Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • No I'm not. Even if I was then comments on this forum wouldn't constitute legal advice in the formal sense. Now you've engaged a lawyer directly can I just make couple of final suggestions? Firstly make sure he is fully aware of the facts. And don't mix and match by taking his advice on one aspect while ploughing your own furrow on others.  Let us know how you get on now you have a solicitor acting for you.
    • Oil and gold prices have jumped, while shares have fallen.View the full article
    • Thank you for your reply, DX! I was not under the impression that paying it off would remove it from my file. My file is already trashed so it would make very little difference to any credit score. I am not certain if I can claim compensation for a damaged credit score though. Or for them reporting incorrect information for over 10 years? The original debt has been reported since 2013 as an EE debt even though they had sold it in 2014. It appears to be a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 Section 13 and this all should have come to a head when I paid the £69 in September 2022, or so I thought. The £69 was in addition to the original outstanding balance and not sent to a DCA. Even if I had paid the full balance demanded by the DCA back in 2014 then the £69 would still have been outstanding with EE. If it turns out I have no claim then so be it. Sometimes there's not always a claim if there's blame. The CRA's will not give any reason for not removing it. They simply say it is not their information and refer me to EE. More to the point EE had my updated details since 2022 yet failed to contact me. I have been present on the electoral roll since 2012 so was traceable and I think EE have been negligent in reporting an account as in payment arrangement when in fact it had been sold to a DCA. In my mind what should have happened was the account should have been defaulted before it was closed and sold to the DCA who would then have made a new entry on my credit file with the correct details. However, a further £69 of charges were applied AFTER it was sent to the DCA and it was left open on EE systems. The account was then being reported twice. Once with EE as open with a payment arrangement for the £69 balance which has continued since 2013 and once with the DCA who reported it as defaulted in 2014 and it subsequently dropped off and was written off by the DCA, LOWELL in 2021. I am quite happy for EE to place a closed account on my credit file, marked as satisfied. However, it is clear to me that them reporting an open account with payment arrangement when the balance is £0 and the original debt has been written off is incorrect? Am I wrong?
    • OMG! I Know! .... someone here with a chance to sue Highview for breach of GDPR with a very good chance of winning, I was excited reading it especially after all the work put in by site members and thinking he could hammer them for £££'s and then, the OP disappeared half way through. Although you never know the reason so all I can say is I hope the OP is alive and well regardless. I'd relish the chance to do them for that if they breached my GDPR.
  • 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

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


Number6
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4796 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

 

On an Experian credit report that payment history would be a perfect one. We don't accept what lenders say - they are sharing their own data with each other - we simply provide the facility. But we do make practical QC checks and we do encourage consumers to check their reports from time time and resolve any disputes.

 

My mistake it is the Equifax one that said 00000000D Experian was just a D. So are you saying that the lender can see a different payment history than me ? or that the decison not to give me...say a credit card is based on information from other areas because other then the D I was a good candidate for credit.

 

So Halifax talk to HSBC who talk to RBS and even Out of the blue never even heard of would'nt touch with a barge pole bank, decide if I can have a credit card or not. Because of the information they share with each other?

 

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

  • Replies 525
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I would guess it's somehting to do with Credit Reference Agencies.

 

But, point taken, I guess.

Ahhh, assumption. The mother of all f**kups. ;)

Robertxc v. Abbey - £3300 Settled in full

Robertxc v. Clydesdale - £750 Settled in full

Nationwide v. Robertxc - £2000 overdraft wiped out, Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Style Card - Default removed by order of the sheriff

Robertxc v. Abbey (1) - Data Protection Act action. £750 compensation

Robertxc v. Abbey (2) - Data Protection Act action. £2000 compensation, default removed

 

The opinions on this post are those of Robertxc and not necessarily the opinions of the group and do not constitute sound legal advice. You are advised to seek professional legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

'D' on an Experian report means 'account dormant'. Status 8 means default.

 

Credit reports are heavily subsidised and cost much more than £2 to send out. Most do not contain information people dispute. Would we be entitled to a refund too under your suggestion?

 

I understand your primary objection and I will address this when I next come on.

 

Uhuh... of course it does...

 

Screen capture from Equifiction's own website:

ballmycredit.jpg

I'm often a sarcastic SOB and speak my mind (and I don't do PC at all), but I have a laugh as I go. I won't be intimidated, and I don't take prisoners... so live with it, or go get yourself a humour implant :p

 

Copy of Law book from Amazon…£19.95, Refund Request stamp...32p, LBA stamp...also 32p, Court fees...£750.00,

The look on the bank's barrister's face, when they lost the '£25k Mother-of-all unfair charges' cases...(plus his £8k+ of costs)... Priceless!

 

The legal bit: These are my opinions and own view of legislation and process. I accept no liability whatsoever for any outcome as a result of anyone invoking any or all of the advice given - clarify your own personal stuation with an insured legal professional.

Saying that, I've used these methods against many of these corporate crooks:evil: and won hands down!:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect several of you will have queried the post-contract data rentention issue directly with the ICO and perhaps it would be useful for one of you to share the response you get with other users of this site so you can discuss its implications. I will check back in a few days to see how you are getting on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect several of you will have queried the post-contract data rentention issue directly with the Information Commissioners Office and perhaps it would be useful for one of you to share the response you get with other users of this site so you can discuss its implications. I will check back in a few days to see how you are getting on.

 

My daughters get this sort of comment from teachers when they are set homework! :rolleyes:

 

Pete

I will not make any deals with you. I will not be pushed, filed, stamped, indexed, briefed, debriefed or numbered. My life is my own. Number 6

Link to post
Share on other sites

'D' on an Experian report means 'account dormant'. Status 8 means default.

 

It was most certainly a default, it was not dormant because it was a mortgage. I had to move it to get it shown as Satisfied. I had to move it to a higher rate of interest as well !!!!! although showing as Satisfied has made no difference.

When I asked the lender to show it as satisfied I checked my report to find the same lender had put three on (although satisfied). There was more than one account re further borrowing (no problem with those either). I really dispute the accuracy of the information you hold but when queried nothing was done until I came here. Now they are all gone, removed by the lender I must add with a threat of legal action.

 

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

I expect several of you will have queried the post-contract data rentention issue directly with the Information Commissioners Office and perhaps it would be useful for one of you to share the response you get with other users of this site so you can discuss its implications. I will check back in a few days to see how you are getting on.

 

Yes, quite simple... the complaint was not handled by their legal department, so I am taking action aganst them for advocating advice that has not been properly investigated in relation to the contractual issues.

 

That complaint has gone above the head of the person who sent the letter, and has also gone to several MPs and the DTI. The I.C.O.s office has now referred the matter to their own legal people as they are now concnered that any advice going out to the CRAs was without their knowledge. In fact, the I.C.O. solicitor that I spoke to, wasn't even aware of the issue.

 

In addition, I don't need it anyway, as a judge will need to satisfy himself that any such advice letters are clearly in line with the Law, which they clearly aren't. Plus I have your company's letter to show any judge that your company admits that they should be referring to what the contract allowed in the first place.

 

So, I guess you don't need to sit there with such a smug grin, after all!! :p

I'm often a sarcastic SOB and speak my mind (and I don't do PC at all), but I have a laugh as I go. I won't be intimidated, and I don't take prisoners... so live with it, or go get yourself a humour implant :p

 

Copy of Law book from Amazon…£19.95, Refund Request stamp...32p, LBA stamp...also 32p, Court fees...£750.00,

The look on the bank's barrister's face, when they lost the '£25k Mother-of-all unfair charges' cases...(plus his £8k+ of costs)... Priceless!

 

The legal bit: These are my opinions and own view of legislation and process. I accept no liability whatsoever for any outcome as a result of anyone invoking any or all of the advice given - clarify your own personal stuation with an insured legal professional.

Saying that, I've used these methods against many of these corporate crooks:evil: and won hands down!:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect several of you will have queried the post-contract data rentention issue directly with the Information Commissioners Office and perhaps it would be useful for one of you to share the response you get with other users of this site so you can discuss its implications. I will check back in a few days to see how you are getting on.

 

Now then. I am going to get very angry in a minute as JamesJ is taking the micky :mad: . Experian were contacted during the investigation by the Information Commissioners Office and also advised by the Information Commissioners Office that Lee's letter was inaccurate. The response from the Information Commissioners Office was posted here last week so that everyone could benefit - even JamesJ.

 

Experian know that the Information Commissioners Office has offered 'advice' that the retention of non-public data for 6 years is acceptable and that consent isn't even required :o

 

Even Experian must have been suprised by that little statement - do Experian agree that consent isn't required (I doubt it) but I bet you they will cling to this advice right up until we show, in front of a judge, that you cannot continue to process my data if the account is settled and the Ts & Cs did not contain any in perpetuity (or similar) clause.

 

I have shown you courtesy and respect James, I expect you to do the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect several of you will have queried the post-contract data rentention issue directly with the Information Commissioners Office and perhaps it would be useful for one of you to share the response you get with other users of this site so you can discuss its implications. I will check back in a few days to see how you are getting on.

 

P.S. Plus there are loads of other things going on that we are keeping to ourselves and not divulging publicly, as we are well aware of who reads this forum (as you have shown) and we wouldn't want to spoil the surprise now, would we!! :D

 

Needless to say, that there are a whole load of implications lined up for Court concerning all the relevant legislation and the CRAs abuse of those Acts... believe me, we haven't even scratched the surface yet.:p

I'm often a sarcastic SOB and speak my mind (and I don't do PC at all), but I have a laugh as I go. I won't be intimidated, and I don't take prisoners... so live with it, or go get yourself a humour implant :p

 

Copy of Law book from Amazon…£19.95, Refund Request stamp...32p, LBA stamp...also 32p, Court fees...£750.00,

The look on the bank's barrister's face, when they lost the '£25k Mother-of-all unfair charges' cases...(plus his £8k+ of costs)... Priceless!

 

The legal bit: These are my opinions and own view of legislation and process. I accept no liability whatsoever for any outcome as a result of anyone invoking any or all of the advice given - clarify your own personal stuation with an insured legal professional.

Saying that, I've used these methods against many of these corporate crooks:evil: and won hands down!:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect several of you will have queried the post-contract data rentention issue directly with the Information Commissioners Office and perhaps it would be useful for one of you to share the response you get with other users of this site so you can discuss its implications. I will check back in a few days to see how you are getting on.

 

P.P.S. And to be quite frank, it's quite amusing to come ou with such a patronising comment, especially when you are fully aware of what the I.C.O. has said last week... a little silly, but I'll put that down to perhaps immaturity in business...

 

Interesting thing is though, is that banks and lenders are already instructing your agencies to remove defaults, based on the contractual legal issue.

 

So it seems that despite the stubborn protest of the CRAs, your own clients (the banks) realise that this could be another bad PR day for them if they lose in Court...

 

Maybe, this troll-ing/trawling exercise was to try and find out what our next steps are... two of your posts already give that away very clearly...but we realised this last week, so won't fall into the trap.:)

I'm often a sarcastic SOB and speak my mind (and I don't do PC at all), but I have a laugh as I go. I won't be intimidated, and I don't take prisoners... so live with it, or go get yourself a humour implant :p

 

Copy of Law book from Amazon…£19.95, Refund Request stamp...32p, LBA stamp...also 32p, Court fees...£750.00,

The look on the bank's barrister's face, when they lost the '£25k Mother-of-all unfair charges' cases...(plus his £8k+ of costs)... Priceless!

 

The legal bit: These are my opinions and own view of legislation and process. I accept no liability whatsoever for any outcome as a result of anyone invoking any or all of the advice given - clarify your own personal stuation with an insured legal professional.

Saying that, I've used these methods against many of these corporate crooks:evil: and won hands down!:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now then. I am going to get very angry in a minute as JamesJ is taking the micky :mad: .

 

He is troll-ing... don't let him get to you... the last patronising comment just about said it all.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again... he hasn't answered a single question... I think he's fishing to try and find out our next moves. I wouldn't be surprised if Darth Jones appears on here soon!! LOL

 

It's also clearly evident, when you re-read his posts that he's as worried as the rest of them over the potential litigation issues... you've only got to analyse the language within some of them to see what's actually going through his head.

 

Maybe he's enjoying the banter, just to see who's the first to lose it, rip into him and get thrown off...:D

I'm often a sarcastic SOB and speak my mind (and I don't do PC at all), but I have a laugh as I go. I won't be intimidated, and I don't take prisoners... so live with it, or go get yourself a humour implant :p

 

Copy of Law book from Amazon…£19.95, Refund Request stamp...32p, LBA stamp...also 32p, Court fees...£750.00,

The look on the bank's barrister's face, when they lost the '£25k Mother-of-all unfair charges' cases...(plus his £8k+ of costs)... Priceless!

 

The legal bit: These are my opinions and own view of legislation and process. I accept no liability whatsoever for any outcome as a result of anyone invoking any or all of the advice given - clarify your own personal stuation with an insured legal professional.

Saying that, I've used these methods against many of these corporate crooks:evil: and won hands down!:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Maybe he's enjoying the banter, just to see who's the first to lose it, rip into him and get thrown off...:D

 

Just make sure it's not you :eek:

 

Burnt my rice for tea reading this.........got to start again :mad:

 

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

JamesJ,

 

Just a quick question which should be very easy..

 

How long does it take for CIFAS information to be removed?

 

I have an entry, which I totally disagree with but hey I have only just found out about it..

 

My entry is for some material falsehoods, it was put on by HSBC on 09/09/2005.

 

My understanding is, assuming there is no more "fraudulent activity" it would removed 1 year after the date. Your website states this also.

 

When i called one of your customer relations guys, he said it was 13 months and the website was wrong... any ideas why there is no set amount of time...?

 

Thanks

Neo

If you find this post useful, please click the Scales of 'Justice' in the top right corner. Thanks ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

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

 

Hey Lizzy,

which letter, the long one or the short one????

 

 

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

 

I sent mine to the lender. Just amend with lenders details etc but leave it all in. Send the notice with it as well.

 

Good luck

 

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

Guest katzcafe

Hi, thanks for responding.

On that post there's two letters , a very long one, ( with reference to persoal experience, that I don't have) and a neat short to the point one, (that's easier to understand) but would it be as effective???

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, thanks for responding.

On that post there's two letters , a very long one, ( with reference to persoal experience, that I don't have) and a neat short to the point one, (that's easier to understand) but would it be as effective???

 

Please start your own thread to ask questions. It makes everyone's story so much easier to follow.

 

Thank you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, thanks for responding.

On that post there's two letters , a very long one, ( with reference to persoal experience, that I don't have) and a neat short to the point one, (that's easier to understand) but would it be as effective???

 

 

Start your on thread and I will respond there. See you in a min :)

 

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

Just amend with lenders details etc but leave it all in. Send the notice with it as well.

 

Good luck

 

Lizzy

 

If people are to use the above letter, I would urge the following:

 

1) Please do read through the letter and make sure you understand it before you send it.

2) Remember to amend the "As a highly-educated company secretary for a major PLC" section as Surlybonds has already mentioned in a previous post.

 

Failure to do the above could cause you problems.

 

A great letter, but just make sure you understand what you are doing before jumping in the deep end... :)

If you find this post useful, please click the Scales of 'Justice' in the top right corner. Thanks ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Neo

 

What "above letter"?

You've got me worried about removing the "As a highly-educated company secretary etc.," I had this in my letter that I have sent to Thames Credit. Its in the original template letter. Is it wrong? What problems can it cause. I'm having a major panic because the 21 days are up and I havent heard from them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

relax notty,

It's a small point within about 5 pages of letter. If you sent it to the company secretary then you're fine.

If not, then the person reading it will probably ignore that paragraph.

In reality, one paragraph in the letter isn't going to make a difference about their decision to remove the default or not. They either will and good luck if they do, or they will say "get lost - we don't recognise your right to tell us to stop processing your data - the ICO say we can" and you will have to go to court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...