Court Action Started Against CRA and Lowell

[sbfido]

More than that though, it may make the CRA realize that they are not an extension of the banks (even though most of them have links with them) and the law is there for everyone to obey. Not to pick just the bits they can use to cover themselves!

 

Well there defense is now gonna cause them a few problems lol.

___________

In summary - the defendant role is merely as a processor of information supplied by the data suppliers.

 

The defendant has no means of verifying the data.

 

the defendant therefore has no authority to amend the information.

 

___________________________

 

The ICO consider them as Joint data controllers, that must verfy the information when disputed and when the data subject provides evidence must take action.

 

As a joint data controller what more authority do they require.

 

_____________________________

 

Should i publish this in the press

[sbfido]

Asked Lowell for chair persons name today so that i can start getting him struck off as a director.

 

Experian still claim they have no authority to amend data so maybe they should get advise from the ICO. (as joint data controllers they are required to comply with the proncipals of the data protection act)

[ODC]

Asked Lowell for chair persons name today so that i can start getting him struck off as a director.

 

 

[/img]

[sbfido]

hehehehehe bet he aint smiling later

[noomill060]

subby

[banker_rhymes_with]

That thing has a face like a well smacked bum.

 

Is that what they all look like in CRA land?

 

Cheers,

BRW

Edited August 17, 2009 by banker_rhymes_with
Tripe-O

[spamheed]

So their argument "It has nothing to do with us" is a lie

 

Their argument "we can't change information without our clients permission" is a lie (I think that this is a contractual issue)

 

their alleged status as being independent from the creditors is a lie

 

all of those people who have had their complaints overruled because of the above should now complain again

[noomill060]

Banks etc have direct access to Experians files.

 

Experian allow them to upsdate and change these files themselves directly

 

"You are correct that Barclays do have direct access to our system ....due to the terms of the contract they hold with us."

 

[email protected] telephone 0115 8286485 or by writing to me at the following address:

 

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

[littlefatbudha]

hi all, i have received a letter from shop direct ,stating they dont have a credit agrement, so basically i do no give them or the DCA ( account Credit managers) permission to use my data.

I phoned Experian this morning regarding the letter and the permission issue, and they stated, they cannot do anything about it, it would have to be the DCA or creditor to tell them to remove the data.

I feel the Experian file is wrong anyway, due to never receiving default notice and there are unlawful charges included in fee, but from what i have read on this thread ,they are liable and so the DCA or creditor.

I still feel like Experian get away with false information, if you imagine that Experian was a daily paper say "the sun" and the creditor ( or DCA) was the supplier of the story, and the story was not true, and the newspaper printed this, who would be in court..........Yes it would be the paper , so why do Experian get away with this false information they supply !!!!!!!!!

Edited August 20, 2009 by littlefatbudha

[sbfido]

send experian a copy of the letter stating they have no file they would then have to act on that information

[postggj]

Tell The Cra That The Fos Considers Them Not Only Data Processors But Data Controllers As Well.

 

They Have A Legal Duty To Confirm The Data They Hold Is Correct And Until Confirmation All Data That Is Questioned Should Be Deleated Until Confirmed

[sbfido]

UPDATE COURT DATE SET

 

2.5 Hours

 

CRA and Lowell - Lowell have not submitted defense.

 

CRA state 4 reason why claim should be struck out.

 

1. The defendants role is merely a processor of information - OPPS - ICO STATES in formal letter - They are joint Data Controllers.

 

2. The defendant has no mean or requirement to amend or delete - OPPS - ICO letter states that if claimant submitted information they should act.

 

3. They have no authority - I agree - I haven't given them permission to process and they are the data controller so they have authority to remove it.

 

4. Unable to delete - Well need i say more. LOL

 

OK they further claim - In rspect of accoun A that they were informed on 10th of special date that the data was correct, thre own letter makes alternative statement. OPPS admin error.

 

They also stated that the claimant me should have followed other legal routes and this is the funniset bit " The claimant should have directed his complaint to the FOS / ICO and the claimant has not made any complaint.

 

So the court case in relation to case 1 that i won - Does that not count and judgement was received on 11 of special month.

 

1 day after equifax remove my notice of correction that had the court numbr on.

 

The ICO letters sent to Equifax when i raised the dispute - Yet they claim i did not follow any other route - Thats the other two accounts lol

 

I have all he letters for the judge. I am starting to feel they are not aware of what they are doing and this claim could set an example for them

 

 

Nearly forgot to add in the defense pack thy have submitted notes as there evidence - this also states clearly the ICO ref number i sent when i disputed the data - hahahahahaha - The Judge has got to agree they are foolish.

[yubnub]

Absolute class!!!! :D:D:D:D:D

 

Worthy scales tip incommming!

[lickthewallfatboy]

how much in financial terms are you claiming?

 

I'm going after call credit for a kick off to see how it plays out

[stripper]

Brilliant!!!!!

[spark1]

Hope you win mate Just want to share what the ICO state in an assessment they carried out in relation to incorrect information on a Experian Credit File. And bare in mind this information was incorrect for 10 months and had an adverse effect imo.

 

So What Im gonna do is use Equifax 4 reasons for the case to be struck out and insert the ICO opinions regarding Experian :

 

1. The defendants role is merely a processor of information

2. The defendant has no mean or requirement to amend or delete

3. They have no authority

4. Unable to delete

 

 

With regard to the fourth principle, the credit reference agencies store information that is sent to them by organisations who subscribe to their services. As such they do not 'own' the data and are unable to amend or remove data without instruction from the comapny who has recorded it.

 

They are joint data controller with the organisation and therefore need to take reasonable steps to ensure the accuracy of the information. Because the information is supplied by them by the organisation. we accept Experian are taking reasonable steps by writing to the organisation on the consumer's behalf to ammending or removal of the data then Experian can then carry out any necessary changes. During this process, it is necessary to show that a challenge has been made to the accuracy of the information and by placing a notice of dispute against the particular entry.

 

The above also refered to the first principle as well as the fourth.

 

I would'nt be surprised they defend themselves with some sort of correspondence between themselves and the ICO.

 

They will be a tough nut to crack imo, but good luck.

 

Cheers Spark1

[sbfido]

Hope you win mate Just want to share what the ICO state in an assessment they carried out in relation to incorrect information on a Experian Credit File. And bare in mind this information was incorrect for 10 months and had an adverse effect imo.

 

So What Im gonna do is use Equifax 4 reasons for the case to be struck out and insert the ICO opinions regarding Experian :

 

1. The defendants role is merely a processor of information

2. The defendant has no mean or requirement to amend or delete

3. They have no authority

4. Unable to delete

 

 

With regard to the fourth principle, the credit reference agencies store information that is sent to them by organisations who subscribe to their services. As such they do not 'own' the data and are unable to amend or remove data without instruction from the comapny who has recorded it.

 

They are joint data controller with the organisation and therefore need to take reasonable steps to ensure the accuracy of the information. Because the information is supplied by them by the organisation. we accept Experian are taking reasonable steps by writing to the organisation on the consumer's behalf to ammending or removal of the data then Experian can then carry out any necessary changes. During this process, it is necessary to show that a challenge has been made to the accuracy of the information and by placing a notice of dispute against the particular entry.

 

The above also refered to the first principle as well as the fourth.

 

I would'nt be surprised they defend themselves with some sort of correspondence between themselves and the ICO.

 

They will be a tough nut to crack imo, but good luck.

 

Cheers Spark1

 

Yes I am aware of this statement from the information commisoners office and so raised a formal complaint against the ICO for not regulating the act independantly, tis resulted in another formal response that places the duty on the CRA when information is provided to them. Such as court case and also ICO report. Sadly for them this was provided as idnetified in thier own defense thus they have a duty to remove the data and notify the supplier of thier actions lol. I also have a letter from the ICO with that information in it. I also have several MP's ready to jump on the ICO and the matter has recently been raised in Parliment. I love it

 

Thus the reason Equifax and Lowell were summon'd together. They can fight amongst themselves

[spark1]

Yes I am aware of this statement from the information commisoners office and so raised a formal complaint against the ICO for not regulating the act independantly, tis resulted in another formal response that places the duty on the CRA when information is provided to them. Such as court case and also ICO report. Sadly for them this was provided as idnetified in thier own defense thus they have a duty to remove the data and notify the supplier of thier actions lol. I also have a letter from the ICO with that information in it. I also have several MP's ready to jump on the ICO and the matter has recently been raised in Parliment. I love it

 

Thus the reason Equifax and Lowell were summon'd together. They can fight amongst themselves

 

Who did you raise a complaint with against the ICO, because thats what I need to do aswell.

[spark1]

sbfido

 

You have a letter from the ICO stating "that places the duty on the CRA when information is provided to them"

 

Why don't you get the ICO to state in writing, that in your case, Equifax is the CRA in question, and therefore it is unlikely they have not complied with the DPA 1998.

 

Spark1

[sbfido]

Who did you raise a complaint with against the ICO, because thats what I need to do aswell.

 

I asked the information commisoner office to provide me with a written explanation to wy the principles of the data protection act do not apply to credit reference agencies - thes eprivate limited companies appear to fail regularly to deal with issues claiming they cant

 

I invited my MP in Sheffield (NICK CLEGG) and MP rotherham to write to them also - they did the response came within 3 weeks and amazingly so did all the other outstanding matters.

 

Will post it all on here after court case -

[spark1]

I going to write to the ICO and ask them to re-examine my complaint against Experian, especailly when it was obvious the information was incorrect.

[sbfido]

I going to write to the ICO and ask them to re-examine my complaint against Experian, especailly when it was obvious the information was incorrect.

 

Contact your MP - They dying to get a dig in re financial servcoes ect, ask them to complain for you you get a faster response too. 3 weeks compared to 18 months.

 

Also state that as a goverment agency this could be a breach of your human rights to live free from harrasment and if the ICO are allowing special favours to CRA it would also be discrimnatory. (MMMMMMM)

[sbfido]

If anyone knows how to write draft orders

 

I would like

 

The court to order how many complaints they have has in relation to the concerns I have raised and details of how they have safeguarding the public when using these companies.

 

For them to stop processing disputed data

 

For compensation

 

And to attach additional information including contracts and the indemnity provided by the data supplier.

[sbfido]

5 weeks to go for court hearing lol

 

In the Rotherham County Court

[sbfido]

If anyone knows how to write draft orders

 

I would like

 

The court to order how many complaints they have has in relation to the concerns I have raised and details of how they have safeguarding the public when using these companies.

 

For them to stop processing disputed data

 

For compensation

 

And to attach additional information including contracts and the indemnity provided by the data supplier.

 

Anyone know howto write a draft order