Credit Ref Agency reply to DPA s.12 request-help please

[Glenn UK]

Seems to me there are several issues here

 

1st off the CRA get data abnoiut you because you or I sing a contract that allows the original lender to chare that data with 3rd parties.

 

2nd if you apply for credit subsequently you allow the 2nd lender to search for data on you.

 

The question in my mind is not whether the CRA processes your data, but exactly what data they pass on to new lenders?

 

Seems to me the use of the credit scoring process removes personal data and it is this that is beingused as the basis for a lender determining if you get the credit.

 

Im not saying I agree with it as a process in terms of whether its within the spirit of the DPA, it seems to me this is how it works and how they can get round some of the issues.

 

I agree with james in one respect the focus must initially be on the lender who you originally had a contract with.

 

If you have a contract with them currently then i thik the case is less clear, or at least it is in my mind.

 

I dont agree with the CRA poisiotn on their abulity to porcess your data and use this to produce a credit score, but i need to read more about that.

 

JMHO

 

GLenn

[Glenn UK]

If we're holding public personal data for six years it makes sense to hold private personal data for the same amount of time.

 

Not sure if this is addressed further down in the thread but this nonsense.

 

A person acquires a serious debt problem for which they acquire a ccj could logically be for thousnads and thousands of pounds, the courts decide that this stays on the persons record for six years.

 

Then theres someone has a late payment for say a catalogue and perhaps ends up with a default over a fiver. Are you saying that the fiver and ccj have the same bearing on society?

 

As much as I have my doubts about the UK justice system in theory at least the thief who steals a fiver is dealt differently from the thief who steals five thousand pounds.

 

In the CRA business however, each are effectively treated with the same measure ie a record retained for six years on thier file.

 

One of the abilities and i must say the distinctions between professions and the rest, is that professionals working for a professsional company can make suitable distinctions rather than simply following a prescribed set of rules.

 

Generally 'rules' are useful to act as the guidance for wise men and the observance of fools.

 

Just an observation.

 

GLenn

[Glenn UK]

Yes but there's a subtle difference. Lenders do not share credit account data to penalise people. The factual information is shared so that, when you apply for credit, participating lenders can consult a CRA and check your borrowing behaviour over the past six years, including how much you currently owe on credit. Most of the account info we hold is completely up to date and helps people get credit quickly and easily when they want it and can afford it.

 

James

 

Is disagree in principle and fact.

 

You assert most of the information is correct and up to date. The truth is that 99.9% of subjects have no idea what data you hold or how to get it. Im prepared to accept my value may be out, 99.1 or 99.9% maybe?

 

in turn you have no way of knowing if the data is correct since you are rarely challenged on the matter. According to a report submitted to the Treasury into low cost banking there are only 2-3million adults without bank accounts in the uk. Im not quite sure how many adults there actually are but CRAs will hold data on nearly every adult, for arguments sake 40 million people.

 

I suspect that in percentage terms you normally get less than 0.5% of that number of persons a year enquire as to the status of their credit file. If you can put some real numbers on this it would be interesting.

 

The average subject applies for credit and gets it, they have no idea what decisions are made about them by the lender only the deal they get at the end of the process.

 

The CRAs in turn have no way of validating the information beyond reliance of the goodwill of the banks.

 

There is no effective means for an individual to challenge the data held on their credit file since the CRAs accept,without exception as far as i can tell, the supplying lenders submissions.

 

So you assertion is made in good faith no doubt, but the reality is the CRAs has no interest in changing the status quo.

 

The effect of entering defaults on an individual is in effect to punish an individual for 6 years and irrespective of the value of the default or whether its just or not, the individuals ability to obtain credit at good rates is affected.

 

In the end, the CRAs have a business to run and it is effectivley unregulated at the moment with the balance of power tending towards the lenders and the CRAs themselves.

 

The Data Protection Act on the other hand is supposed to support the interests of the subject and the 'establishment' refuses to accept that, actually they are riding roughshod over the rights of the subject in search of the extra dollar.

 

JMHO

 

Glenn

 

Edit found a couple more, it always takes me ages to see the damn typos

[Glenn UK]

Tinkerbelle

 

thanks for that, i think ive found most of them.

 

glenn