Jump to content


EXPERIAN... The final battle commences


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4296 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

At one time I had five defaults for the same debt:mad:

BANK CHARGES

Nat West Bus Acct £1750 reclaim - WON

 

LTSB Bus Acct £1650 charges w/o against o/s balance - WON

 

Halifax Pers Acct £1650 charges taken from benefits - WON

 

Others

 

GE Money sec loan - £1900 in charges - settlement agreed

GE Money sec loan - ERC of £2.5K valid for 15 years - on standby

FirstPlus - missold PPI of £20K for friends - WON

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 862
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

My point exactly - does anyone have any idea what these checks are that they claim they do?

 

In all seriousness, can they really be confidential? How do we find this out?

 

Can I just say to Finlander - really not trying to hijack your thread - am just hoping any of this could be useful :o

Dipply75

 

I am in no way a legal advisor and only speak from my own experiences and the helpful advice of those in the same boat! :p

Link to post
Share on other sites
At one time I had five defaults for the same debt:mad:

 

 

THAT'S AWFUL ISN'T IT? I really do think if enough people act and complain then these CRA's will have to start taking responsibilty for their publishing these accounts. They really don't have the rght to condemn people on just a "say so" from a company who is not proving their ownership of an account or at least writing the correct figures involved.

 

The CRA's are fully aware that there are all these "charges" reclaims going on and quite often the figures published are wrong due to this. Therefore the CRA's ought to remove these files until the figures are proven by the companies involved. It's not the CRA's place to take sides and imply the consumer is lying about the state of accounts.

My CCA skeleton argument to use in court -

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/cabot/115280-useful-information.html

 

Useful Letters (CCA request is letter N)

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/20758-creditors-dcas-letter-templates.html

 

CAG A-Z list of useful places in CAG -

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/69359-cant-find-what-youre.html

 

Introduction to Consumer Litigation -

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/108467-basic-introduction-consumer-credit.html

CABOT THREADS -

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/131321-cabot-threads.html

 

ALWAYS SEEK A PROFESSIONAL OPINION FROM QUALIFIED ADVISORS - any advice offered is from my own experience and knowledge - I am NOT qualified.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am still not sure how to get the remaining ones removed - three at the last check. But considering that the OC has not been able to supply anything at all in terms of an agreement and I have heard nothing for almost 18 months it is all a bit much. Having said that I have no intention of applying for credit for anything so I am not particularly bothered. It gets rid of all the people trying to push credit onto you when you tell them you have loads of defaults:D

BANK CHARGES

Nat West Bus Acct £1750 reclaim - WON

 

LTSB Bus Acct £1650 charges w/o against o/s balance - WON

 

Halifax Pers Acct £1650 charges taken from benefits - WON

 

Others

 

GE Money sec loan - £1900 in charges - settlement agreed

GE Money sec loan - ERC of £2.5K valid for 15 years - on standby

FirstPlus - missold PPI of £20K for friends - WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bang on Mistermind (very eloquent also!)

 

and again, how do they know that the 'trigger event of the charges occurred' and not a charge applied in error putting you over your limit, company taking direct debit early and the bank shrugs their shoulders and charges you anyhoo or any number or things go wrong and charges snowball.....how do they know without verifying it. Again they don't. The assumption is made and the assumption is ALWAYS in the lender/dca's favour.

 

I recommend a look at this thread,brilliant, cannot wait to see the show. I am raging I missed posting in it earlier.........

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-consumer-issues/150610-television-interview-cra-dca.html

Dipply75

 

I am in no way a legal advisor and only speak from my own experiences and the helpful advice of those in the same boat! :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

Subscribing...

"To love unconditionally is the greatest gift, laughter is a close second" .To give your time to help others after being helped here is the best way to show your appreciation to your fellow CAG members.

 

Please note that this advice is given informally, without liability and without prejudice. Seek the advice of an insured qualified professional if you have any doubts. All my knowledge has been gained here, for which I'm very grateful. I'm a Journalist, not a law professional.

 

If you do PM, make sure to include a link to your thread as I don't give out advice in private ;)

BB 13 - DCAs/banks and solicitors 0.

 

I get a fresh start to get on with learning to live with severe disabilities when they could have had something if they'd been understanding...

 

<--- If you feel I've helped, please twinkle my star :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

is this guy good or is it just more waffle to slow the process down. its seems to me they don't like to be seen as wrong.

 

here is experians latest reply.

 

Thank you for your e-mails received 4 and 9 July 2008.

In response to your most recent e-mail, Cabot update the information we hold on a monthly basis. This is to ensure that the information we hold is up to date and compliant with the fourth data protection principle.

By querying the disputed information, we have fulfilled our legal obligations under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the Data Protection Act 1998. The account information we hold actually belongs to each supplying lenders. Only they can amend it or tell us to amend it for them. We cannot amend or delete entries without a lender's direct consent. As a licensed client of Experian each supplying lender is obligated to ensure that the info they provide us with is accurate.

With regards to your comments regarding sensitive personal data and my response, you stated in your e-mail received 1 July 2008:

"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."

 

I responded advising that I presumed you were referring to Schedules 2 (II) and 3 (III) and that Schedule 3 relates to the processing of 'sensitive' personal data. I apologise if I misinterpreted what you previously meant and would ask that you please clarify your comments.

My comments concerning the Banking Code were made in relation to the Tournier principles and I provided case law in support of this. I only stated that the principles were referred to in the Banking Code and did not advise whether Cabot subscribed to the Code.

As stated, 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 are four separate areas and a bank does not need for all four to be fulfilled prior to a piece of data being disclosed.

In this instance it is considered to be in the legitimate interests of banks to share data on individuals who have not adhered to the terms and conditions of any agreements they may have held. I also advised that this was compliant with the Data Protection Act 1998.

The application form you have supplied states that it is a credit agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The terms contained within this only need to make reference to the general terms and conditions that may be supplied separately.

Section 10.5 of Barclays general terms and conditions cover the sharing of account data and can be located at the following link: Barclays : Important Information : Customer Agreement (new window)

It may be helpful to explain that sections 77 and 78 of the CCA state that a creditor must give a consumer a copy of their executed agreement within 12 working days of receiving a request in writing and the appropriate fee. The Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983 ("CNCD") specify that every copy of an executed agreement, security instrument or other copy referred to in the CCA and delivered or sent to a debtor, hirer or surety under any provision of the Act shall be a true copy thereof. However, it is well established that a "true copy" is not an exact copy.

 

Regulation 3(2) of the CNCD Regulations allows the following to be omitted from any copy:

 

a) Information in the original which relates to the debtor, hirer or surety or is included for the use of the creditor or owner only and which is not required to be included in the original agreement by the Act or by any regulations as to form and content. Therefore it is not necessary for the copy to reproduce, for example, details of the business or occupation of the debtor, the name and address of the employer or bank details of his income etc,

 

b) Any signature box, signature or date of signature.

 

Therefore there is no requirement for Barclaycard to send you a copy of the original agreement. They may simply send you a copy of the terms and conditions of the agreement.

I am sending a copy of the response we received from Cabot Financial under separate cover.

It appears from your comments that your actual dispute is not with regards to the accuracy of the data submitted to us, but your interpretation of the company's compliance with a specific piece of legislation.

If a company can demonstrate that an account was being paid on time for a number of months/years prior to falling into arrears, this is often seen as evidence that the individual concerned must have consented to the terms and conditions of the contract.

I am unable to arbitrate in a dispute between you and a company regarding whether they have complied with a specific piece of legislation. I would recommend that you either approach the company directly or lodge a formal complaint with a recognised regulatory body should you wish to take this matter further.

In order that I can be of further assistance please clarify if you have ever borrowed money from Barclaycard.

We do believe that your threat of legal action is without merit. Consequently, if you do choose to issue proceedings we will instruct our solicitors to apply to strike out your case and we will seek to reclaim the costs incurred in doing so.

I therefore recommend that you review your legal position prior to proceeding with any claim. You may wish to consult with our regulator, the Information Commissioner's Office, in order to obtain an unbiased opinion.

If you have any further queries, please feel free to contact me directly either by e-mail at [email protected], by telephone on 0115 8286485 or by writing to me at the following address:

Directors' Office, Experian Ltd, PO Box 8000, Nottingham, NG80 7WF

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

Mr L J Hancock

Consumer Compliance Executive

Directors' Office

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello thecteam!

 

is this guy good or is it just more waffle to slow the process down

It's good well put waffle by a bad guy, one of the enemy...to slow the process down!

 

It just needs to be pulled apart line by line, as it's the same mock-Tudor-authoritative clap-trap they all spout out if given half a chance to say something profound.

 

Where's the Agreement then?

 

Ah, there isn't one. OK, let's take it from there shall we!

 

It's the same old line that you've spent it, so you owe it, our client can prove that you spent it [insert a few Paragraphs of waffle], so we are happy that you owe it and what they say about you [edit] is fine and dandy with us and all our DCA mates here in Debt HQ.

 

It's just CRA blaa blaa.

 

The fact remains that they are Publishing very nasty and financially Damaging things about you without valid cause. His Letter is just trying to waffle and be very pompous to hide that somewhat inconvenient and akward fact.

 

I'm sure Royal will have something to say about it!

 

Cheers,

BRW

Edited by steven4064
Link to post
Share on other sites

thats pretty much what i thought.

 

all full of waffle the lot of them.

 

this bit got me.

 

Therefore there is no requirement for Barclaycard to send you a copy of the original agreement. They may simply send you a copy of the terms and conditions of the agreement.

this might be true but they will need to produce it in a court of law.

 

the fools all hiding behind legal words but with nothing in the world to back it up with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Intresting to see whats been happening since my last post. As far as Ican seen Experians and call credits replies are exactly the kind of twaddle I would expect mine to be when it arrives. However I have no intention of arguing with Mr Han COCK at all. If thats what I get he gets a complaint to the ICO and then a summons. Remember 'DON'T GET DRAGGED INTO AN ARGUEMENT'... And keep the letters... will look good in court ' We don't have to check if our data is true because our client pays us!' ..LOL... the judge will love that one :p

Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.Thus, what is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy. What is essential in war is victory, not prolonged operations.

 

Sun Tzu 'The art of war'

POST THE LETTER AND SIGN THE PETITION AT POST 88 ON THE LINK BELOW TO GET THE OFT TO INVESTIGATE THE CRA'S

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/campaign/153512-campaign-oft-against-unfair.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Link to post
Share on other sites

As we process over 100 million personal data items each month, we believe it would constitute a disproportionate effort on our part to have to check the validity of each data item against contracted terms and conditions.

We can assure you that we take our responsibilities under the Data Protection Act 1998 and all other relevant regulations very seriously, but in the case of a dispute between a consumer and a data controller over the validity of a particular credit record, we feel it appropriate to process the record as provided, until we are instructed otherwise by the data controller.

 

 

that's all well and good, but if the data subject can show that the data is innaccurate - for example with a letter from the data controller acknolwedgeing there is no CCA- there should be no difficulty with them amending their data accordingly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
As we process over 100 million personal data items each month, we believe it would constitute a disproportionate effort on our part to have to check the validity of each data item against contracted terms and conditions.

We can assure you that we take our responsibilities under the Data Protection Act 1998 and all other relevant regulations very seriously, but in the case of a dispute between a consumer and a data controller over the validity of a particular credit record, we feel it appropriate to process the record as provided, until we are instructed otherwise by the data controller.

 

 

Is it just me or is what they are saying in that quote "we dont think it is necessary to validate the information received because it is too much like hard work and we cant be bothered!"

hello all:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
As we process over 100 million personal data items each month, we believe it would constitute a disproportionate effort on our part to have to check the validity of each data item against contracted terms and conditions.

We can assure you that we take our responsibilities under the Data Protection Act 1998 and all other relevant regulations very seriously, but in the case of a dispute between a consumer and a data controller over the validity of a particular credit record, we feel it appropriate to process the record as provided, until we are instructed otherwise by the data controller.

 

 

Is it just me or is what they are saying in that quote "we dont think it is necessary to validate the information received because it is too much like hard work and we cant be bothered!"

 

 

it sure does to me, which i find hard to believe that they put it to print, so have done a screen shot of the page i got it from in reply to my question i asked.

 

totally shocking

Link to post
Share on other sites
that's all well and good, but if the data subject can show that the data is innaccurate - for example with a letter from the data controller acknolwedgeing there is no CCA- there should be no difficulty with them amending their data accordingly.

 

Exactly, and this is where the pathetic line comes in - we still cannot change any of the info without the originators consent - as in we do not own it, blah blah.

 

Now, where is this rule/law/guidance that states this? Can anyone show me where it says that they CANNOT - is this another standard practice again - or a contractual obligation???

 

So, who says they cannot?

Dipply75

 

I am in no way a legal advisor and only speak from my own experiences and the helpful advice of those in the same boat! :p

Link to post
Share on other sites
As we process over 100 million personal data items each month, we believe it would constitute a disproportionate effort on our part to have to check the validity of each data item against contracted terms and conditions.

We can assure you that we take our responsibilities under the Data Protection Act 1998 and all other relevant regulations very seriously, but in the case of a dispute between a consumer and a data controller over the validity of a particular credit record, we feel it appropriate to process the record as provided, until we are instructed otherwise by the data controller.

Absolutely disgraceful. Are they saying that if they were to process 1 billion personal data items, that they would not have to ensure the accuracy of them due to the volume. Surely the volume handled requires greater security, greater accuracy and greater regulation.

 

This is complete trash and would raise a lot of eyebrows in Court. Write to the ICO and complain that they have informed you that they cannot ensure the information they provide is accurate, due to the sheer volume processed each month.

 

Do I want my data processed by these numb nuts? Very worried.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly ! If they can not prove that the information supplied is accurate , then surely that information is worthless and should not be relied upon by anyone searching your credit files?

Edited by SURFBOY
to add to.

hello all:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wierd, according to Credit Expert (experian):

 

We do indeed have an obligation to ensure we are holding accurate information

[COLOR=blue][B]Defaultless since 2012 :)[/B][/COLOR][COLOR=green][/COLOR]

Link to post
Share on other sites
Wierd, according to Credit Expert (experian):

 

You wa? :confused:

 

That's a turn around isn't it? :eek:

 

Now, all they need to do is start bleeding doing it! :rolleyes:

Always happy to help where I can!

:lol:

Beware of legal advice given on a private forum - do you REALLY know who is posting? Are they REALLY accountable for their posts? What if you follow their advice and get something wrong?

It was Winston Churchill who said; "Democracy is the worst way to run a country except for all the others"

 

Advice and comments posted by car2403 are offered purely without prejudice. They reflect only my personal opinion and do not represent the opinion of this forum or it's management. You should always seek legal advice from a qualified legal advisor. As a member of the site team, I disable reputation - reputation points mean nothing, please check my posting credentials yourself and make an informed decision. You shouldn't PM me and await a reply - I may be too late with a response. No replies will be given in Private Messages - just as with getting advice from the forum, getting advice via Private Messages is dangerous. CAG is about sharing successes so others can follow your example, this is primarily why I'm here, so please don't be offended if I don't offer replies in PM that doesn't comply with this. Help CAG to help others by keeping your thread up to date.

 

 

USEFUL LINKS; New User Guide to CAG | Can't find what you're looking for? | Intro to Consumer Credit Litigation | Is My Agreement Enforceable | Default (Surleybonds) Template Letter | Defaults - background, removal methods, challenges and taking a claim to Court | Digital Signature Guide | Overdrafts and the CCA

Link to post
Share on other sites
At one time I had five defaults for the same debt:mad:

 

Me too! But i had 6 :mad:

 

5 from DCA, 1 from bank.

 

got DCA to clear 2 accounts last year, bank paid compensation (through FOS) this month.

 

so in the end, you can use them to your advantage.

 

CRAs didn't help though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4296 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...