:

 

“Appropriate technical and organisational measures shall be taken against unauthorised or unlawful processing of personal data and against accidental loss or destruction of, or damage to, personal data.”

I therefore consider your request for further evidence of my identification irrelevant & merely a prevaricating tactic to fulfil my Subject Access Request under the aforesaid Data Protection Act.

I would again remind you that I made this application to you on xxxx & that under the provisions of the Act you had 40 days to comply. Your company has now committed a serious breach of this legislation & I require that you ensure I receive ALL information you hold about me, including but not limited to, all transactions pertaining to the above account, late payment fees or other charges levied & interest applied plus copies of any default notices issued & Notices of Deed of Assignments in relation to this account no later than xxx 2008.

Failure to produce this information by the above specified date will result in my taking legal action against your company without further notice to enforce your compliance. The costs of any such action will be claimed against you.

 

I will also be making a report to the Information Commissioner & the OFT.'

Sorry, Finlander ranting on your thread -

[Gez]

The thing is though, a CRA don't normally send data, so I wonder what constitutes adequate ID checks? I gave them photocopied bank statements, I think that should have been sufficient.

[deedee1310]

Hello Finlander.

 

I haven't posted on CAG for a good long while but found your post yesterday and have read through to this foolishgirl's last post. I have read your thread with interest as I have finally decided to correct each entry on my file(s) and was thinking of the best way to go about this.

 

Tackling each data recorder (notice I didn't say owner) was one tactic or tackling the CRAs themselves was my other, so it's interesting to find someone who is actually pursuing my second considered tactic.

 

I read all 10 odd pages of car2403's battle with O2 and so can fully understand his cautionary advice to you. However, as always all CAG members are here to give their support. In light of what you are attempting to do, I think it might help if you could get the "big guns" at CAG involved at this early stageby Pm'ing a mod perhaps. That way your thread can be monitored. From what I surmised after reading car2403's post, is that if he/she (sorry no offence intended), had perhaps brought his/her case to the attention of the more experienced CAG members, i.e those with the legal and technical knowhow, there are certain arguments that he/she would not have pursued. Car2403 please correct me if I am wrong.

 

I have subscribed to your thread and am off to do some research of my own.

 

Best wishes,

 

deedee.

[finlander]

Thanks for your support DEEDEE,

 

I have taken legal advice from my staff associations legal team but obviously don't want disclose what they said here with the CRA's watching. It was however very interesting and I will divulge later. It basically was down the line Sparkie has already been and been successful at. It appears that he is right in the simplicity of certain laws we forget. When it comes to court if it stays in the small claims track I shall be representing myself and will PM a mod.

[foolishgirl]

Gez - if you've got a bank account, CC, loan, whatever, those companies update your records with the CRAs on a regular (usually monthly) basis. Therefore it follows that if you've changed your name, address or other ID that would also be included on those updates. If it isn't, the Banks, CCs, DCAs are in breach of the DPA by distributing inaccurate data about you. Hence the CRAs MUST have adequate info. on your current name & address to send you your credit file unless you've recently moved or you're asking that the info. be sent to A.N.Other (hardly likely is it!)

[car2403]

I read all 10 odd pages of car2403's battle with O2 and so can fully understand his cautionary advice to you. However, as always all CAG members are here to give their support. In light of what you are attempting to do, I think it might help if you could get the "big guns" at CAG involved at this early stageby Pm'ing a mod perhaps. That way your thread can be monitored. From what I surmised after reading car2403's post, is that if he/she (sorry no offence intended), had perhaps brought his/her case to the attention of the more experienced CAG members, i.e those with the legal and technical knowhow, there are certain arguments that he/she would not have pursued. Car2403 please correct me if I am wrong.

 

I can't correct you deedee, because you are spot on. Off my O2 thread and off-CAG, my battle with O2 continues unabaited. This wouldn't have been necessary if I'd had a greater amount of detailed support at the beginning, when it mattered. In fact, it wasn't until I spoke with those "big guns" at CAG that my whole claim against O2 became so much more clearer to me and only then could I "see the wood for the trees".

 

This is the benefit of CAG; we share experience and bring those threads to the attention of those that can help the most. Remember that the CAG Admin team can't view every thread, but the site team is backing them up, so if you want some in-depth help, either on- or off-thread, use the "report post" links on the left of each post to bring the thread to the attention of the site team to get the ball rolling.

 

The path we're on with this one, has many rocky pitfalls and split-forks in it that can send us in the wrong direction, should we take a wrong turn - use the well beaten tracks of those that gone before you, learning from those that have fallen foul, to make sure you don't befall the same fate.

 

Christopher Collumbus didn't discover new Land alone - it was he plus the team behind him, that helped him plan and deliver the journey, that has made him famous. Without that team of people behind him, who would Christopher Collumbus be?

 

Use CAG to your advantage and share, share and share the journey with others - we're all pointing due-North, but some will take longer to reach it unless we guide them to their destination.

 

Now that I've posted my "most profound post of the day", I'm off for a brew and a tissue to wipe away the tear in my eye...

 

[itsamomentintime]

finlander did you get any sort of timetable re post 64? when will millsyboy write to you again?

[Dipply75]

Hi Finlander

 

I have had a few responses from Equifax and they have made some specific statements that raise some serious questions. Especially the bit about the CRA's 'contractual obligations' to their subscriber (posts 9 & 12)

 

The implications of that statement are very worrying. Could there be proof that a CRA and a company have contractually agreed to do (or not to do) certain naughty things that they should be doing - for a fat fee?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/150213-cabot-dodgy-default-credit.html

 

Just in case it helps the cause

Edited July 7, 2008 by Dipply75
extra info

[saqqara]

This is an excellent thread and a very worthy cause.

 

I know that there are genuine concerns when fighting Experian and the likes, but I would also add that it was only a few years ago when people were saying "do not fight the banks, it will only lead to tears..." and now look where we are.

 

Keep up the good fight and I am certain that those in the know at CAG will provide all the support they can.

 

All I can offer is support and thanks for what you are doing here. I am certain that I will follow in your footsteps shortly.

[thecteam]

have sent Experian 2 emails in the past 5 days, both explain that i believe they are wrong in my eyes. since they wrote back to me 3rd of july, my credit file with Experian has been updated by Cabot or Experian or both. one of them is marking it and it is totally outside the guidlines of the CCA1974 and the data proctection act 1998.

 

lets see what there next response will be to it. Also dipply thank you for the mention about sensitive data. slapped that in the reply i sent them.

[midge61]

Hi all

 

This was in the Times today

 

Experian warns of continued downturn in financial services - Times Online

[Sparkie1723]

Does this mean the Banks will be charging LESS penalty charges they attempt to pass of as " a financial service":)

 

sparkie