Statute Barred show up on your credit file

[InformedSearcher]

Okay if you see a search showing 'Outstanding Debt' on a CRA from a DCA knowing full well that it's statute barred then contact the CRA and let them knowo It's very important you copy whatever you are told in a reply if they do not delete the search!

There are 2 parts and the first is that under the DPA your 'penance' (my word) cannot be forever extended once the 6 years have passed. Whilst these 'cowboys' might well ignore your complaint and say the entry is valid, it is NOT! The CRA is probably as useless and could not care and will not intervene and yet it's the responsibility of their own data contraoller to ensure entries are fair and proper. This is a time when you see that CRA's are there for the cash and the DCA's the same!

The 2nd part is the fact of someone obliged to tell you the debt has been reallocated. My easy example is that you view your credit file and see detrimental entries from unknown DCA's (as above). Who are they and how the heck have they the right to see private financial data about you? However to me this is a 'grey' area which I'm currently venturing into.

Anyhow you have the recourse of complaining (and winning) through the ICO. However you'll be waiting for literally months for their answer. Standard DCA searches remain on your credit file for 2 years by the way. The other option (funds allowing) is to take them to County Court citing the DPA (Section 1). If it's statute barred then there's no reason why you should not win and probably consider damamges for what is now 'false' information and the fact the searches were without your authorisation.

 

Michael

[miziwizzi]

I have a default notice from welscum dated 2006, they put default on credit file dated 2009, contacted CRA they say can still only change it if welscum say so:eek:

[InformedSearcher]

I have a default notice from welscum dated 2006, they put default on credit file dated 2009, contacted CRA they say can still only change it if welscum say so:eek:

 

That happened to me with NatWest a few years ago. In theory from what you say the entry would be valid but should be removed 6 years later as in 2012 from the date of the default. You need to verify that this is what is going to happen.

 

Michael

[JonCris]

I have a default notice from welscum dated 2006, they put default on credit file dated 2009, contacted CRA they say can still only change it if welscum say so:eek:

 

Point out to the CRA that the registration date MUST coincide with the date of default otherwise the DCA/Creditor could go on re-registering the default infinitum. Advise them that the ICO considers them to be data controllers in their own right & therefore cannot hide behind their customer Welcome Also advise them that having been informed they cannot now use the 'good faith' argument

[miziwizzi]

Point out to the CRA that the registration date MUST coincide with the date of default otherwise the DCA/Creditor could go on re-registering the default infinitum. Advise them that the ICO considers them to be data controllers in their own right & therefore cannot hide behind their customer Welcome Also advise them that having been informed they cannot now use the 'good faith' argument

 

 

Thanks for that and I will do, I have got to fax the CRA the default notice so will add that to my correspondance.

 

Welcome put it on this year after I would not play ball, guess its their way of punishment !!!!

[InformedSearcher]

Point out to the CRA that the registration date MUST coincide with the date of default otherwise the DCA/Creditor could go on re-registering the default infinitum. Advise them that the ICO considers them to be data controllers in their own right & therefore cannot hide behind their customer Welcome Also advise them that having been informed they cannot now use the 'good faith' argument

 

 

BUT what happens when the CRA (in all cases!) will not entertain your comments? They speak to you as if you are lucky to speak to them. They hide behind their business clients at all times. Well this is regarding Equifax anyhow.

 

Clarity has now sent me their usual 'demand' letters which have been passed to them from Cabot. These things (if I could even remember them) are all statute barred. They will not remove search entries and neither will the CRA even though I've had correspondence and discussion (and told the CRA) with the ICO on statute barred debts.

 

Michael