dual citi/DCA entry on Credit File

[MARTIN3030]

I think Deb from what I read that there needs to be a plan of action.

I will contact you with more details away from here-because Citi monitor this forum as do Eversheds.

When things are sorted then you can tell all about it here.

Continue of course to write here ....

You will see response from others-we share lots in this forum-but some things need to be done out of their sight.

[Deb T]

Yep I'm all for that....I might be female and blonde but I'm not too dumb of a blonde... I look forward to hearing for you.

[Deb T]

Progressing through the different parts of my credit/debt problems and the situation it so deals.

 

Duplicate entries to my file, one from the creditor the other from a dca or at least their parent company...

 

Wrote to the reference agency and initially they said they wouldn't remove them both but after pushing them a little they wrote to both parties and eventually the original creditor removed themselves from the file. The dca wished to remain on it and quoted to the CRA some spurrious reason.

 

I have CCA'd the DCA and they're now over the 12+2 and no reply has been received so the debt is now in dispute. My next step is to Subject Access the Originak Creditor which I have just done.

 

But in any case, the duplicate entries were both updated in the same month June was the last time I was able to check it (4+ years on after default) but there was a difference of £1900 on the outstanding balance.

 

The OC has since given notice to the CRA that will be removing their entry and which they have now done (or at least that is what I've been told, my free trial is up so at the moment I can't check)

 

What concerns me is that the CRA could quite clearly see that the two entries were for the same debt, they could see the differences between the two sums of money and yet they allow the entry from the DCA to stay on the file saying it is up to them the dca to remove/edit it.

 

If the dca cannot provide evidence that they own the debt, or have the right to collect it or that it's enforceable the surely this should be enough to warrant the file entry from my credit file be struck off, and if not for that then it should be because of the anomalies with the duplicate entries in the same month displaying a £1900 difference.

[Pinky69]

If they have no proof of the debt or their right to collect it and won't remove the entry then make a formal complaint to the Information Commissioner as they are breaching the Data Protection Act 1998.

[Deb T]

If they have no proof of the debt or their right to collect it and won't remove the entry then make a formal complaint to the Information Commissioner as they are breaching the Data Protection Act 1998.

 

What section of the act are they breaching so I can quote it when making the report (which I most certainly will be) but as yet they've not responded to the CCA and they're over the 12+2 but a little grace is required first isn't it? Not only that but I've followed up the cca with a Subject access to the creditor ...or at least the one that took over from the original creditor...

[Deb T]

Moving it here seems to have killed it dead and nothing heard from you Martin? but in any case, I've got the postal order, the cca request to hillsden met with zero response so I'm no longer paying them...until they produce the CCA.

 

In the meantime should I now send the subject access to citi...they were not the original creditors it was two creditors before them but they no longer exist.?

 

Does sending the subject access bring them to the table to start court proceedings etc?

[MARTIN3030]

The SAR should be sent to the original creditor yes.

If the debt has been assigned,and I mean assigned in the correct way,then the owner should be able to supply some of what you request,but would not have all of them.

My understanding from other posts is that Citi claim they do not keep copies of letters etc for more than 2 years,because they use an external source for this.

Who are the 2 original creditors that you say ont exist now ?

[MARTIN3030]

If you are talking of Associates,then Citi are responsible for any documents from that account.

A subject access request is not within itself a route to file a claim-a claim can be filed at any time,providing that you can be seen to have exhausted all avenues beforehand-4 weeks is considered acceptable.

Under FOS guidelines a complaint should be resolved by 8 weeks or else a final decision given.

What exactly were you seeking in your request under the CCA ?

You should also have asked for a copy of the notice of assignment,and the deed of assignment.

Also you should check your Credit files to see whats recorded there.

Any defaults registered by Hillesden should tie in with the assigning.

The subject access may provide you with some things that you need.

With Citi claiming they dont keep copies of comms-I would also consider sending Hillesden a SAR too.

Here you could ask for copies of communications between you,and also third parties.They would be hard pressed to deny you this.

If they say they dont have this...or that....then make it clear that you will be seeking they confirm this later in a statement of truth should you be forced to seek disclosure in the courts.

[Deb T]

There the rub with Hillsden....their were two entries on my credit file for the same debt, one from citi the other from hillsden, citi's showed a default balance some 2k lower than the one from hillsden, my first port of call was to request experian remove them both, this they wouldn't do but instead wrote to both parties, citi removed their entry, hillsden kept theirs on....I again wrote to experian pointing to them initial entries and that even though one had been removed and the other left on...it was to me incorrect....

 

Experians answer was typically non-commital and shifting the blame...

 

Our Ref: ***/*****?**

Dear Miss **********

Thank you for your email, which we received on xx August 2009.

 

I note your comments and I appreciate the situation, but it is impossible for us to monitor every persons credit report before they have seen is as there is simply too much information. We therefore urge people to check their reports to ensure everything is accurate. If it is not, we then help people to correct their reports by contacting the companies concerned on their behalf.

 

If you think any entry in your report is wrong we are obliged to contact the lender to verify your comments or the validity of the entry and adhere to any instructions to amend the information. The lender is equally obligated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Data Protection Act 1998 to ensure that the information they provide is accurate and up to date. If no amendment or deletion instructions are ordered we are unable to amend the information.

 

For further clarification of this you may wish to contact the Information Commissioner's office at the following address:

 

The Information Commissioner: Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, SK9 5AF

Kind regards

 

****** *********

Consumer Services Officer

 

Customer Support Centre

Experian Interactive

------------------------------

 

 

Technically speaking 'Hillsden' are not the lender anyway...so the rubbish that experian have given is not relevant, not only that but I had already pointed experian to the duplicate entries and although one has gone the other quite easily shows differences. The last update by citi was last month and showed a balance of one amount...hillsden also updated last month shows a different balance and considerably higher.....although citi's has now been removed I keep a copy of the entry and took a snaopshot just in case....

 

The subject access I am sending to citi is amongst other things such as the original agreement is to also help establish the assignment validity as Hillsden have caught themselves out in several ways and I just want to pinpoint the assignment before I let them (Hillsden) know some of what info I have)

 

The default date on the entry was made by Citi and was before Hillsden were assigned, however hillsdens entry is a duplicate of the citi entry other than the outstanding amount...(citis is now deleted of course)

 

I'm glad you said that re the subject access of Hillsden as well, I wasn't sure if it was a viable option or not...but now you've said it I will.

 

I did read somewhere a rather extensive subject access letter that was a template, it pretty much covered the lot...but I can't find it at the moment, it wanted phone call records and all sorts of things...is that the one to send ? Once I locate it?

[MARTIN3030]

I will send you a pm.

[Deb T]

Ok, well sent off the CCA request, nothing heard within the 14 days and have since sent off the dispute letter.

 

Had a letter come through dated 6th August from Hillsden (not dlc who I had sent the CCA to and it states they acknowledge the £1 sent and that they're awaiting a copy of the requested documentation from their Client...which also happens to be the same people sending the letter?

 

It also stated that if they are unable to forward a copy of the original agreement they will be able to supply a true copy of the document which will comply with section 77-79 of the Credit Consumer Act 1974

 

and I'll be updated in 14 days if they hear anything....

 

This from the people that had my debt assigned to them, possibly purchased by them and yet they don't have a copy of the original credit agreement?

 

-------

 

This standard procedure? and what exactly is a true copy, if it doesn't have the details on that was requested it isn't true as in my signature and other such stuff?

[Enron]

If the original creditor was Citi they will have to apply to them for a copy, that said if Citi are misleading their own customers by sending out copies of recent Terms & Conditions in response to s78(1) CCA it is unlikely that they will supply a DCA with them.

 

It is possible that if Hillesden do not receive any documentation, they will make an offer for you to settle the account in full and final settlement.

 

That said keep us posted on what you receive in return.

[Deb T]

Citi although supposedley the original creditor are not actually that.

 

First creditor was

 

-----

 

then it went to CitiBank, then Citi-Financial and then Citi before it was

assigned to Hillsden etc... The first creditor for now will remain nameless suffice to say I'll be interested in seeing it.

 

I'm about to send off a subject access to both citi and Hillsden...but maybe I should wait...?

[Enron]

Request copies of the front and reverse of the executed agreement in your SAR with both.

 

If your executed agreement was Peoples Bank Connecticut it is likely that they only have a copy of the front, which will not have prescribed terms etc., and as such they will supply you with a printed page with the info typed out. This to disguise from the fact that they don't have an enforceable agreement - yes Citi are that tricky.

[Deb T]

Ok *smiling* I guiess waiting to request a subject access is maybe not the thing to do? and to infact just do it anyway?

 

I've seen a subject access template letter but don't recall the front/reverse idea...excellent for that thank you....I guess that without the prescribed terms any enforcement via court is difficult if not impossible? Notwithstanding that the assignment may also be a little dodgy?

[Enron]

Section 78(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 is the way to do it, as a creditor is legally barred from enforcing the agreement at all until they provide a copy of the executed, as confirmed to me by the Office Of Fair Trading.

 

That said Citi being Citi and being something of a law unto themselves will continue to enforce the agreement regardlessly normally, you may be lucky and find that a DCA is somewhat more wise.

 

Citi themselves are sending out copies of recent Terms & Conditions to customers who request copies of their executed agreement, it might be that Hillesden and other Citi assignees are receiving these but know farewell that this doesn't discharge their duties under s78(1) and are unwilling to forward these to customers.

 

To clarify these recent Terms & Conditions are varied agreements, and not executed agreements - the definition of executed being a signed document. In sending these Citi have only been completeing the request partially in sending out a copy of varied terms, these have to be included in addition to the executed agreement and original terms & conditions if they are referenced in the executed agrement - as outlined by the copy document regulations.

 

The regulations do state that certain things can be excluded such as the signature box, signature and signature date but aside from that the s78(1) reply must mirror the original details contained in the executed agreement, it cannot be replaced by an entirely different document such as varied Terms & Conditions. This has been confirmed to me by a solicitor and expert witness.

 

The practice of sending out recent Terms & Conditions is one of the slippery practices that Citi are doing, in direct contradiction to their own internal code of conduct.

[Deb T]

Thanks for that, it all adds to the fire.

 

Citi can do what they want as far as I'm concerned, if they don't have a proper copy then it isn't enforecable, not only that but a subject access will most likely point up another few anomalies..

 

How do they attempt to enforce it? by way of court action? which if their paperwork is as dodgy/doubtful as what appears what would be the point of them trotting off to court? or do they try the court route looking in the hope that most will capitulate and cave in to their demands or for the judgement in default routine?

[Enron]

They would be pretty unwise to go the court route without an enforceable agreement, as part of CPR rules you could demand that the executed agreement be produced.

 

That said its probably way too early to be thinking of that, it is only on a rare occasion that a creditor takes a customer to court.

 

I think you are more likely to find that Hillesden won't be able to fulfill your request, and will try to negotiate a settlement with you.

 

My belief is that Citi have a problem with a lot of their older executed agreements, in that they have only retained them partially or there are problems with enforceability.... hence why they have reverted to attempting to mislead their customers with copies of recent Terms & Conditions.... after all its all about the bottom line.

[Deb T]

I guess thats the connudrum, do you negotiate with Hillsden if they send an offer to settle or due to it's possible/probably unenforceable nature (the debt) do you pay/say nothing and let things take it's course. Why would/should I pay something to somebody that doesn't have the correct paperwork to be able to pursue the debt in the first place (notwithstanding that I've paid them an amount each month for the last 5 bloomin years.

 

Thanks for the input enron, it's appreicated.

[Enron]

As with all matters on this site, its your personal choice.

[MARTIN3030]

Sorry Deb I did not get back to you-have had major subs of my own but have more time now.

Will be in touch away from eyes to catch up and advise.

[Deb T]

Ok, I shall await further contact from you Martin.

 

As of yet they have been unable to respond to the CCA request and have

twice sent me notification that they'll contact me again in 21 days....

 

While I'm here though, if they haven't been able to supply the cca and once/if they do I'll make it a subject access....but in the interim and if there is no enforceable credit agreement in place and they can't provide the info...is it worth my sending a letter to experian showing the delay/lack of agreement letters from Hillsden and request the credit entry be removed from the file?

[Enron]

Experian will outline to you that the debt still technically exists and as such should be listed.

 

I've tried tacking them down to the fact that the information they recorded with respect to late payment markers and default which Citi entered whilst in default of s78(1), and whilst they were legally barred from enforcing the agreement with or without a court order under s78(6) were unlawfully made.

 

But with the CRAs its like talking to a brick wall, after all the customer doesn't pay them its the bank that do for their services.

[Deb T]

I've had the duplicate entry removed by Experian, but the entry by Hillsden was kept on my file. Experian allegedly wrote to Hillsden when I pointed up the duplicate, citi replied that their entry could come off, Hillsden response to Experian is included in the below explanation from Experian...

 

Dear Ms XXXXXX

 

Further to our recent correspondence, CitiFinancial Europe plc have deleted the entry that you disputed (entry ***) from your report.

 

To keep your data secure we do not send any emails that contain personal data from your credit report.

 

To view this change please login to your report at https://www.creditexpert.co.uk/

 

If you would like a letter showing the change that has been made, please e-mail by return and we will be happy to send this to you.

 

I have also been contacted by Hillesden Securities Ltd regarding entry C** on your credit report. They have confirmed that the details we hold are accurate and have requested that we retain the information on our database. They have also stated the following:

 

"We update our accounts on a monthly basis and will pick up any payments made on the account up to the middle of each month. Therefore, it may appear to look a month behind with payments received, but will be updated the following month to show correctly what has been paid.

The current outstanding balance on the account is £****.** which will show correctly the beginning of August when our next submission to the Credit Reference Agencies is submitted.

Should you have any documentation to prove your current balance is £****, we would require these to be sent to the offices to investigate further."

 

Unfortunately I am unable to amend this information without the authorisation of the company in question.

 

If you have any further queries or wish to discuss this further, may I suggest you contact the company concerned direct at the following address:

 

Hillesden Securities Ltd

Buckingham Road

Brackley

NN13 7DN

I wrote back to Experian informing them of Hillsdens lack of clarity and the unenforceability of the debt, and the below response is below...

 

 

 

 

 

Thank you for your email, which we received on xx xxxx 2009.

 

I note your comments and I appreciate the situation, but it is impossible for us to monitor every persons credit report before they have seen is as there is simply too much information. We therefore urge people to check their reports to ensure everything is accurate. If it is not, we then help people to correct their reports by contacting the companies concerned on their behalf.

 

If you think any entry in your report is wrong we are obliged to contact the lender to verify your comments or the validity of the entry and adhere to any instructions to amend the information. The lender is equally obligated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Data Protection Act 1998 to ensure that the information they provide is accurate and up to date. If no amendment or deletion instructions are ordered we are unable to amend the information.

It went on to give me the information commissioners address blah blah. However, the debt may technically exist but if the company collecting it do not have the correct assignment rights or the OC creditor agreement is in doubt then I would of thought that the DCA entry would be removed simply because they have no right to the debt...(I have an interesting an altogether non valid assignment by them...I just haven't as yet played that card) and the OC as in Citi are not the original OC either and will have difficulty in supplying the info required.

 

I've been making a nuisance of myself with Experian, their arguments are fundamentally flawed and I have oodles of time these days....

[whitelight]

Hi everyone. I am newie to forum but oh how busy I have been reading all your threads. I am after 3 years still fumming and angry at how I have been treated by CitiFinancial - was originally with Associates. My financial circumstances changed for the worse so wanted to use my PPI. Told no can do! So filled out Income & Expenditure form with proposal to bring account up to date - Citi did not reply. They then asked me to pay three times the monthly amount I could afford. First month paid them money, second month they sold account to Hillesden Securities. Since then interest and charges have been put on account - this is a brief synopsis of my argument with these two companies - this argument raised its head again last week due to the fact Hillesden said I had a 'live' account with them, with a credit card - I have no card on account as Citi Defaulted account in Dec 2006. Contacted Citi who have now changed their mind and said the account was not defaulted. I asked them for a copy of my CCA and they advised I write into Data Request Team at Pips Building in Derby with a £1.00 payment. Is this correct?

I have now contacted Financial Ombudsman as I am completely fed up with how dealing with these people.

Any help or advice in relation to Citi/Hillesden would be really appreciated.