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

[Number6]

hello worcester4X4, I think your last letter is exactly right for the plain English brigade, I understand it.

 

May I use it,

pretty please

 

Help yourself saxon. I make no warranty about its accuracy or effectiveness though

 

Pete

[un1boy]

After more prevarication from Equifax and Experian I have sent the following email to both of them (obviously with different addresses and company names ) :

 

 

 

Any thoughts or comments?

 

Pete

 

I'm confused. Are you writing this letter asking Experian to remove all information they hold about you, to effectively make you have a nil "existence" in the credit industry?

[JonCris]

Lets get back to some basics. The CRA's are not quasi public bodies which after reading much of this thread they seem to consider themselves as such. They are private companies who are governed by the law of this land.

 

Much is being made of "this is the way we do it" as is "the regulator approves".

 

Lets 1st deal with the regulator. I can almost guarantee that if you phone either the OFT or the ICO 3 times in one day & speak to 3 different people you will be given 3 totally different conflicting answers. Also the ICO has been appealed & lost before now.

 

As I keep saying just because it has become industry practice does not not mean it is lawful (remember bank charges). As private companies the CRA's have set themselves guidelines which are purely for profit & which while they allow them to offer a service to their customers DO NOT comply with the statute nor common law. Moreover far to much of the information they hold is incorrect & even when drawn to their attention they make very little attempt to correct or remove it. Often this disinformation sits on a persons file for years without their knowledge only coming to light at a time of crisis. Much of what the CRA's do is unlawful but unfortunaltely we have a weak regulator who won't do his job protecting the consumer.

 

A glaring recent example of a body setting itself guidelines which have since proved to be unlawful are the guidelines for nursing home care of the elderly

[tamadus]

Thanks a lot everyone, once again I have found a thread on CAG/BAG thats kept me from my bed until after 3am :o

 

There are 2 things that come to my mind, one of which has had a lot of coverage in this thread.

 

1. I give permission for Bank A to pass my data onto a CRA. I give permission to Bank B to ask that same CRA for details of my data. I have NEVER given the CRA permission to pass on my data or process it in any way, shape or form. In theory all they can divulge to a 4th party is what is already held in the public domain.

 

2. The other point is that the CRA accept whatever the lender tells them as gospel truth, yet they assume the consumer is lying through his/her teeth. Which is obviously double standards. This is giving the lender carte blanche to do, say and record whatever they feel like while destroying the consumer personal and financial reputation. The truth on those records is purely because an employee of the lender says it's true.

 

Thanks to the wonderful work being done by SB and also worcester4x4 I can see this becoming a major line of attack in the fight back by the consumers of the UK

 

I would personally like to thank SurlyBonds in particular for all the time, effort and personal cost he has undertaken to get this far, and also thank you to people like worcester for continuing the crusade so that I and those who follow can quickly and easily find the information they need to counteract the flood of misinformation being passed between the various lenders and CRA's.

[andrew1]

I like your letter worcester, full of your usual resolve. However, earlier in the thread this question came up and I think ( without reading it all again :o ) you were equally inquisitive as to what this actually does in the broader sense of the picture of obtaining credit.

 

May I ask what exactly do you think the effect of stopping the cra's will have if you applied for credit and do you think, if more and more people follow this line, that there will be some kind of negative ( invisible marker) read by potential lenders if there is nothing on your file or something like " this person has removed all permission to veiw this credit file"

 

I can see the attraction to stop the beggars, you and sb are totally correct in curbing the effects it has on our lives but what about the bigger picture?

[Number6]

I'm confused. Are you writing this letter asking Experian to remove all information they hold about you, to effectively make you have a nil "existence" in the credit industry?

 

YES!

 

(see next post)

 

Pete

[Number6]

I like your letter worcester, full of your usual resolve. However, earlier in the thread this question came up and I think ( without reading it all again :o ) you were equally inquisitive as to what this actually does in the broader sense of the picture of obtaining credit.

 

May I ask what exactly do you think the effect of stopping the cra's will have if you applied for credit and do you think, if more and more people follow this line, that there will be some kind of negative ( invisible marker) read by potential lenders if there is nothing on your file or something like " this person has removed all permission to veiw this credit file"

 

I can see the attraction to stop the beggars, you and sb are totally correct in curbing the effects it has on our lives but what about the bigger picture?

 

Hi Andrew

 

In answer to your question "May I ask what exactly do you think the effect of stopping the cra's will have if you applied for credit" - I don't know is the short answer.

 

My mission here is to try my damdest to get the CRA's to stop behaving as though they are the all-powerful bullyboys that they seem to think they are and also to get the regulator to regulate and not to act as the CRAs ring-fence.

 

JonCris made the point a couple of posts ago that the CRA's are nothing special, they are merely private companies that process data for a living and sell that data to the highest bidder. I would like them to realise this, or more accurately to get them to own up to the fact that they do realise this and for them to then take off the jackboots and behave properly. They need to realise that what they do affects peoples LIVES and can seriously screw up peoples lives. They need to start working WITH the average person, not against them!

 

I'm not about to apply for any form of credit right now but if (sorry, WHEN) I get my data wiped from the CRA's records I will then apply for a line of credit and see what happens - we can then answer that question definitively.

 

Another point about credit files is that they are very useful to persons seking to steal someones identity. Several US states have given citizens the legal right to "freeze" their credit files to avoid ID theft. What I'm doing might a a bearing on this aspect; if you feel that your ID is at risk then "blanking" your credit file could be a strong countermeasure.

 

My latest letters to the CRA's are my final shot. If they don't do as I ask then the next step is to issue an N1 and get a Judge to decide the issue.

 

I'll keep you posted.

 

Pete

[un1boy]

Good luck Worcester, look forward to your next post.

[andrew1]

Thanks worcester, I thought you might say that. I think a lot of people are wondering what the effects of 'de-listing' are. Once it has been established I think the flood gates will open. It's a pity we are not getting more input from people who actually work in the CRA's and the DCA's onto the threads ( maybe the experience of a certain JamesJ might have put them off!). We might have had a better insight from them.

 

I just found out I was the victim of ID theft and I found out by a most parculiar co incidence. Nectar cards! a store points card not a credit card!- I lost mine so I asked for another, when I called they said do you want it to go to xxx address? Not my address but by strange coincidence an address I had linked on my credit file - entered in 2004 and once by Wescot in 2005. I just thought it was like Cabots 'Kingshill No1' and an address of wescot or something. Not a bit of it!

"Where did you get that from I asked" after a long search I eventually found out that the Post Office or Royal Mail 'sell' your information when you redirect your mail and Nectar buy that data and update your files to apparently save you writing in! - Big brother or what? Anyway, I had never redirected my mail and had lived at the same address for nearly 20 yrs. What had happened was that some guy had moved into a house in Redhill, registered my name on the electoral register then put in an application to capital 1 for a 3k credit card with someone else as a named user ( probably him) The application form had my current address as his ' previous address' he had the length of time I'd lived here correct, my dob, my job title and my income not far off reality. So he made it look as though I'd just moved. I think, as I run a couple of companies he could have got some of this info from Co's House but it was scary to find out. Wescot told me it was their search department had come up with the address and registered it with CRA's.

 

If the guy had known my financial state at that time he would have put money into my account rather than nobbling me!

 

Anyway, this CRA's status really needs to be thrashed out and the consequences are going to be extremely useful to know. I have a few things to clear up first but I'm in the process of infiltrating a DCA on a business matter so I may get an insight from that and I'll post back soon ( nothing covert I might add!). Good luck and well done for all the good work.

[JamesJ]

We recently produced a new guide to help immigrants, and Brits who have been abroad for a number of years, establish a credit history in the UK, because of the problems they experience getting credit with no information on their credit reports. I certainly wouldn't encourage people to willingly get into this situtation.

 

James

[Tinkerbelle]

We recently produced a new guide to help immigrants, and Brits who have been abroad for a number of years, establish a credit history in the UK, because of the problems they experience getting credit with no information on their credit reports. I certainly wouldn't encourage people to willingly get into this situtation.

 

James

 

:?

 

Edit: Come to think of it...I can see why you would want to discourage this. How would you guys make money otherwise?

You'd have nothing to sell / process

 

Since when has a CRA actually cared about an individuals ability to get credit? The CRA's won't change incorrect information unless they are told to do so by the Originating Organisation - even though it could be wrong!

 

An organisation could tell you guys anything, and you publish that to all and sundry - regardless of whether it is correct or not, so please don't try and tell us that you guys care

 

A notice of correction means nothing...

[Robertxc]

I agree with James. Having no credit history is almost as bad as having a 'bad' one. Lenders look for track record (among other things), when deciding whether or not to lend. If there's no track record.......:-|

[Tinkerbelle]

I agree with James. Having no credit history is almost as bad as having a 'bad' one. Lenders look for track record (among other things), when deciding whether or not to lend. If there's no track record.......:-|

 

I agree with you. And I have always wondered why anyone would want to put a blanket ban on their file.

 

However, trying to make out that they (the CRA's) actually care one way or another is another matter all together

[saxon]

Hello, I have a daft question to throw in

 

Years ago before the easy access of computers, calculators etc

people were getting credit, how did the lending orgs, sort out who could and couldn't get the credit

 

what I'm getting at is nowadays everyone is so reliant on these electrical devices, people don't seem able to judge, calculate, spell correctly (even me), so everything stops.

 

If we remove all personal data from CRAs, then we would have to return to the good old days, pens and paper etc.

[Number6]

I refuse to repeat my arguments for so doing. They've been posted elsewhere.

 

JamesJ - seeing as you're back you could perhaps chivvy up your chaps to reply to my DSN and CCA Statutory Notice...??

 

Pete

[andrew1]

We recently produced a new guide to help immigrants, and Brits who have been abroad for a number of years, establish a credit history in the UK, because of the problems they experience getting credit with no information on their credit reports. I certainly wouldn't encourage people to willingly get into this situtation.

 

James

 

 

Of course, I can understand why from a business point of veiw you are doing that - sounds very admirable. But all you are doing is easing their way into a system which already exists and that is, as can be seen from the postings, imperfect to say the least!

 

A few people excluding themselves from the 'system' will make little or no difference ' a lot of people - will cause uncertainty, the masses - complete confusion throughout the credit industry. This is where common sense mixed with common law will help everyone.

[Robertxc]

The CRAs will insist relentlessly that they are the data processor, wheras the bank is the data controller. There is an important distinction between the two. The data processor only handles persoanl data under the instruction of the bank. This means that they can not make any decisions, or do any processing of their own, otherwise, they become a data controller. Sooooo.....this means that the CRA is basically just a big filing cabinet where the lenders store their account histories, which they then share amongst themselves. This means that it is the bank which is keeping (and sharing) your data for six years, regardless of whether or not the agreement between you is still in place. For me, it is this which is the most contentious point. Since my credit agreement says nothing about them continuing to process my data beyond the termination of the agreement, on what basis are they doing it?

[Tobes]

That's a ridiculous statement (the CRAs, not you Robert!) because they provide the data to third parties themselves, so they are an independent Data Controller...Anyway, it's easy enough to check - just see whether they're registered as a Data Controller with the ICO - I think you'll find that they are!

[Robertxc]

Yes, but they only provide it to other banks on the instruction of the originating bank (the one with your credit agreement, who for that purpose is the Data Controller). Also, they may well be data controllers as well - for example if you go online and get your credit file, but in this case you will have agreed somewhere to let them process your data for that purpose.

[Number6]

Look, this is all academic.

 

The Data Protection Act states:

 

"processing", in relation to information or data, means obtaining, recording or holding the information or data or carrying out any operation or set of operations on the information or data, including-

 

(a) organisation, adaptation or alteration of the information or data,

 

(b) retrieval, consultation or use of the information or data,

 

© disclosure of the information or data by transmission, dissemination or otherwise making available, or

 

(d) alignment, combination, blocking, erasure or destruction of the information or data;

 

So the CRA's, by so much as holding the data, or passing it to a third party are "processing" it

 

S10 of the DPA gives Data Subjects (you and me) the power to compell any organisation (barring certain 'official' ones) to cease, or not to begin processing our data.

 

A Data Subject Notice served on a CRA must cause them to cease processing, if they refuse they are breaking the law.

 

Pete

[JamesJ]

I refuse to repeat my arguments for so doing. They've been posted elsewhere.

 

JamesJ - seeing as you're back you could perhaps chivvy up your chaps to reply to my DSN and CCA Statutory Notice...??

 

Pete

 

I'm sure you'll hear from us shortly Pete.

 

James

[Number6]

Thanks James.

 

WB BTW - and I do mean that.

 

Pete

[Robertxc]

Look, this is all academic.

 

The Data Protection Act states:

 

 

 

So the CRA's, by so much as holding the data, or passing it to a third party are "processing" it

 

S10 of the Data Protection Act gives Data Subjects (you and me) the power to compell any organisation (barring certain 'official' ones) to cease, or not to begin processing our data.

 

A Data Subject Notice served on a CRA must cause them to cease processing, if they refuse they are breaking the law.

 

Pete

Yes, but as I said, they are only doing it on the instruction of the Data Controller, to whom you gave permission. Once that permission is given, you need to see Scedule 2, sections 1 and 6 of the DPA, which states:

 

CONDITIONS RELEVANT FOR PURPOSES OF THE FIRST PRINCIPLE: PROCESSING OF ANY PERSONAL DATA

 

1. The data subject has given his consent to the processing.

 

 

6. -

 

(1) The processing is necessary for the purposes of legitimate interests pursued by the data controller or by the third party or parties to whom the data are disclosed, except where the processing is unwarranted in any particular case by reason of prejudice to the rights and freedoms or legitimate interests of the data subject.

 

(2) The Secretary of State may by order specify particular circumstances in which this condition is, or is not, to be taken to be satisfied.

 

[Number6]

Yes, but as I said, they are only doing it on the instruction of the Data Controller, to whom you gave permission. Once that permission is given, you need to see Scedule 2, sections 1 and 6 of the Data Protection Act, which states:

 

CONDITIONS RELEVANT FOR PURPOSES OF THE FIRST PRINCIPLE: PROCESSING OF ANY PERSONAL DATA

 

1. The data subject has given his consent to the processing.

 

 

6. -

 

(1) The processing is necessary for the purposes of legitimate interests pursued by the data controller or by the third party or parties to whom the data are disclosed, except where the processing is unwarranted in any particular case by reason of prejudice to the rights and freedoms or legitimate interests of the data subject.

 

(2) The Secretary of State may by order specify particular circumstances in which this condition is, or is not, to be taken to be satisfied.

 

 

But DPA S10 overrides this!

 

Pete

[Robertxc]

Not quite, I'm afraid. I presume you're refering to 10.1:

 

(a) the processing of those data or their processing for that purpose or in that manner is causing or is likely to cause substantial damage or substantial distress to him or to another, and

 

(b) that damage or distress is or would be unwarranted.

 

However, if you look at 10.2, it says:

 

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply-

 

(a) in a case where any of the conditions in paragraphs 1 to 4 of Schedule 2 is met, or

 

...which brings us straight back to Schedule 2.1:

 

CONDITIONS RELEVANT FOR PURPOSES OF THE FIRST PRINCIPLE: PROCESSING OF ANY PERSONAL DATA

 

1. The data subject has given his consent to the processing.