Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Russia’s economy has been cut off from the global financial system - but it is still growing. Why?View the full article
    • Well done. Are you able to tell us more about how it went on the day please? HB
    • when mediation call they will ask the same 3 questions that are in their email you had to accept it going forward. simply state 'i do not have enough information from the claimant to make an informed decision upon mediation so i refuse. end of problem.  
    • Food prices, including a $40 chicken, has stoked fury and calls for big foreign supermarket chains to come to Canada.View the full article
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Civil National Business CEntre Name of the Claimant ? Lowell Portfolio i Ltd How many defendant's  joint or self ? Self   Date of issue –  15 Feb 2024 Particulars of Claim What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?  The claim is for the sum of £922 due by the Defendant under and agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a Capital One account with an account reference of [number with 16 digits] The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit ACt 1974 which has not been complied with. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 16-06-23, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of the issue of these proceedings in the sum of £49.15 The Claimant claims the sum of £972 What is the total value of the claim? £1112 Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? I dont know the details of the PAPDC to know if it was pursuant to paragraph 3, but I did receive a Letter of Claim with a questionaire/form to fill. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? no Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Assigned/purchaser Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I was aware, I'm not certain I received a 'Notice of Assignment' from Capital One but may have been informed the account had been sold without such a title on the letter? Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Not since the debt purchase, and not from Capital One. Why did you cease payments? I can't remember - it was the tail end of the pandemic and I may not have had enough income to keep up payments - I am self-employed and work in the event industry - at that time. I also had a bank account that didn't allow direct debits and may have just forgotten payments and became annoyed at fines for late payments. What was the date of your last payment? Appears to be 20/4/2022 Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No Here is my Defence: Defence - 1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had an agreement with Capital One but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request.. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unaware of having been served with a Default Notice pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1) 5. The Defendant has sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement, the Claimant has yet to comply and remains in default of said request. 6. A further request has been made via CPR 31.14 to the Claimants solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim. The Claimant has not complied and to date nothing has been received. 7. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and; b) show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for and; c) show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 88 CCA1974 d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim 8. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed 9. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of section 136 of the Law of Property Act and section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 10. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. .................. Please note that I had to write a defence quite quickly as I hit the deadline. At the time of writing the defence, I hadn't been able to find correspondence from Capital One, but had since found default letter etc. I submitted CCA request and CPR 31.14. However, I didn't get any proof of postage or use registered post for the CPR (an oversight) but did with the CCA request. I received a pack which included a letter from Overdales, going over the defence I'd filed, as well as letters of Lowells and reprints of letters from Capital One. But I have no idea if this pack is in response to the CCA request or the CPR ! I would have expected two separate responses ... although I do know they are both the same company. Looking over the pack today, and looking through old emails .. I find some discrepancies in the Capital One default letters (notice of default and Claim of default). They are both dated *before* an email I have stating that a default can be avoided. The one single page of agreement sent (so not the full agreement) has a 16 digit number at the top in small print, next to 'Capital One' which corresponds to a number called 'PURN' printed at the top of each of the 10 pages of ins and outs of the account (they're not official statements, but a list of monthly goings) yet no mention anywhere on either of the account number. I cant really scan them at the moment - I can later tomorrow, but that will be after the mediation call I'm sure. I guess I may be on my own for this mediation ... I am not certain the CCA request has been satisfied .. or if the CPR has been . And then I appear to have evidence that the Default notices provided are fabricated ? Yet, I do have (elsewhere ... not at home) Default letters from Capital One I can check ..
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

2 defaults Egg and Vodaphone - Default hell!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4867 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

Ok i have read this entire thread and i am now left extremely confused :-?

 

If i give permision for some one to log info on my credit report and give someone permision to ask a credit reference agency if they hold any info on me can i still ask the credit reference agency not to give out any info on me as i have only given people permision to ask for the info i have not given the cra's permision to disperse such info?

 

Does that make any sense what so ever or am i slowly going insane due to information overload? :-D

 

Kind regards Nicky

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • Replies 460
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

OK like many others I sent the S12 letter to the three companies. Like everyone else I got the standard reply from Experian today.

I have typed out the whole letter (which took me ages) and although many have seen it there is one point I have not seen anyone pick up on yet.

One of the paragraphs says "I would like to clarify that our role is to give lenders factual information about you when you apply for credit"

Now does anyone know what steps the CRA's take to assure the information they hold is factual? If I believe information hey hold is NOT factual then isn’t it up to them to find the proof that it is?

I have pasted the complete letter below.

Dear Mr *******

Thank you for your letter dated 12 June 2007, which has been brought to my attention in the Directors Office.

I acknowledge your request under section 12(1) of the Date Protection Act 1998, entitles an individual to write to a data controller to require the data controller to ensure that no decision which significantly affects them is made solely by automatic means.

I am fully aware of the legislation that you kindly quoted in your letter, which is detailed below for your reference.

12. - (1) An individual is entitled at any time, by notice in writing to an data controller , to require the date controller to ensure that no decision taken by or on behalf of the data controller which significantly affects that individual is based solely on the processing by automatic means of personal data in respect of which that individual is the data subject for the purpose of evaluating matters relating to him such as, his performance at work, his creditworthiness, his reliability or his conduct.

As a credit reference agency, Experian does not make any automated decisions with regards your creditworthiness or any other criteria that are specified within section 12(1). Consequently, we do not have to comply with your request to remove the information that we process by automated means. This is because we are not making any decisions about the information that we obtain and process via automated systems.

I have highlighted the relevant part of section 12(1) that clarifies that it is only when a decision is made by automated processing that you are entitled to have that automated decision reconsidered (s.12(2)(b)).

I would like to clarify that our role is to give lenders factual information about you when you apply for credit. This helps lenders as it enables them to review your current and previous credit agreements but also benefits the applicant as they can be granted credit facilities instantly rather that having to prove that they have a good financial history every time they make an application.

When a lender asks to see the information we hold, we do not offer any comments or advice. Lenders use the information we send them, along with the information you give on a credit application form, to help them decide weather or not to lend. We are not told if the information we have provided has affected the lending decision or, in fact, what the decision is.

If you have been declined for financial services and the lender confirms that the decision was made via an automated process then you do have the right to appeal against that decision and request that your application is manually reviewed.

You may wish to quote the legislation you referred to in your letter in support of any request that you may make to a lender for a manual assessment. Furthermore, you may also like to note that is you add an explanatory statement to your credit report, this will automatically mean that your credit application must be manually reviewed prior to completion of any automated assessment.

You can add a short explanatory statement to your report to make sure that future lenders are aware of your comments. This is called a ‘Notice of correction’. Anyone looking at your report in the future will see your comments and should take them into account before making a lending decision.

If you would like to add a ‘notice of correction’ to your credit report, please let us know the exact wording you would like to use. We can not add a statement that is longer than 200 words or one that we think is defamatory, frivolous, scandalous or unsuitable for publication for some other reason.

Before you are permitted to add a ‘notice of correction’ to your report, you must first obtain a copy of your credit report detailing the information that we hold about you that lenders view when you apply for credit. I am enclosing an application form (NO application form enclosed) for you to complete and return should you wish to take up this option.

It is also stipulated within section 5 (Principles or decision-making) of ‘The Guide to Credit Scoring 2000’, that the applicant can appeal for a manual decision to be made if they have been declined purely by means of an automated scoring process.

You might wish to view ‘the guide to credit scoring 2000’ in particular section 5-7, if you wish to see this in full. You can find this on the Experian website at:

www.experian.co.uk/corporate/compliance/creditscoring

In your letter you also refer to the Human Rights Act 1998. This act requires all ‘public authorities’ to act completely within the rights contained in Schedule 1 of the act. As Experian is a private company and not a public body, the human rights act 1998 does not directly affect the work we do.

The Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the Data Protection Act 1998 strictly control the personal information that we hold. Both laws give you specific rights and make sure we deal with your information carefully and fairly.

If you have any further queries, please fell free to contact me directly either by email at *****@uk.experian.com, by telephone on ***** or by writing to me at the following address.

Blah Blah Blah

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Today i got the same kind of reply from Equifax (still no reply from callcredit). Does anyone know any other road I can go with this?

 

As Experiam quoted in the letter "I would like to clarify that our role is to give lenders factual information about you when you apply for credit" Does anyone think there is a further route i can take with this whole "Factual" thing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Cress, the best thing is to sue the b-tards.

 

I have never used a s10/12 - I have used other methods, ie, claiming that hte default is unlawful because no default notice was sent/no original application/agreement is available.

Disclaimer: Anything I write in these forums is my personal opinion and offered without prejudice. If in doubt, please seek independent legal advice.

 

*If what I have told you in this post has helped, please press the star at the bottom left and tell me!!*

 

My charges claims:

un1boy vs egg *SETTLED* | Un1boy vs LTSB-SETTLED | un1boy vs Black Horse-SETTLED | Un1boy v Smile *WON* | un1boy v HSBC - SETTLED! | Un1boy's HSBC CC - SETTLED! | Un1boy vs Co-Op *SETTLED* |un1boy vs Co-Op CC *SETTLED*

 

Default removals:

un1boy v Equifax - Default removal

un1boy vs Experian - Default removal

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok i have read this entire thread and i am now left extremely confused :-?

 

If i give permision for some one to log info on my credit report and give someone permision to ask a credit reference agency if they hold any info on me can i still ask the credit reference agency not to give out any info on me as i have only given people permision to ask for the info i have not given the cra's permision to disperse such info?

 

Does that make any sense what so ever or am i slowly going insane due to information overload? :-D

 

Kind regards Nicky

 

Anyone?

Link to post
Share on other sites

blimey well this is an anti-climax...3 hours reading the 22 pages and no conclusion! no test case!

 

is the general consensus that a s10/s12 to the bank is the best route for just one default removal?

 

 

I used SurlyBonds' letter enclosing an S10 Notice and have sent it to NatWest, Barclaycard and Capital Bank. The former two I have issued N1s to and my POCs included removal of Default and all reference to the Banks from my credit file. Capital Bank stands alone. Responses and results to date:

 

1. NatWest - removed Default from file 14/8, money claim still ongoing

2. Barclaycard - removed Dafault from my file 14/8, money claim still ongoing

3. Capital Bank - letter acknowledging S10 received 17/7 informing me that 'the appropriate department' would be dealing with my request. No further correspondence from them. The 21 days is up (I have given them more time owing to the postal dispute), LBA going off today giving 7 days' notice before I commence court proceedings.

 

I have today also issued CapOne with an S10 Notice and request for removal of adverse marker data using the same principles in law, on a credit card account that is closed and settled (charges & CCI refunded earlier this year).

 

So, I suppose you can draw your own conclusions from these responses. I intend to pursue my claims with CapOne and Capital Bank in court as it seems to be the only way these banks will take things seriously.

 

HTH Painty xx

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone?

 

Hi Fallen Angel

 

If you would like an answer to your question it is best you start your own thread. More people will see it then.

 

Read as much as you can in this section, the answer to your question is long and complicated.

 

Lizzy

 

Halifax

Sent LBA
27/6/06

Been on hol for a week, got home found letter from them dated
27/6/06 offer of £92 claiming £1155.10 so no deal.

Filed claim with Moneyclaim 12/07/06

Halifax acknowledged claim 25/7/06

Court papers received 28/7/06 Halifax intend to defend.

HALIFAX SETTLED IN FULL 1/8/06

Donation made

Birmingham Midshire (mortgage charges) Prelim letter sent 2nd Aug 2006, full offer received 11th Aug with conditions.

13th Aug accepted offer unconditionally.

BIRMINGHAM MIDSHIRES (MORTGAGE) SETTLED IN FULL 24/8/06

Sent SurlyBonds template letter to get defaults removed to Birmingham Midshires 27/08/06

DEFAULTS REMOVED 5/09/06.
THATS 9 DAYS LATER, YES 9 DAYS

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many of the Debt Collection agencies are now 'managing their risk' and segregating accounts into subsections by establishing what assets the debtors have or haven't got. By that I mean the Land Registry and seeing whether they can obtain a charging Order on your property if you own a house and owe a debt. What merits are there in slapping a section 10 or 12 on the Land Registry to stop them providing this information to Debt Collectors?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many of the Debt Collection agencies are now 'managing their risk' and segregating accounts into subsections by establishing what assets the debtors have or haven't got. By that I mean the Land Registry and seeing whether they can obtain a charging Order on your property if you own a house and owe a debt. What merits are there in slapping a section 10 or 12 on the Land Registry to stop them providing this information to Debt Collectors?

 

That's very interesting, I don't like the sound of that at all. Can I ask where you obtained that info as your suggestion is worth pursuing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ehmm! source eh? Whistleblowing - me ? :D Actually it is a known fact from our friends ( I'm a Fan! ) in Cabot Financial amongst many other dca's I might add, I just love Cabot though - that that is exactly what they are doing. take a read of this: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/cabot/82835-cabot-kings-hill-no1.html

 

I take it you mean searching the Land Registry? One only has to send in a Data Protection Subject Access Report to the DCA's - any DCA and you will be provided with the whole gambit of their activities. Just read the notes carefully and you'll find just what you need. Now I'd keep that to yourself rather than air it on an open forum because I wouldn't want to be responsible for providing the DCA's with a whole load of admin work from thousands of applications of course.(Don't forget the £10 P.o. :D ) People are generally inclined to send a CCA request to confirm that they have the copy of their agreement, which most don't of course, but not many send off to a dca for a complete breakdown with the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request).

 

It's a bit too big brother for me, and given that the dca's are jumping for joy with getting access to 'white data' it's only going to get worse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

I havent got round to reading the entire thread yet, currently upto page 12, however I found this that I thought was interesting on the Information Commisioners website.

 

The Data Protection Act gives you, as an individual, a limited right to prevent significant decisions being taken about you solely by automatic processing. This affects only those decisions made by a computer where there is no human involvement in the decision. It could include, for example, a decision about your performance at work or your credit worthiness.

You also have the right to be told, as soon as reasonably possible, when this type of decision has been made about you.

What can you do to stop this type of processing?

 

You can write to an organisation telling them not to make decisions about you on this basis. It would be advisable to send your letter by recorded delivery and keep a copy.

The organisation has 21 days to tell you how they intend to respond to your objection. They can either reconsider any decision they have made or make a fresh decision not just using a computer. If you are not satisfied with the response, you can go to court and the court can order the organisation to reconsider the decision they have made or take a new decision on a different basis.

 

Some fully automated decisions are exempt from these provisions. These are where the decision is taken

  • in relation to entering or carrying out a contract, or
  • is authorised or required by an Act of Parliament, and
  • the decision results in the granting of a request you have made, or
  • steps have been taken to safeguard your legitimate interests, such as, there is an appeal to the decision.

 

Ive highlighted the interesting parts on bold.

 

Im presuming if you sent an order to the CRA to stop automated processing of your data, they can still show it to anyone you agree to conducting a credit check in relation to a contract.

 

Now ive looked over the DPA and cant seem to locate these exclusions in the act :confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I havent got round to reading the entire thread yet, currently upto page 12, however I found this that I thought was interesting on the Information Commisioners website.

 

The Data Protection Act gives you, as an individual, a limited right to prevent significant decisions being taken about you solely by automatic processing. This affects only those decisions made by a computer where there is no human involvement in the decision. It could include, for example, a decision about your performance at work or your credit worthiness.

You also have the right to be told, as soon as reasonably possible, when this type of decision has been made about you.

 

 

Ive highlighted the interesting parts on bold.

 

Im presuming if you sent an order to the CRA to stop automated processing of your data, they can still show it to anyone you agree to conducting a credit check in relation to a contract.

 

Now ive looked over the Data Protection Act and cant seem to locate these exclusions in the act :confused:

 

Note: You can't stop the CRA's from processing your data, as they have a "legitimate" interest in the data that is shared with them from their customers (financial institutions) with them - the right to share that information (between customer (financial institutions) and CRA) must be based on a contract between you and the customer. (A bank, for example) Without having express written consent from you, sharing of information with any third party (where there isn't provision for it in the Act - such as Crime investigation/prevention, for example) is a criminal offence under s.35 of the DPA.

 

Having said that, the Act allows you to prevent automated processing of your data, which is what I think you're referring to PR? That can happen, but as the CRA's only use automated processing (you can't stop processing all together, as I've mentioned above, but they aren't geared up for manual processing at all) to share information, asking them to stop doing so would result in you having no credit reference information being publicly available at all! (Is having no record better than having a bad one? You'd have to decide that based on the merits of your own case)

 

You can read this in this thread, from post 14, as Surleybonds talks about how to do this and a bit about potential impact;

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legalities/20118-default-hell.html

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi car2403,

 

It was indeed the second part of your post I was refering to. Ive read a lot about how people have send letters to the CRA to stop them automatically processing thier data. Not something I would consider at this time as I believe it would appear suspicious to lenders.

 

However the main point of my post, was that according to the ICO this wouldnt have any affect because:

 

Some fully automated decisions are exempt from these provisions. These are where the decision is taken
  • in relation to entering or carrying out a contract, or
  • is authorised or required by an Act of Parliament, and
  • the decision results in the granting of a request you have made

 

So it appears The CRA would still be able to give an automated decision everytime you apply for a contract as this is an exemption. However for some reason I can not seem to locate this actual exemption within the DPA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

great thread but has grown some since my last visit - is there a template for letter to send to cra's still processing the data, I have done my S10 to the relevant parties but no response at all months ago, also have already had one prelim hearing with one party and just waiting for listing but they are still updating file with incorrect data - arggghhhh!!

'rise like lions after slumber, in unvanquishable number, shake your chains to the earth like dew, which in sleep had fall'n on you, ye are many, they are few.' Percy Byshse Shelly 1819

Link to post
Share on other sites

great thread but has grown some since my last visit - is there a template for letter to send to cra's still processing the data, I have done my S10 to the relevant parties but no response at all months ago, also have already had one prelim hearing with one party and just waiting for listing but they are still updating file with incorrect data - arggghhhh!!

 

Why would you want to write to them again? The s.10 template acts as a LBA, so the next step is a Court claim or a complaint to the ICO.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya car2403, my S10 went to the creditor dishing this info out like smarties! I have complained to experian but now starting again with equifax, I have not S10 to either of these, since I am already in court (hearing to be listed) re same with the creditor I have assumed the court outcome will deal ultimately with the issue in a way the agencies cannot ignore?

'rise like lions after slumber, in unvanquishable number, shake your chains to the earth like dew, which in sleep had fall'n on you, ye are many, they are few.' Percy Byshse Shelly 1819

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya car2403, my S10 went to the creditor dishing this info out like smarties! I have complained to experian but now starting again with equifax, I have not S10 to either of these, since I am already in court (hearing to be listed) re same with the creditor I have assumed the court outcome will deal ultimately with the issue in a way the agencies cannot ignore?

 

If your claim asks for a Court Order under s.14(1) and s.14(3) Data Protection Act 1998 it should.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I used SurlyBonds' letter enclosing an S10 Notice and have sent it to NatWest, Barclaycard and Capital Bank. The former two I have issued N1s to and my POCs included removal of Default and all reference to the Banks from my credit file. Capital Bank stands alone. Responses and results to date:

 

1. NatWest - removed Default from file 14/8, money claim still ongoing

2. Barclaycard - removed Dafault from my file 14/8, money claim still ongoing

3. Capital Bank - letter acknowledging S10 received 17/7 informing me that 'the appropriate department' would be dealing with my request. No further correspondence from them. The 21 days is up (I have given them more time owing to the postal dispute), LBA going off today giving 7 days' notice before I commence court proceedings.

 

I have today also issued CapOne with an S10 Notice and request for removal of adverse marker data using the same principles in law, on a credit card account that is closed and settled (charges & CCI refunded earlier this year).

 

So, I suppose you can draw your own conclusions from these responses. I intend to pursue my claims with CapOne and Capital Bank in court as it seems to be the only way these banks will take things seriously.

 

HTH Painty xx

 

Have you got a link so I can do the same to HSBC?

They have put incorrect information on my credit file, need to issue N1 claim form but don't know what to put on the POC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you got a link so I can do the same to HSBC?

They have put incorrect information on my credit file, need to issue N1 claim form but don't know what to put on the POC.

 

Hi xfox,

 

Here's the link to the template letter;

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legalities/24013-defaults-proposed-method-removal.html

 

It's worth starting your own thread so you can get some specific advice on your individual case as you go along. Here's how if you're unsure;

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If your claim asks for a Court Order under s.14(1) and s.14(3) Data Protection Act 1998 it should.

 

my claim in under Agreement Unenforceable, (lack of prescribed terms) all figures are wrong (tcc and apr) I have included removal of default in the claim, however, creditor seem to think the Judge will say it can stay even if the agreement is found unenforceable and security removed, arguing the debt is not void. this argument has been done elsewhere and I believe the default should be removed since it is based on an unenforceable agreement, with mystery charges and fees all over it, no prescribed terms and the figures and dates of default are also incorrect, DPA states processing of 'accurate' information, does it not.

'rise like lions after slumber, in unvanquishable number, shake your chains to the earth like dew, which in sleep had fall'n on you, ye are many, they are few.' Percy Byshse Shelly 1819

Link to post
Share on other sites

another problem with the credit reference agencies is that they are so hasty to record not only inaccurate information but record 'blind' information, a payment may be late for reasons totally out of the persons control and not their fault at all but still it 'appears' as if this is so! this information is being shared all too randomly without sufficient checks as to accuracy and causing asbolute mayhem without it seems any way of stopping them - it takes much time and effort to sort out and is not an option for everyone:(

'rise like lions after slumber, in unvanquishable number, shake your chains to the earth like dew, which in sleep had fall'n on you, ye are many, they are few.' Percy Byshse Shelly 1819

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...