EXPERIAN... The final battle commences

[angry cat]

I'm hoping I'm wrong here, but you seem very, very disillusioned, I have to say.

 

I'm with you all the way, in that you have a very good argument.

 

There is an alternative, though...

 

They don't cave in, as you say, and you do get to Court. Because of the interest you've generated on this thread, that is more likely now. Also because of this interest is the Judge less likely to actually deal with your case and refer it to the High Court. Along with a High Court referral, are you going to face thousands of pounds worth of costs. Do you think this will bother them? I don't!

 

"Attacking the head of the snake is one thing, but just be sure you've covered yourself with a shield against the sting in the tail, should it rear around and come at you unexpectedly"

 

car2403, "EXPERIAN... The final battle commences" post #85

 

 

The above Quote, is like somebody throwing a bucket of cold water over a person!

 

The CRA's have been processing consumers subject data now for many years, they have no legal obligation so do so; it is simply just standard industry practice...It is NOT 'The Law'. It all started way back in the days of the mail order catalogues.

 

I for one am enraged over the incorrect, unjustified and unwarranted data that they process in relation to me. THE CRA's have no legal right to process such data and even if they did, the CRA's apparently do not even bother to check as to whether the data is correct, which is a breach of The Princoples, in itself.

 

Enough is enough, time to fight back for 'Our Legal Rights'.

 

AC

[angry cat]

I believe it is wise to listen to the words of car2403's words. However,I also am of the opinion that, 'Consumers have to stand up for their Rights'.

 

AC

[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

[angry cat]

I have had some dealings with the nasty Mr. Han...Cock.

 

I note that he is spouting Reg.3 Of the Consumer Credit Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents Regulations 1983.

 

Throw back Reg 7 at him;

 

7(1) Where an agreement has been varied in accordance with section 82(1) of the Act, EVERY COPY OF THE EXECUTED AGREEMENT given to a debtor, hirer or surety under any provision of the Act, other than 85(1) SHALL INCLUDE either-

 

a) an easily legible copy of the latest notice of variation given in accordance with section 82(1) of the Act relating to each discrete term of the agreement which has been varied;

 

or

 

b) an easily legible statement of the terms of the agreement as varied in accordance with section 82(1) of the Act.

 

Reg 7. refers to a copy of the EXECUTED AGREEMENT and that sub sections a) or b) are in addition to this AND NOT ANY ALTERNATIVE TO SENDING THE ACTUAL EXECUTED AGREEMENT!

 

Mr. Hancock is simply giving you his interpretation of the regulations, Mr Hancock is wrong.

 

Angry Cat

[angry cat]

angry cat this is from the cca1974 act or is it from one that mr hancock is quoting.

 

It is from:-

The Consumer Credit Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents Regulations 1983, as referred to by Mr. Han Cock.

Furthermore it is the interpretation provided by The Trading Standards Service, who are the enforcement officers of the "Act".

 

The Banks and now Mr Hancock appear to rely on the Reg 3 argument but this can clearly be challenged by Reg 7.

 

To reiterate Mr. Hancock is only quoting his 'opinion' or interpretation of legislation.

 

AC

[angry cat]

I realise that this thread is about experian. However, I would appreciate your views on the followng the following letter that I have received from Equifax, which is in response to this:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-1588841.html

 

Dear AC

 

Re: Credit Agreement - Link Financial MBNA

 

The Client concerned has investigated the accuracy of the information above and has verified its accuracy. In their response they have advised they have supplied documents to you directly as requested. Any disputes regarding charges should be directed ro MBNA. Therefore, the information remains unchanged.

 

This information is supplied and owned by our subscribing clients and as such we do not have the ability to amend the information without written authorisation from them. If you are unhappy with the outcome of your dispute we suggest that you contact the company concerned with any additional enquiries and they will advise you further.

 

Equifax Customer Services"

 

 

I am enraged, as I requested that Equifax remove the inaccurate defamatory data that Link are processing...

 

The original creditor was MBNA, they sold the debt to Link whilst the account was in dispute over PPI and S78 CCA.

The alleged Credit Agreement has been deemed irredeemably unenforceable;

I have pursued Link for documentary evidence that they are legally entitled to collect on the debt, however, I have not received any proof; Link do not have my consent to process but Equifax refuse to remove siad data.

 

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

 

Thanks

 

AC

Edited July 19, 2008 by angry cat

[angry cat]

Hi Guys,

 

I recently sent a similar letter to finlander's to Equifax and

received this response:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/credit-reference-agencies/156909-my-equifax-response.html#post1673747

 

I would be grateful if someone could take a look and provide an opinion, as the letter just doesn;t make sense to me!

 

Equifax have stated "Although the credit agreements are held by the CRA's"

Equifax cannot hold a valid credit agreement for the disputed acount, because there isn't one!

 

Any ideas on a response?

 

AC

[angry cat]

Hmmm!

 

Sounds like it is possible that Equifax do not even bother to contact the bank or DCA to re-investigate a complaint...

They say the information is accurate!

 

Time to SAR both parties!

 

What a dirty business.

 

AC